Boris Johnson faces damning new evidence in Partygate probe
New incriminating evidence has been revealed as part of an inquiry into whether former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson misled parliament about his behavior during the so-called Partygate scandal.
New information suggests that people who advise Johnson knew that Downing Street meetings during the Covid lockdown were in breach of the British government’s own guidance and point to a drinking culture in Downing Street at the time.
Last year, Johnson was fined by the Metropolitan Police for taking part in a rally, making him the first British Prime Minister to be found guilty of breaking the law.
The new details emerged in a report by the House of Commons Privileges Committee, which released evidence Johnson will be questioned about when he appears before the panel later this year.
The report says there is evidence Johnson may have misled Parliament about what he knew about events in Downing Street. “The evidence strongly suggests that the policy violations would have been apparent to Mr. Johnson while he was at the meetings,” it added.
In one section of the report, Johnson’s former communications director is quoted in a WhatsApp message about the June 19, 2020, meeting: “I’m having a hard time understanding how that’s in the rules off the top of my head.” response to a suggestion to call the event “reasonably necessary for work”, which would be covered by the rules, the communications director says: “Not sure that this work does. Also talks about another big hole in Prime Minister. The account of the Prime Minister, not sure. it?”
Johnson repeatedly told parliament that as far as he knew, “the instructions were followed and the rules were followed at all times”.
The Privileges Committee will ultimately decide whether Johnson misled the House of Commons about his actions and whether or not he will be found in contempt of parliament. The question is then submitted to the House of Commons for a vote.
If Johnson were found in contempt and still in government, it would be a breach of the Ministerial Law. Normally, a breach would mean the resignation of the minister. As a traitor, it is unclear what punishment awaits Johnson, although Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is under immense pressure to discipline him in some way.
Johnson and his allies have disputed the credibility of the report, saying it is based on evidence from senior civil servant Sue Gray, who has been linked to the work of opposition Labor leader Keir in recent days. Starmer.
However, this account has already been debunked by a spokesperson for the Privileges Committee, who said: “The committee’s report is not based on Sue Gray’s report. The committee’s report is based on the following evidence: materials provided to the government committee in November, including communications such as WhatsApp, emails from the official street photographer and photographs and “testimonies from witnesses who were present either during the meeting or during the preparation of Boris Johnson’s statements to Parliament. Sue Gray was also not present and is not one of those witnesses.”