A summary of today's developments
- Boris Johnson will face a Commons inquiry over whether he lied to parliament after Downing Street withdrew an attempt to force Conservative MPs to delay the new Partygate investigation. Two more Tory MPs called for Johnson to quit on Thursday, including the influential Brexiter Steve Baker. A Labour motion to launch a parliamentary investigation into whether Johnson lied to MPs about Downing Street parties passed without a vote on Thursday afternoon. Hours earlier, government whips had pulled an amendment that would have delayed any vote to start the inquiry until after the Sue Gray report was published.
- Asked if a general election should be called now, Sir Keir Starmer said: “I think the prime minister’s lost trust, I don’t think he has the moral authority to lead, and I think he should go. “Obviously I can’t force that – it’s for his own MPs to reflect on the situation they are in and decide for themselves whether they’re still prepared to go on defending the indefensible. I don’t think they should. I think they should call on him to go. Sir Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, believes Boris Johnson is too “distracted” by the Partygate allegations to lead the country.
- Earlier, Johnson spoke about the No 10 whipping U-turn on his trip to India. In an interview with Sky’s Beth Rigby at the Akshardham Temple in Ahmedabad, Johnson said the government dropped its amendment because it did not want to look as if it had something to hide.
- The Home Office’s top civil servant has told thousands of his staff that they will not be breaking the law or be guilty of racism if they enforce Priti Patel’s plan to send people with rejected UK asylum claims to Rwanda. Matthew Rycroft, the permanent secretary, faced questions at an online staff meeting asking if the home secretary’s policy of giving people a one-way ticket to Kigali was racist, while others demanded to know if the new policy was within international law.
- The Metropolitan police has said that it will not make any further announcements about people being fined for lockdown breaches at No 10 ahead of the May local elections. Fines could still be issued, but there won’t be announcements about them.
We will close this blog now but you can read our story on Boris Johnson’s position within the Tory party here:
Updated
The Home Office’s top civil servant has told thousands of his staff that they will not be breaking the law or be guilty of racism if they enforce Priti Patel’s plan to send people with rejected UK asylum claims to Rwanda.
Amid growing anger from the department’s workforce, Matthew Rycroft, the permanent secretary, faced questions at an online staff meeting asking if the home secretary’s policy of giving people a one-way ticket to Kigali was racist, while others demanded to know if the new policy was within international law.
Rycroft told staff they had to implement ministers’ decisions, and reminded them of the civil service’s neutral role, sources said.
Updated
Updated
The shadow foreign secretary, David Lammy, tweeted:
“The @Conservatives’ humiliating climb-down on the inquiry into @BorisJohnson’s law-breaking and lying shows he’s lost the confidence of his own MPs.
“The Prime Minister is a basket case. He must go.”
Updated
The shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has tweeted this:
Honesty and integrity matter in our politics, and for our democracy.
— Rachel Reeves (@RachelReevesMP) April 21, 2022
Today the Conservatives failed to stand up for either.
Britain deserves better.
Updated
Asked if a general election should be called now, Sir Keir Starmer said: “I think the prime minister’s lost trust, I don’t think he has the moral authority to lead, and I think he should go.
“Obviously I can’t force that – it’s for his own MPs to reflect on the situation they are in and decide for themselves whether they’re still prepared to go on defending the indefensible. I don’t think they should. I think they should call on him to go.” Pressed on whether that means he does not think there should be a general election now, he said: “I think many people think he should resign, including some of his own MPs, but it’s only when the majority of them think that he should go that in the end he will go.” He added: “I think the country is crying out for change, so of course I think there should be change.
“But the issue before the house today was whether the prime minister had the confidence of his own MPs to support him in relation to what I think were misleading statements made to the house.
“And in the end his MPs showed that they didn’t support him in that.”
Updated
Sir Ed Davey believes Boris Johnson is too “distracted” by the Partygate allegations to lead the country.
The leader of the Liberal Democrats told BBC News: “The Tory MPs were clearly too embarrassed to back the prime minister today but I’m afraid they are too weak to sack him. “And I think that’s what we need, we need the prime minister gone. “The country is facing some huge crises: the cost of living crisis here at home hitting millions of families and pensioners, as well as the international crisis in Ukraine. “And we need a prime minister who can provide leadership, who isn’t distracted and who has the trust of the British people.
It is pretty clear Boris Johnson has lost that trust and we have a Conservative party incapable of taking the measures that are needed to restore trust.
Updated
The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, said: “Honesty and integrity matter in our politics, and for our democracy. Today the Conservatives failed to stand up for either.
Boris Johnson has lost the trust of the public over parties held in Downing Street during lockdown. Now it’s clear he has lost the confidence of his MPs. Today’s humiliating climb-down showed that they know they can no longer defend the indefensible.
While the prime minister dodges accountability, the British public is demanding action on the cost of living crisis. It has never been more clear that Boris Johnson’s authority is shot and he is unable to lead.
Britain deserves better.
Updated
Here is the Commons Hansard for today’s debate. The first two-and-a-half hours of the debate are already up (up to Clive Efford’s speech). Further speeches will be added as the afternoon goes on. Speeches normally appear on Hansard online about three hours after they were delivered.
Updated
Downing Street has indicated that it will tell the public if Boris Johnson or the cabinet secretary, Simon Case, receive a fine (or a further fine in Johnson’s case) between now and the local elections on 5 May - even though the Met police does not plan to make any further announcements about fines during this period. (See 1.53pm.) A No 10 spokesperson said:
We’ve committed before to being transparent and to letting people know if that were the case. That hasn’t changed. But specifically the announcement made today - it’s clearly a matter for the Met police, it’s their investigation and it’s an independent matter for them.
The spokesperson said that he was not aware of any conversations between Downing Street and Scotland Yard preceding the Met announcement.
That is all from me for today. My colleague Nadeem Badshah is taking over now.
Updated
Updated
This is from Tobias Ellwood, the Conservative chair of the Commons defence committee. It’s a message to his Tory colleagues. Ellwood has already said publicly that Boris Johnson should go.
An extraordinary 24 hours in Parliament.
— Tobias Ellwood MP (@Tobias_Ellwood) April 21, 2022
It’s time to stop drinking the Kool-Aid.
The latest edition of the Guardian’s Politics Weekly podcast is out now. As MPs approve an unopposed motion to set up inquiry into claims Boris Johnson misled MPs over Partygate and the home secretary, Priti Patel, has been heavily criticised over the legality of her plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, Guardian columnist Gaby Hinsliff stands in for John Harris, and asks what happens when ministers no longer seem afraid to push the boundaries of the law? Gaby is joined by Guardian parliamentary sketch writer John Crace and Dr Hannah White, deputy director of the Institute for Government and author of Held in Contempt.
Updated
The barrister Adam Wagner, who is an expert on Covid restrictions, has posted a long and interesting thread on Twitter on the Met police’s decision not to publicise any further Partygate fines until after the local elections. It starts here.
The police do purdah now! https://t.co/Mk3yUkWsvH
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) April 21, 2022
Wagner is critical of the decision. Here are his conclusions.
To be fair to the Met, I can see why, reading NPCC guidance as a whole, they might thing "ooh we shouldn't be releasing information" which could influence the election. But they are missing the point that deciding not to release information will itself influence the election.
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) April 21, 2022
Also, they will not be releasing the name of any politicians, as per their policy. Just that FPNs have been issued. It is up to the politicians to say whether they have been given one.
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) April 21, 2022
MPs approve unopposed motion to set up inquiry into claims PM misled MPs over Partygate
Nigel Evans, the deputy Speaker, calls the vote. There are no objections, and so the motion goes through on the nod.
That means MPs have voted to trigger a privileges committee inquiry into claims that Boris Johnson misled MPs over Partygate. You can read the motion in full at 11.35am.
But the committee will not start its “substantive” work until the Met police inquiry into Partygate is over.
Updated
Ellis says Boris Johnson’s comments made to MPs were in good faith.
He thought the event for which he was fined was allowed, he says.
He says there is a difference between a deliberate and an inadvertent breach of the rules.
Karl Turner (Lab) asks if the PM’s view is that he did not understand the rules, or if they did not apply to him.
Ellis says that does not deserve a response.
He says the surprise birthday party was reported in the Times at the time. That shows that people did not think it was wrong,
Labour’s Angela Eagle asks if MPs will be able to see all 300 photographs of the parties, including those taken by the PM’s official photographer, once the police investigation is over.
Ellis says he cannot comment, because the police investigation is ongoing.
Ellis says Labour has talked of using personalised attack ads against Conservative MPs.
He says Keir Starmer has moved a motion accusing the PM of misleading the house. But this morning Starmer himself apologised for misleading MPs at PMQs yesterday.
Boris Johnson is in India strengthening relations with a fellow democracy, he says.
At no time has Johnson said this issue is not important, he says.
He claims that at all times the PM has set out his version of events.
(That is not true. Johnson has repeatedly refused to answer detailed questions about the Partygate affair.)
Ellis says the government believes the privileges committee inquiry would take place after the Met inquiry, and after the publication of the Sue Gray report. The government wants to publish the Gray report as soon as possible after the police inquiry is over.
Michael Ellis, the Cabinet Office minister and paymaster general, is now winding up for the government. He claims he welcomes the chance to discuss the issue.
The prime minister has always been clear that he is happy to face whatever inquiries parliament sets up, he says.
He says the government tabled an amendment because it wanted to be sure Sue Gray could publish her report without any further delay. But it now recognises that Labour’s motion would have much the same effect, so it is now happy to support it, he says.
He says the police investigation must be allowed to finish its inquiry. The privileges committee inquiry should take place after that point - as the opposition motion says.
Updated
In the Commons Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, is now winding up for the opposition. She says today is a chance to protect the institution of parliament.
Honesty, integerity and the truth matter in politics, she says. She says they are British principles.
If MPs do not vote for this, they will not be forgiven, she says.
"The prime minister is leading the Conservative Party into the sewer"
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) April 21, 2022
Closing the debate for the opposition, Labour's deputy leader Angela Rayner says "truth matters in politics" https://t.co/GvK9xnsEoV pic.twitter.com/N9Y219jytg
Updated
And the SNP’s Pete Wishart told MPs in his speech that the Conservatives were going to get “hammered” in the local elections. He said:
I am not going to be reticent about elections. The police have just put out a statement to say there will be no more issuing of fines and no more comment until after the council elections.
This is now definitely in the mix, the elections are a feature of all this because of that police statement.
I have to say to my Conservative colleagues over there, you are going to get hammered, absolutely hammered. The public are outraged.
I have got a local authority that is Conservative in Perthshire and we have got one message on our leaflet which says: ‘As you obeyed the rules, the Tories partied. Kick them out.’
That will be, I suspect, going on most leaflets in subsequent elections until he is replaced and he is removed.
Updated
In her speech in the debate Labour’s Jess Phillips criticised the amount of time it had taken Boris Johnson to apologise for Partygate. She said:
I could have had a baby in the time it has taken the apology to come. It would have been less painful. The reality is that along that nine months what we have seen is not somebody taking the actions to desperately try and preserve the thing that we all came here to do. It has been to desperately try and preserve his own position. And that that to me is unforgivable.
Everything that he has sought to do has been about him. He cannot answer a simple question. You don’t have to wait for a police investigation. I asked him a question ... four months ago now: ‘Did you go to this party in your flat on this date?’ And he said ‘I can’t answer because there’s a police investigation.’
Well, I’ll tell you what, there’s a police investigation into that and I can say I didn’t go to a party at his house that day. There you go, I wasn’t at that party. It hasn’t affected the police investigation.
The fact that what he has done shows a lack of contrition because it wasn’t upfront. It has never been upfront.
This is from my colleague Jessica Elgot, making the point, although today marks a victory for the opposition, defeat would have had its advantages.
Labour are going to have to pulp those leaflets
— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) April 21, 2022
Here is a question from below the line.
The Labour MP Chris Bryant, who chairs the Commons standards committee and the Commons privileges committee, has got an answer. He says a 10-day suspension on the recommendation from the standards committee can create the conditions for a recall petition, leading to a byelection. The privileges committee is a different body. But Bryant suggests the legislation is ambiguous, and could cover the privileges committee too.
A recall petition applies following a report from Cttee on Standards, if the Commons orders an MP's suspension for ten days or more. But the 2015 Act also says the Cttee is any Commons 'cttee concerned with the standards of conduct of individual members'. Privileges? or not?
— Chris Bryant (@RhonddaBryant) April 21, 2022
In practice, if the privileges committee were to conclude that Boris Johnson knowingly misled MPs, he would probably be forced to resign anyway - regardless of whether or not it recommended a 10-day suspension, and regardless of whether or not that counted under the recall legislation. Under the ministerial code, a minister who has knowingly misled parliament is expected to resign.
Recall would affect whether Johnson were able to remain as an MP. But if Johnson were no longer PM and Tory leader, it is hard to imagine him wanting to remain an MP for long anway.
The Conservative MP Anthony Mangnall told MPs in his speech in the debate that he could not forgive Boris Johnson for misleading the Commons. He said:
Every day that I see issues and rules broken in this place only reaffirms my belief that we have to stand up in this place and make it clear that dishonesty, that inaction and misleading of the House cannot be tolerated from anyone.
Now, when I put that letter in [calling for a no confidence vote in the PM], I asked for changes. I asked for changes in the operation of how No 10 was organised. I asked for changes in how the whipping system might work. And I’m pleased to say some of those changes have come in, but unfortunately not enough ...
I do forgive the prime minister for making those mistakes, but I do not forgive him for misleading the house, as I see it.
The debate is still going on, but there are no more Conservative backbenchers trying to speak. We are just getting opposition MPs.
But Michael Ellis, the Cabinet Office minister, will be winding up for the government.
Pippa Crerar from the Mirror says the Labour motion is now expected to go through on the nod. (Earlier Keir Starmer said he would like to see a division. See 12.08pm.)
Update: Labour isn't expected to force a vote on its own motion today, meaning it goes through on the nod (*unless* one of the other Oppo parties does).
— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) April 21, 2022
Johnson says he abandoned attempt to put off inquiry into claims he misled MPs because he has 'nothing to hide'
Boris Johnson has been speaking about the No 10 whipping U-turn on his trip to India. In an interview with Sky’s Beth Rigby at the Akshardham Temple in Ahmedabad, Johnson said the government dropped its amendment because it did not want to look as if it had something to hide. He said:
People were saying it looks like we are trying to stop stuff. I didn’t want that. I didn’t want people to be able to say that. I don’t want this thing to endlessly go on. But, I have absolutely nothing, frankly, to hide.
He also argued that, until the police investigation is over, ongoing discussion of the Partgate controversy was “not very useful”. He said:
What voters will want to see is the conclusion of the investigation and then I think the House of Commons can decide what to do.
I will then come back as I’ve said and explain what happened, give a fuller account than I’ve been able to do so far, we will get Sue Gray’s final words on that matter and then I think people will be able to make a judgment.
But until then, I have to say, I think a lot of this is not very useful.
There’s not a lot more I can say and what I want to do is focus on the things that I think are a massive long-term benefit to this country.
Asked about Steve Baker’s call for his resignation, he replied: “I understand people’s feelings. I don’t think that is the right thing to do.”
And he said he was determined to lead the Conservatives into the next election (as he was when he spoke to reporters on the flight over - see 9.14am). Asked if he was confident he would lead the party into the next election, he replied:
Of course, I am. What I am determined to do is make sure we continue with our agenda to unite and level up.
Updated
In the Commons debate the Conservative MP Steve Brine said MPs should be focusing on more important issues. Intervening on a speech by Labour MP Andy McDonald, Brine said:
Right now this house should be discussing childhood cancers. Now, if one was a parent of a child with cancer, I suggest that they would rather the house were discussing that than this. That is not to minimise this, but this issue needs to be resolved and we need to move on and for that reason I will be supporting the main motion, with him I suspect, this evening.
In response McDonald replied:
He is right, we all want to move on from this, but we will find unless this issue is resolved we will be back to it forever until such a time as the prime minister accepts the consequences of his actions.
We need that leadership and we are robbed of it at the moment. That is the entire point. Of course cancer with children is critically more important. We want to get on to that, but we cannot have this issue hanging over us.
Updated
From Adam Bienkov from Byline Times
The main takeaway from this debate so far is that Conservative MPs appear to be a lot more unhappy with the Prime Minister than most commentators have suggested.
— Adam Bienkov (@AdamBienkov) April 21, 2022
I have some updated some of the earlier posts with more direct quotes from speeches. To get the updates to appear, you may need to refresh the page.
Steve Baker explains why he can no long forgive Johnson, and wants him gone
The most surprising speech of the debate so far has probably been the one from Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister who, as a leading figure in the European Research Group, played an important role in helping to bring down Theresa May as PM.
In a question to Boris Johnson in the Commons on Tuesday, Baker (a devout Christian) said Johnson was entitled to mercy. He went on: “Justice leading into mercy relies on a very old-fashioned concept, and that is repentance. What assurance can he give us that nothing of this kind will ever happen again?”
Today Baker said that Johnson had shown “contrition” on Tuesday, “beautiful, marvellous contrition” but that it “only lasted as long as it took to get out of the headmaster’s study”. Baker went on:
And that’s not good enough for me, and it’s not good enough for my voters. I’m sorry, it’s not.
And I’m afraid I am now in a position where I have to acknowledge that if the prime minister occupied any other office of senior responsibility, if he was a secretary of state, if he was a minister of state, a parliamentary undersecretary, a permanent secretary, a director general, if he was a chief executive of a private company or a board director, he would be long gone. The reason that he is not long gone is because removing a sitting prime minister is an extremely grave matter, and goodness knows, people will know, I’ve had something to do with that, too.
It’s an extremely grave matter and an extremely big decision and it tends to untether history and all of us, all of us should approach such things with reverence and awe and an awareness of the difficulty of doing it and the potential consequences and that’s why I’ve been tempted to forgive.
But I have to say now the possibility of that, really, for me, has gone. I have to say I’m sorry that, for not obeying the letter and spirit - and I think we have heard that the prime minister did know what the letter was - the prime minister now should be long gone. I’ll certainly vote for this motion. But really, the prime minister should just know the gig’s up.
On Tuesday Mark Harper, the former Tory chief whip, called for Johnson’s resignation. Harper and Baker are chair and deputy chair respectively of the Covid Recovery Group, an influential Tory faction that opposed lockdown restrictions.
Updated
Met police says it will suspend further Partygate fine announcements ahead of local elections
The Metropolitan police has said that it will not make any further announcements about people being fined for lockdown breaches at No 10 ahead of the May local elections, the BBC reports.
Fines could still be issued, but there won’t be announcements about them.
A Met spokesperson said:
Whilst the investigation will continue during the pre-election period, due to the restrictions around communicating before the May local elections, we will not provide further updates until after 5 May.
This is in line with the “purdah” convention that government should not make announcements likely to advantage a political party ahead of an election. It is a convention that normally applies to spending decisions - not police inquiries.
Updated
Sir Bob Neill, the Conservative chair of the Commons justice committee, used his speech in the debate to say that he felt “personally badly led down” by Boris Johnson. He said:
I will say, without having come to a final decision about the prime minister’s position, that I’m profoundly disappointed in what happened in No 10 Downing Street: people were badly let down, my constituents feel badly let down, I feel personally badly let down by what happened, and there must be consequences that follow from that.
What the consequence is, I think anyone would accept in fairness, depends upon an ultimate assessment of the measure of culpability, and that’s why I would prefer, both in making my own personal decision and ultimately in the house making a decision, to wait until we have the full evidence and information before us.
Chris Bryant, the Labour chair of the Commons privileges committee (who has recused himself from its inquiry into the PM), said in his speech that the country needed a PM with moral authority.
You need at a moment of national and international crisis, a leader of completely and utterly unimpeachable moral authority. I don’t think we have that at the moment. I don’t think we have that by a long chalk.
Referring to what Nadhim Zahawi said in an interview this morning (see 9.28am - it is an interview he probably regrets, in the light of the subsequent No 10 U-turn), Bryant said:
I have heard ministers argue quite rightly that there has to be due process. I would say to the house that this is the due process - it always has been the due process.
But Bryant also said that for the committee to find against Boris Johnson, a high bar would have to be reached. He explained:
It’s actually quite a high bar that the committee of privileges will have to consider. I mean I think it is ... not debated that the house was misled. I think even the prime minister effectively admits that the house was misled.
It was said that rules weren’t broken, and it is self-evident that rules were broken. So the house was misled. It got a false impression. The question is whether that was intentional.
Updated
William Wragg, the Conservative chair of the public administration and constitutional affairs committee, told MPs in his speech in the debate that Tories were being asked to “defend the indefensible”. He said:
I care deeply about my colleagues. I know that a number are struggling at the moment. We have been working in a toxic atmosphere. The parliamentary party bears the scars of misjudgments of leadership.
There can be few colleagues on this side of the house I would contend who are truly enjoying being members of parliament at the moment. It is utterly depressing to be asked to defend the indefensible. Each time part of us withers.
Wragg said he had questioned his place in the Conservative party “in recent months”, but said he was “not going anywhere” and urged voters to stick with the Tories in the local elections.
Wragg also said Tory MPs had a duty to do the right thing.
For us to maintain their trust and confidence we must be seen to do the right thing. It is our responsibility. It is the Conservative parliamentary party’s responsibility. We must stop delegating and delaying our political judgement.
We each only have our own limited and imperfect integrity. We can’t keep spending it on others who we cannot be sure will not let us down.
Wragg was one of the first Tory MPs to call for Boris Johnson’s resignation when the Partygate scandal erupted.
UPDATE: In his speech Wragg said that it was the aftermath of former government press spokeswoman Allegra Stratton’s resignation which led him to submit a no-confidence letter in the prime minister.
What alarmed me most was, later that evening, a press preview of the winter Covid Plan B measures was brought forward to try to move matters on.
I therefore thought to myself if a government was prepared to bring such measures forward earlier in order to distract from its own embarrassment, that the prime minister was no longer fit to govern.
And this is how he concluded his speech.
The matter before us is one of the heart of this institution, of our Parliament. I love this place, believing it to be place of high ideals and purpose. What is said here matters.
Quite apart from the Facebook clips about roundabouts and drains in our constituencies, or indeed the confected anger to wind people up, it should be a place venerated by those of us given the singular honour of being sent here.
Now, of course it can be a pantomime, a farce, turgidly boring, obscure, but it should always be reasonably honest, and it is for that, I hope not naive, principle that I cannot support the amendment and I will vote for the main motion.
Updated
Former Brexit minister Steve Baker says Johnson 'should be long gone'
Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister, has used his speech in the debate to call for Boris Johnson to go. He said:
The prime minister now should be long gone ... Really, the prime minister should just know the gig’s up.
I will post more from his speech shortly.
UPDATE: See 2.10pm for more.
Updated
MPs set to vote for inquiry into PM after government U-turn - summary and analysis
Someone will have to update the tally of government U-turns because - to the surprise of most observers at Westminster - Downing Street performed a remarkable one this morning, withdrawing an important amendment that it had tabled only about 15 hours earlier. The decision will embarrass some of the Tories who were defending the government line (that Labour’s motion should be rejected) until about 11am. It means the Labour motion will go through.
None of this is simple, and so here is a quick Q&A explaining where we are.
Q: What is happening now?
MPs are debating a motion, tabled by Labour but backed by six other opposition parties, saying there should be an inquiry into claims Boris Johnson misled MPs when he told them there were no parties in No 10.
Q: What changed this morning?
Until this morning the government was planning to use its majority to vote down the opposition proposal. Instead it was going to tell its MPs to vote for its own amendment saying the decision should be postponed.
Q: Why did the government change its mind?
We have not had an exact explanation yet, but if Tory MPs had voted against the Labour plan, they would have been accused of blocking an inquiry (even though the amendment only called for the decision about having an inquiry to be postponed, not shelved for good). And the Tory whips may have worried about losing the vote - because many of their MPs did not want to vote for a delay, because that would be used against them by their opponents.
Q: Where does this leave the government?
On the plus side, it avoids a Tory split. If the government amendment had gone to a vote, many Tory MPs would have abstained.
But this debacle suggests that - on this matter, at least - Downing Street has lost control of its parliamentary party.
And - reverting to the big picture - Johnson is going to be the first prime minister in recent times to be investigated by parliament for potentially lying to MPs.
Q: What will happen next?
The motion says the privileges committee should investigate claims that Johnson misled MPs.
The privileges committee contains the same seven MPs who sit on the Commons standards committee and it has the same chair, Chris Bryant. The standards committee investigates claims that MPs have broken the code of conduct for MPs. The privileges committee investigates complaints about contempt of parliament (an ancient concept, involving disrespecting MPs). Knowingly misleading MPs would be a contempt of parliament. (It is also a breach of the ministerial code, but the ministerial code is policed by government, not parliament.)
Bryant says he will recuse himself from this inquiry, because his anti-Johnson comments in the past would lead to him being accused of bias, and Sir Bernard Jenkin, a Conservative, is expected to chair the inquiry instead.
But the inquiry will not start until the police investigation into Partygage is over.
Q: How will the inquiry proceed?
The police say they still have a lot of Partygate evidence to consider, and so the committee inquiry will probably not start for months.
When it does start, it may take much or all of its evidence in private (as the Commons standards committee does).
It seems inevitable that it will conclude that MPs were misled. The key issue, though, will be for it to decide whether or not Johnson misled MPs intentionally.
It will produce a report, and make a recommendation for the Commons as a whole. If it decides Johnson misled MPs unintentionally, it will probably just ask for the record to be corrected. But if it concludes that he misled MPs intentionally, it will propose a sanction, to be voted on by the whole house. Regardless of what happened then, Johnson would be under intense pressure to resign.
The committee has four Conservative members, two Labour ones (one of whom, Bryant, will not take part in the inquiry), and one SNP one. The members are used to acting on a non-partisan basis (as the standards committee they adjudicate on MPs who have broken the code of conduct), but for a Conservative-dominated committee to effectively bring down a prime minister would still be quite something.
Q: Will there be a division this afternoon?
It seems unlikely that any Conservative MPs will want to vote against the motion this afternoon. Normally in those circumstances a motion will go through on the nod.
However Keir Starmer said earlier he would like a division to take place - so MPs can show where they stand.
But a party can only orchestrate a division if there are no MPs planning to vote against by getting a large number of MPs to shout “no” - even though they are in favour - when the Speaker calls the motion. But MPs who shout no in these circumstances are not supposed to do that and subsequently vote yes. If there are clearly more MPs shouting “aye” than “no”, then the Speaker will declare the motion carried without calling a division.
Updated
Blackford ended his speech saying that democracy and decency are under assault the world over, and that they should be defended.
He said George Orwell said political chaos was connected with the decay of language. If the prime minister cannot be trusted to tell the truth, politics will be in dangerous decline, he said.
He said today’s vote was about ending that decline, and preventing dishonesty from becoming the new normal.
Updated
Blackford said Boris Johnson repeatedly told MPs that parties did not take place in No 10. Those comments are still on the record, and have not been corrected, he says.
Parliament was misled, he said.
And we were all misled deliberately, because the prime minister knew the truth. Not only what part is happening, not totally was the law broken. The prime minister was at the very parties he denied ever happened.
The truth is simple and it’s this. He lied to avoid getting caught. And once he got caught, he lied again. There is no other way to describe it. There is no other word for it.
That is why parliament needs to act, he said.
Blackford also accused Boris Johnson of lying to the Queen. But bringing the Queen into it was too much for the Speaker, and he asked Blackford to withdraw that point. Blackford did.
Updated
Ian Blackford, the SNP leader at Westminster, opened his speech by saying that parliament needs to act because “the prime minister of the United Kingdom is a liar”.
I genuinely don’t say that lightly. And I don’t say it loosely. I honestly believe that it’s right... Members across this house know it to be true.
In normal debates MPs are not allowed to call each other liars. But that rule does not apply when the honesty of a MP is effectively the subject being debated, as it is today.
Sir Peter Bottomley, the father of the Commons (longest-serving MP), told MPs in his speech that he would have been happy to vote for the government amendment. He said that Boris Johnson had explained what happened, and that he was concerned this issue was being exploited by the opposition ahead of the local elections in May.
Starmer says parliament will have failed if it does not stand up for truth in politics
In response to an intervention from Alistair Carmichael (Lib Dem), Starmer agreed that there should be division this afternoon (and that the motion should not be passed on the nod) so that MPs can register where they stand.
Starmer ended his speech saying the public expected MPs to do their duty.
If we don’t pass this motion, if we don’t take this opportunity to restate the principles, then we are all complicit in allowing these standards to slip. We are all complicit in allowing the public to think we are all the same, nobody tells the truth, that there are alternative sets of facts.
The conventions and the traditions that we are debating this morning are not an accident. They have been handed down to us as the tools that protect Britain from malaise, from extremism and from decline.
And this is important because the case against the prime minister is that he has abused those tools. That is the case against him, that he has used them to protect himself rather than our democracy. That he has turned them against all that they are supposed to support.
Updated
This is from a senior government source explaining why the government decided to pull its amendment.
The prime minister has always been clear that he’s happy to face whatever inquiries parliament sees fit and is happy for the house to decide how it wishes to proceed today and therefore will not be whipping Conservative MPs. They are free to vote according to how they believe we should move forward on this.
We tabled an amendment last night because we wanted to be explicit about ensuring Sue Gray is able to complete and publish her report without any further delay, as well as allow the Metropolitan police to conclude their investigations. We now recognise that – in practice – this is almost certainly likely to be the case and therefore we are happy for the Labour motion to go through if that is the will of the house.
Sir Edward Leigh (Con) intervened to say that two MPs have been killed recently. He asked Starmer if he agreed that it was important for MPs not to call each other liars, and to accept that they act in good faith, so as not to inflame anti-politician sentiment.
Starmer thanked Leigh for his intervention, and said he would be careful with his language today.
In his speech Keir Starmer said some people have tried to diminish the seriousness of claims that Boris Johnson misled parliament.
The prime minister’s supporters ... many of them seek to simply dismiss its importance
“They say there are worse crimes: ‘he didn’t rob a bank, he only broke the rules for 10 minutes, it was all a long time ago’, every time one of these arguments is trotted out, the status of this house is gradually eroded and our democracy becomes a little weaker, because the convention that parliament must not be mislead and that in return we don’t accuse each other of lying, are not curious quirks of this strange place, they are fundamental pillars on which our constitution is built.
And he said that claims that lockdown rules were breached at No 10 were particularly serious. During lockdown many people missed family events, like funerals and weddings, and that generated “a huge sense of guilt”. That is why people feel so strongly about this.
Updated
This is from Sky’s Beth Rigby on the government’s decision to drop its amendment.
Less than 24 hrs ago, PM said on plane “best thing to do is for the investigation to be concluded” & “we have to wait for that & then Sue Gray have her final say” > Now u-turn & free vote on unamended lab motion. Senior Tory tells me threat of big rebellion forces whips’ hand…. https://t.co/5vPcReddfM
— Beth Rigby (@BethRigby) April 21, 2022
And this is from ITV’s Robert Peston.
Or to put it another way, the PM in India has effectively conceded he could not win today’s vote. Amazing misjudgment of the mood of his MPs https://t.co/2T5yeuXoMx
— Robert Peston (@Peston) April 21, 2022
John Baron (Con) intervenes to say that he lost his mother during the first Covid lockdown. She was in hospital, and he could not be with her because they were following the rules. He says he has expressed his disquiet to the PM. But he thinks Boris Johnson should be judged when all the evidence is available, including the Sue Gray report.
(This sounds like an intervention drafted before Baron knew the government was dropping its amendment.)
Starmer expresses his sorrow for Baron’s loss. He says under Labour’s motion the inquiry will not start until the police investigation is over.
Keir Starmer is opening the debate. He says the Labour motion “seeks to defend the simple principle that honesty, integrity and telling the truth matter in our politics”.
That is not a Labour principle. It is a British principle, he says.
This is about honesty, integrity and telling the truth in this place, and it’s an important principle and as I say I’m not claiming this as a Labour party principle. It is a principle that we all share because we know the importance of it.
That’s why it’s a matter for the house to consider, but it is a principle under attack, because the prime minister has been accused of repeatedly, deliberately and routinely misleading this house over parties held in Downing Street during lockdown.
Now that’s a serious allegation, because if it’s true it amounts to contempt of parliament - and it’s not and it should never be an accusation that is made lightly, and nor should we diminish the rights of members to defend each other from that accusation.
Updated
MPs debate motion calling for inquiry into claims PM misled parliament over Partygate
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker, confirms at the start of the debate that the government amendment to the Labour motion will not be put to a vote.
You can read the text of the goverment amendment here.
Starmer withdraws claim from PMQs yesterday about PM accusing BBC of being soft on Putin
Keir Starmer has just used a point of order to retract the claim he made at PMQs yeserday about Boris Johnson criticising the BBC for being soft on Putin. Starmer said that various news organisations had reported this, based on a briefing from the PM’s press secretary. On Wednesday morning the government did not correct those reports, Starmer said. But he said he now accepted that Johnson’s claims that what he said had been misreported, and he said he was happy to withdraw.
UPDATE: Starmer said:
The prime minister’s comments on Tuesday night to his backbenchers were briefed to journalists by a spokesperson.
Those comments were reasonably interpreted by several media outlets, including the Daily Telegraph, as being criticisms of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the BBC for their comments and coverage of Ukraine. government ministers were out on broadcast rounds yesterday morning and they didn’t seek to correct that interpretation.
But since then the government has corrected the record and said the prime minister’s comments only referred to the archbishop and not the BBC, so I’m more than happy to echo that correction and withdraw my comments of yesterday.
Updated
This is from Chris Bryant, the chair of the privileges committee.
Tories now on a one line whip. It would seem they’ve given up the ghost. Johnson will be the first prime minister in history not just to receive a criminal sanction but to be referred to the Committee of Privileges.
— Chris Bryant (@RhonddaBryant) April 21, 2022
Bryant has said that he will recuse himself from the committee’s inquiry into Boris Johnson because of his past criticism of the PM
Full text of Labour motion on inquiry into claims PM misled parliament
Here is the text of the motion, tabled by Labour but backed by six other opposition party.
In the light of the No 10 decision not to ask its MPs to vote against it, it now seems certain to go through. It may well go through unopposed.
Some Conservative MPs are on record as saying they will vote against. But in the light of the PM saying this morning that he now welcomes an inquiry (see 10.21am), voting against would almost certainly be considered unhelpful by Downing Street, and so it would be surprising if any Tories were to try this.
Alternatively, Labour could orchestrate a vote (by putting up tellers for the no side) just so that that their MPs get the chance to register their support for the measure in a division.
Here is the motion
That this House
(1) notes that, given the issue of fixed penalty notices by the police in relation to events in 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office, assertions the Rt hon Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip has made on the floor of the House about the legality of activities in 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office under Covid regulations, including but not limited to the following answers given at Prime Minister’s Questions: 1 December 2021, that “all guidance was followed in No. 10”, Official Report vol. 704, col. 909; 8 December 2021 that “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”, Official Report vol. 705, col. 372; 8 December 2021 that “I am sickened myself and furious about that, but I repeat what I have said to him: I have been repeatedly assured that the rules were not broken”, Official Report vol. 705, col. 372 6 Thursday 21 April 2022 OP No.147: Part 1 Business Today: Chamber and 8 December 2021 “the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times”, Official Report vol. 705, col. 379, appear to amount to misleading the House;
and (2) orders that this matter be referred to the Committee of Privileges to consider whether the Rt hon Member’s conduct amounted to a contempt of the House, but that the Committee shall not begin substantive consideration of the matter until the inquiries currently being conducted by the Metropolitan Police have been concluded.
This is what Mark Spencer, the leader of the Commons, told MPs a few minutes ago. He was responding to a question from Jacob Young (Con), who asked what the whipping arrangements would be, in the light of the comments from Boris Johnson in India this morning. He was referring to Johnson says he was it was up to MPs to “do whatever they want”. (See 10.21am.)
Spencer replied:
You’ll see the chief whip in his place. The prime minister has indicated that he is keen for the house to decide on the business later today. The vote on the unamended house business will be a free vote to all Conservative MPs.
MPs set to pass motion setting up inquiry into claims PM misled parliament after No 10 shelves its amendment
The government has decided to pull its amendment, the i’s Arj Singh reports.
That means the original Labour motion setting up a privileges committee inquiry into claims Johnson misled parliament will be passed this afternoon - probably unopposed.
BREAKING Boris Johnson pulls his wrecking amendment on Partygate Commons probe investigation and gives Tory MPs a free vote pic.twitter.com/ZzUrBzb8uB
— Arj Singh (@singharj) April 21, 2022
Tory MPs to get free vote in debate on inquiry into PM misleading parliament, meaning Labour motion now more likely to pass
In the Commons Mark Spencer, the leader of the Commons, has just announced that Tory MPs will get a free vote in the debate today.
That means the government may not have enough votes to pass it amendments. It could therefore decide not to press it to a vote.
Commons leader Mark Spencer hints at possible rethink over government plan to block Labour motion on inquiry into PM
This is what Sir Charles Walker, vice chairman of the Conservative backbench 1922 Committee, said in the Commons a few minutes ago about wanting the government to let the Labour motion - setting up a privileges committee inquiry into the PM, starting once the police inquiry is over - go through unopposed. He said:
Can I say to the leader of the house ... I greatly struggled with lockdowns, and the legacy of Covid. It has pumped so much poison into the veins of this country and the veins of this place?
Can we please try and find a way today not to have a fractious debate and a division? I believe genuinely that the prime minister is a good and decent man and he can make the case to the privileges committee directly without having this house to divide and yet more poison be pumped into public life. Please the chief work find a way of making that happen?
In response Mark Spencer, the leader of the Commons (and the former chief whip), told Walker that it would be important to get the tone of the debate right. He said the chief whip, Chris Heaton-Harris, will have heard his comments “and I’m sure will be reflecting on them”.
That makes it sound as if a rethink is at least being considered.
Updated
The Conservative MP Sir Charles Walker, vice chair of the backbench 1922 Committee, has just told the Commons that the government should not put its amendment to a vote. It should let the Labour motion go through, he said.
This is from my colleague Aubrey Allegretti.
Tory MP Charles Walker urges the government to let Labour's motion pass without a vote.
— Aubrey Allegretti (@breeallegretti) April 21, 2022
He says the PM is a "good and decent man" but "can make the case to the privileges committee directly without having this House to divide".
The government has ordered its MPs to be in the Commons for this afternoon’s vote, and it is expected to pass its amendment - which would shelve a decision about whether to hold an inquiry into the claims that Boris Johnson misled parliament over Partygate.
But perhaps the government whips will have second thoughts. If they do press their amendment, the Tories will be accused of blocking an inquiry (even though they are technically not ruling one out for good). And, in his interview in India this morning, Johnson said that it was up to MPs to “do whatever they want” - implying that he was not committed to a particular outcome. (See 10.21am.)
Zahawi says he is opposed to smacking ban being extended to England
This morning the Times splashed on a story about Dame Rachel de Souza, the children\s commissioner, saying England should follow Scotland and Wales and legislate to ban parents smacking their children.
Thursday's Times: Children's tsar calls for ban on smacking #TomorrowsPapersToday #TheTimes #Times pic.twitter.com/FlSsI5iJ5h
— Tomorrows Papers Today (@TmorrowsPapers) April 20, 2022
This morning Nadhim Zahawi, the education secretary, said he was opposed to the idea. He told Times Radio:
My very strong view is that actually we have got to trust parents on this and parents being able to discipline their children is something that they should be entitled to do.
We have got to just make sure we don’t end up in a world where the state is nannying people about how they bring up their children.
Johnson claims he would welcome inquiry into claims he misled parliament - but only after police probe over
Boris Johnson has been speaking to reporters on a visit to a new JCB plant in Gujarat. The company is run by Lord Bamford, a major Conservative donor, and Johnson has often held events at JCB plants in the UK.
Here are the main points.
- Johnson claimed that he would be happy to be scrutinised by a Commons committee over his Partygate remarks - but he said the police inquiry should conclude first. He said:
I’m very keen for every possible form of scrutiny and the House of Commons can do whatever it wants to do. But all I would say is I don’t think that should happen until the investigation is completed.
He said MPs should have the “full facts” before deciding whether to refer his conduct to the privileges committee.
I think what people should have is the full facts. In the meantime what I want to do is get on with the job.
But he also insisted that MPs would have to “do whatever they want” in the vote today. “That is their prerogative,” he said.
- He restated his claim that he did not mislead parliament. Asked if he had knowningly or unknowingly misled parliament, Johnson said: “Of course not”. (This was a surprising answer because last week Johnson seemed to imply that he had, at least unknowlingly, misled parliament when he said no parties took place and the rules were always followed. He told journalists last week that he was planning to correct the record on these points.)
- He said the UK hoped to agree a free trade agreement with India by the autumn. He said:
We’re hoping to complete another free trade agreement, with India, by the end of the year, by the autumn.
- He brushed aside concerns about Narendra Modi making India more authoritarian. He said:
We always raise the difficult issues, of course we do, but the fact is that India is a country of £1.35bn people and it is democratic, it’s the world’s largest democracy.
Updated
Boris Johnson was presented with a copy of a guide to London written by Mahatma Gandhi during his visit to the Indian independence leader’s ashram in Gujarat, PA Media reports. PA says:
The prime minister remarked that “vegetarianism costs far less than meat-eating” as he read today from the book designed to be a guide for how Indians could manage in London in the late 19th century.
While flying to India for his two-day visit, Johnson told reporters on the plane his own favourite curry is lamb rogan josh, rather than a meat-free variety.
The Sabarmati Ashram, which was the centre of the peace leader’s non-violent struggle against British rule, was one of the first stops for Johnson during his visit to Ahmedabad.
Johnson also draped a ring of khadi cloth around a statue of Gandhi, who studied law at University College London during his time in Britain.
Johnson signed a guestbook, writing that it was an “immense privilege” to learn about how Gandhi “mobilised such simple principles of truth and non-violence to change the world for the better”.
From the ashram, Johnson was driven to a meeting with Gautam Adani, the billionaire industrialist whose Adani Group has been plagued by controversy and allegations ranging from environmental abuse to tax evasion.
This is from my colleague Heather Stewart, who is one of the reporters accompanying Boris Johnson on his trip to India.
Wow: en route from Ahmedabad airport the route is *plastered* with giant billboards featuring Boris Johnson’s face. Bit different from the welcome he gets at home these days: pic.twitter.com/ztILZ54oEo
— Heather Stewart (@GuardianHeather) April 21, 2022
Labour’s Wes Streeting has responded.
I’m sure there will be plenty of Labour billboards with Boris Johnson’s face on at the next general election. https://t.co/K8gbE79loa
— Wes Streeting MP (@wesstreeting) April 21, 2022
Zahawi claims Tory MPs delaying inquiry into PM out of respect for British tradition of 'due process'
Nadhim Zahawi, the education secretary, was speaking for the government this morning on the broadcast interview round. Asked why the government is telling its MPs to vote to delay the decision about holding an inquiry into whether Boris Johnson misled parliament over Partygate, he claimed this was because ministers were acting in accordance with “due process” - a tradition for which Britain is respected around the world, he implied. He told Sky News:
I think the right thing to do is to follow due process. The world looks at this country for its values and due process.
What do I mean by that? The prime minister came to parliament, as he promised he would, he made a full apology and explained that he made a mistake.
But, in his mind, when he attended the cabinet room for that nine-minute birthday celebration, he didn’t think he was breaking the rules which is why he didn’t think he misled parliament.
Today, we’ve put down an amendment to say actually, the right way to do this, to follow due process, is to wait for the police inquiry to conclude, to have the full publication of the Cabinet Office report, the Sue Gray report, and then parliament can decide to put it to the privileges committee. That’s the right way to do this.
This argument will surprise the government’s critics who have long argued that one of the defining features of Boris Johnson’s government is how little respect it has for due process. The former prime minister John Major is one of the many people to have made this argument, in a speech earlier this year.
Updated
Johnson says he wants to focus on 'things that matter to electorate' ahead of Commons vote on inquiry into claims he misled MPs
Good morning. MPs will today debate the opposition proposal to hold a privileges committee inquiry into claims that Boris Johnson misled parliament over Partygate. At one point it was assumed that the government would just vote this down but, partly because No 10 has realised that would be a PR disaster, and partly because the government whips were not confident of winning (because many Tory MPs were not willing to vote for a PR disaster), the government will instead try to amend the motion to postpone the decision about holding an inquiry.
It means that Tory MPs will be able to vote for the government and argue that, technically, they are not voting to block an inquiry. But in presentational terms the outcome may be almost as bad, because it will look as if they are voting to block an inquiry. Here is our overnight story.
Speaking to journalists on his trip to India, Johnson argued that the issues he was focusing on on his visit (trade, investment etc) were actually a lot more important to voters. He said:
I think politics has taught me one thing, which is that you’re better off talking and focussing on the things that matter and the things that make a real difference to the electorate, and not about politicians themselves.
As a general rule, this is probably right, although it comes close to minimising the significance of Partygate – something he spent all Tuesday afternoon in the Commons claiming he was not doing.
Photo du Jour (LATE LATE EXTRA): Prime Minister @BorisJohnson speaks to journalists on his way to India tonight. By Stefan Rousseau/PA pic.twitter.com/w2eMKKOI07
— Stefan Rousseau (@StefanRousseau) April 20, 2022
Johnson also insisted he would lead his party into the next election. Asked by journalists if he would fight the next election, he replied: “Of course, yes.” Asked if anything would cause him to resign, he replied: “Not a lot springs to mind at the moment.”
In one sense this is unremarkable, because it is what you would expect any prime minister to say, on almost any occasion. But for those Tory MPs who have been saying, in private or in public, that they don’t want Johnson to resign now, but that they want him out before the next general election, it is reminder that he is not going to go easily.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Around 11.30am: Keir Starmer opens the Commons debate on holding a privileges committee inquiry into whether Johnson misled parliament about Partygate.
12pm: Nicola Sturgeon takes first minister’s questions in the Scottish parliament.
12pm: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
At 5pm at the latest: MPs vote on the privileges committee motion.
And Johnson is in India today. He is due to record clips for broadcasters in the morning and at around lunchtime, UK time.
I try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter. I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
Alternatively, you can email me at andrew.sparrow@theguardian.com.
Updated
