There are more photos of Boris Johnson flanked by bottles of wine, new WhatsApp messages between No 10 aides worrying about a leak of “the PM having a piss-up”, and details of the government’s resistance to handing over Partygate evidence.
A new interim report from the privileges committee paints a compelling picture of an attempted cover-up by Downing Street, almost a year after the police issued penalties for criminal breaches of the law during the Partygate scandal.
However, the seven MPs on the cross-party committee have one job only – to consider whether Johnson misled the Commons and by doing so committed contempt by impeding the functions of parliament.
For all the extra shocking details they have published, their argument appears to be very straightforward: Johnson announced the rules, broke the rules and then denied that the rules had been broken.
It would have been obvious to the prime minister, they suggest, that his presence at these gatherings was against the guidance, and therefore he could not claim to have been ignorant of parties or to have needed assurances that they were above board. These are core parts of Johnson’s defence, according to the statement he put out within minutes of the interim report’s publication.
The almost 500-word justification and a subsequent television appearance from Johnson showed he was in full fightback mode. Johnson claimed the report had vindicated him because there was nothing saying he had misled parliament knowingly or recklessly. The committee may not yet have concluded definitively that Johnson misled the Commons, but in no way does it put him in the clear.
His spokesperson released not just the statement from Johnson himself but also a series of quotes from supportive MPs casting doubt on the credibility of the report into Partygate by Sue Gray, the civil servant who has just been announced as the new chief of staff for Keir Starmer.
Johnson’s own words also appeared to use Gray’s new association with Labour to suggest the entire Partygate story was a conspiracy against him fuelled by the opposition, while an anonymous “ally” urged Tory MPs to “take note: apparently it’s OK to be put through a parliamentary process which is reliant on material provided by the leader of the opposition’s chief of staff”.
Conservative MPs are outraged by Gray’s move to Labour, mostly because they fear what she knows, having served so long as the Cabinet Office’s chief of propriety ethics. Analysts at the Institute for Government point out it could also be uncomfortable for the civil service.
But the idea that it invalidates her report, which was based on witness testimony and documentary evidence, or that the bulk of Tory MPs may now be ready to vote to stop the privileges committee in its tracks, is not credible.
It is also worth remembering that Johnson welcomed Gray’s report at the time it was published, saying he was grateful for its revelations and that he was “humbled”.
Johnson will now give evidence to the committee in about two weeks. It is plain that the former prime minister intends to fight for his political life by whatever means possible. He knows that his future as an MP is at stake.
However, he is increasingly in a weak position since he failed to drum up much opposition to Rishi Sunak’s Brexit deal and did not challenge for the Tory leadership in the autumn.
A small circle of Conservative MPs remain fully loyal to Johnson, including the former cabinet ministers Nadine Dorries and Simon Clarke, and a substantial chunk of the membership do too.
But a damning verdict from the privileges committee that recommends a lengthy suspension and possibly triggers a recall petition could finally bring to a halt his tumultuous second stint in parliament.
