Boris Johnson may have misled parliament over ‘partygate’, say MPs

MPs investigating Boris Johnson’s conduct in the “partygate” scandal said on Friday he may have misled parliament after concluding evidence “strongly” suggested that breaches of coronavirus rules would have been “obvious” to the then prime minister.

The cross-party House of Commons privileges committee is probing whether Johnson knowingly misled parliament in statements about the scandal, which centred on parties in Downing Street and Whitehall during Covid-19 restrictions in 2020 and 2021.

In a report, MPs on the committee said the Commons “may have been misled” on four occasions by Johnson — including in December 2021 when he told parliamentarians that he had “relied upon repeated assurances that the rules had not been broken”.

“The evidence strongly suggests that breaches of guidance would have been obvious to Mr Johnson at the time he was at the gatherings,” said the MPs.

“There is evidence that those who were advising Mr Johnson about what to say to the press and in the House were themselves struggling to contend that some gatherings were within the rules.”

MPs found to have misled the Commons can face a vote on whether they should be held in contempt of parliament, but it is unclear what sanctions could follow.

Last year, Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle said if Johnson was suspended as an MP, it could allow people in his constituency to start a petition on whether to call a parliamentary by-election.

Johnson became the first UK prime minister found to have committed a criminal offence while in office after police last year fined him for an illegal birthday party held in Downing Street in 2020 during a Covid lockdown.

Rishi Sunak also received a fixed-penalty notice from the Metropolitan Police for attending the same party.

The MPs on the privileges committee said there was a “culture of drinking” within Whitehall, even as Covid restrictions were enforced across the country.

“Johnson is said by witnesses to have seen [Downing Street] press office gatherings on his way to the Number 10 flat, and to have occasionally joined these gatherings when his attendance had not been planned,” they added.

The committee, which began its investigation into Johnson in June last year, will produce its final conclusions after MPs question him later this month.

The MPs said their inquiry had been held up by a lack of government co-operation, revealing they first asked for documents in July but only received a partial response one month later.

“Following further engagement between the committee and ministers and senior officials, which took some months, unredacted disclosure of all relevant material was finally provided on 18 November.” By this time, Sunak was prime minister.

In a statement, Johnson accused the committee of relying on evidence from Sue Gray, a senior civil servant who investigated the partygate affair — and this week quit to become chief of staff to Sir Keir Starmer, Labour leader.

The former prime minister said it was “surreal to discover that the committee proposes to rely on evidence culled and orchestrated by Sue Gray”.

He added there was “no evidence in the [committee] report that I knowingly or recklessly misled parliament”.

Gray’s report into the partygate affair, published in May last year after being commissioned by Johnson, outlined a culture of lawbreaking in Downing Street during the pandemic.

Johnson said at the time he accepted “full responsibility” for the parties but insisted he would not quit.

A spokesperson for the committee said its report was “not based on the Sue Gray report”.

Opposition parties criticised Johnson. “While families up and down the country dutifully followed the rules, unable to visit loved ones, missing weddings and funerals, Boris Johnson was repeatedly holding drinks and social events at the heart of government — events attended by the current prime minister,” said Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner.

Meanwhile key Johnson allies attacked Gray and her report into the partygate affair, accusing her of damaging civil service impartiality by quitting to work for Starmer.

When questioned on whether Sunak wanted to block Gray’s move to work for Starmer, the prime minister’s spokesperson said on Friday said her resignation had been accepted with immediate effect.

He added the Cabinet Office was looking into the circumstances in which Gray had quit.