Privileges committee says Johnson would face 90-day suspension if he were still MP
The committee says, if Boris Johnson were still an MP, it would recommend a suspension for 90 days. It says that last week it was set to recommend a suspension for more than 10 sitting days, enough to trigger the recall election process. But it says it increased the hypothetical punishment in the light of his statement on Friday night, attacking the committee and its draft findings, which itself was “a very serious contempt”.
Johnson is now an ex-MP, and so a suspension punishment can no longer apply. But the committee says Johnson should not be entitled the pass normally given to former MPs allowing them access to parliament.
In its summary the committee says:
The question which the house asked the committee is whether the house had been misled by Mr Johnson and, if so, whether that conduct amounted to contempt. It is for the house to decide whether it agrees with the committee. The house as a whole makes that decision. Motions arising from reports from this committee are debatable and amendable. The committee had provisionally concluded that Mr Johnson deliberately misled the house and should be sanctioned for it by being suspended for a period that would trigger the provisions of the Recall of MPs Act 2015. In light of Mr Johnson’s conduct in committing a further contempt on 9 June 2023, the committee now considers that if Mr Johnson were still a member he should be suspended from the service of the House for 90 days for repeated contempts and for seeking to undermine the parliamentary process, by:
a) Deliberately misleading the house.
b) Deliberately misleading the committee.
c) Breaching confidence.
d) Impugning the committee and thereby undermining the democratic process of the house.
e) Being complicit in the campaign of abuse and attempted intimidation of the committee.
We recommend that he should not be entitled to a former member’s pass.
Key events
It is generally assumed that there will be a division on Monday after MPs debate a motion to approve the privileges committee report. Reports like this normally go through on the nod, but some Conservative MPs have already said or indicated they are going to vote against. (See 1.44pm.) At the end of a debate, the speaker calls a vote by acclamation (“all those in favour, say aye”), and all it takes is one or two MPs to shout “no” loudly enough for a division to be called.
But, in an interview with Radio 4’s the World at One, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Boris Johnson supporter and former business secretary, suggested that a division may not in fact take place. Any vote would be a “formality”, he said, because “a small number of Tory Boris haters” would vote with the opposition. But he also said: “It may not come to a vote.”
Given the pressure on Tory MPs to vote against the report (see 11.32am), it would be surprising if the Johnsonites did not force a vote.
And yet – any division might just show how few supporters Johnson has in the parliamentary party. Most Tory MPs would probably choose not to vote at all, but the motion would get through with opposition backing. Just as Johnson decided to walk way from the privileges committee process last week, his supporters could decide to boycott the Commons vote on the supposed grounds it was “unfair”.
And it would suit the Tory whips for no division to take place, because that prevent endless rows breaking out in Conservative associations over whether MPs voted for or against.
The debate is the main business schedule for Monday. But on Mondays the Commons does not start sitting until 2.30pm, and any debate would not start until 3.30pm at the earliest. From the government’s point of view, the less attention it gets the better, and so it would not be surprising if some lengthy and dull ministerial statements gets scheduled for Monday, and perhaps some urgent questions too, pushing the start of the debate back by a couple of hours or so.
The byelections in Uxbridge and South Ruislip, Boris Johnson’s constituency, and in Selby and Ainsty, Nigel Adams’ constituency, will take place on Thursday 20 July, the Telegraph’s Christopher Hope reports.
NEW Brace for the Boris by-elections!
I understand July 20 has been set for the Selby and Ainsty and Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-elections.
Announcement due shortly.— Christopher Hope📝 (@christopherhope) June 15, 2023
One of the oldest cliches about Boris Johnson is that it is never safe to rule out his making a comeback. The polling firm Savanta has published the results of a snap poll today that suggests, following the publication of the privileges commtitee’s report, almost half of voters think his political career is over. But 40% of people do not agree, the poll suggests. And more than half of people who voted Tory in 2019 don’t think his career is over, according to the survey. 🚨NEW Privileges Committee Report SNAP poll🚨 Half say Boris Johnson’s political career is over. All Con 2019 1,069 UK adults, 15 June pic.twitter.com/NwiJTW16b8 — Savanta UK (@Savanta_UK) June 15, 2023
Is over 47%
Is not over 40%
Don’t know 13%
Is over 35%
Is not over 54%
Don’t know 10%
Committee says it will publish further report dealing with those who have attacked its credibility over Johnson inquiry
The Commons privileges committee report makes it clear that it is being particularly harsh towards Boris Johnson because of the way he responded to its inquiry. In a list of five reasons justifying the proposed 90-day suspension, if he had remained an MP, only one relates to what he orginally told MPs about Partygate, three relate to his response to the investigation, and one relates to what he told the committee when he gave evidence to it. (See 9.18am.)
The committee says that attacks on its integrity amount to contempt of parliament, and that Johnson is an offender in this regard. It says:
(Johnson) stated that the Committee had “forced him out (…) anti-democratically”. This attack on a committee carrying out its remit from the democratically elected House itself amounts to an attack on our democratic institutions. We consider that these statements are completely unacceptable. In our view this conduct, together with the egregious breach of confidentiality, is a serious further contempt.
The committee criticises Johnson for, among other things, calling it a “kangaroo court”. It does not criticise other MPs who have used similar language, but it says it is going to address this matter in a further report. In paragraph 14 it says:
From the outset of this inquiry there has been a sustained attempt, seemingly coordinated, to undermine the Committee’s credibility and, more worryingly, that of those Members serving on it. The Committee is concerned that if these behaviours go unchallenged, it will be impossible for the House to establish such a Committee to conduct sensitive and important inquiries in the future. The House must have a Committee to defend its rights and privileges, and it must protect Members of the House doing that duty from formal or informal attack or undermining designed to deter and prevent them from doing that duty. We will be making a Special Report separately to the House dealing with these matters.
The committee does not say it will be naming other offenders in this regard, and proposing sanctions. But that might be an option for the committee.
Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, is one of the most prominent MPs who has denigrated the committee in this way. Although his language today has been more moderate, in the past he has described the committee as a kangaroo court, and on the day it took evidence from Johnson he posted a joke tweet making the same point.
Boris is doing very well against the marsupials.
— Jacob Rees-Mogg (@Jacob_Rees_Mogg) March 22, 2023