Partygate report: The key findings of privileges committee that sealed Boris Johnson’s destiny

After months of investigation, the report into whether or not Boris Johnson lied to parliament over partygate has lastly been revealed.

Mr Johnson sensationally resigned as a Conservative MP on Friday with quick impact.

He furiously claimed a “witch-hunt” was underneath strategy to “take revenge for Brexit and ultimately to reverse the 2016 referendum result”. Mr Johnson’s 1,000-word assertion attacked Rishi Sunak’s authorities, and finally accused him of not being Conservative sufficient.

The Commons privileges committee’s 14-month investigation, and its findings run to round a 30,000-word report – across the similar size because the George Orwell novel Animal Farm.

Here, Sky News rounds up the important thing findings.

1. Boris Johnson intentionally misled the House over partygate

The Tory-majority committee discovered that Mr Johnson did mislead parliament over partygate on a number of events: twice in December 2021, as soon as the following January and once more in May 2022.

It asserted that Mr Johnson had “personal knowledge about gatherings which he should have disclosed”.

Read extra:
Boris Johnson ‘was complicit in tried intimidation of committee’ – politics newest
Boris Johnson has been damned however he could have extra grenades to throw – evaluation

The report concluded that in “deliberately misleading the House”, Mr Johnson had “committed a serious contempt” which was all of the extra critical as a result of it was dedicated by the prime minister, probably the most senior member of the federal government”.

The report said there is “no precedent” for a prime minister having been found to “have intentionally misled the House”.

“He misled the House on a problem of the best significance to the House and to the general public, and did so repeatedly,” the cross-party committee concluded.

2. Committee ‘unanimously’ advisable a 90-day suspension

Had he not resigned as an MP, the committee would have advisable that Mr Johnson be suspended from the House for 90 days “for repeated contempt and for seeking to undermine the parliamentary process”.

It discovered this was by:

• Deliberately deceptive the House;
• Deliberately deceptive the committee;
• Breaching confidence;
• Impugning the committee and thereby undermining the democratic technique of the House;
• Being complicit within the marketing campaign of abuse and tried intimidation of the committee

The size of the proposed suspension is longer than was anticipated – however not the longest sanction we have seen.

3. Boris Johnson ‘shouldn’t be entitled to a Member’s cross’

Due to his resignation, the committee is unable to sanction Mr Johnson because it had hoped.

However, the report stated: “In view of the fact that Mr Johnson is no longer a Member, we recommend that he should not be granted a former Member’s pass” granting him entry to the parliamentary property.

4. Birthday social gathering claims ‘not convincing’

The committee report stated it does “not regard as convincing” Mr Johnson’s clarification that “it seemed to me… perfectly proper” for officers to be “asked to come and wish me a happy birthday”.

This pertains to a gathering that occurred on 19 June 2020, on the top of lockdown.

The report continues that Mr Johnson was unable to clarify why he thought of his spouse and inside designer “absolutely necessary participants” in a work-related assembly.

“His assertion that the prime minister’s family are entitled to use every part of the building does not constitute an explanation,” it stated.

Mr Johnson was fined for attending the gathering within the Cabinet Room in Downing Street.

5. Gatherings at Number 10 and Chequers

The report revealed that on 18 May, the federal government offered the committee with “new evidence relating to 16 gatherings at Number 10 and Chequers” with none prior discover. Chequers is the official nation residence of British prime ministers.

An accompanying assertion from the federal government had stated: “As part of their work preparing Boris Johnson’s witness statement for the COVID Inquiry (due to be filed on 29 May), the counsel team supporting Mr Johnson identified a number of diary entries as potentially problematic.

“These entries […] are primarily based on an evaluation by Government Legal Department as to occasions/actions which may fairly be thought of to represent breaches of COVID Regulations.”

The committee stated this was disclosed to Mr Johnson the following day.

6. ‘Wine time Fridays’

According to at least one junior official who gave proof to the committee, press officers would collect in Downing Street for “wine time Fridays” from 4pm, the place social distancing was “not enforced”.

“Number 10, despite setting the rules to the country, was slow to enforce any rules in the building,” the official testified.

“The press office wine time Fridays continued throughout, social distancing was not enforced and mask wearing was not enforced.”

The official stated they enquired whether or not masks ought to be worn and was instructed the “science advice was that there was ‘no point’ and had ‘very little effect on the spread on COVID'”.

“This was all part of a wider culture of not adhering to any rules. Number 10 was like an island oasis of normality.

“Operational notes had been despatched out from the safety staff to be aware of the cameras exterior the door, to not exit in teams and to social distance, it was all a pantomime.

“Birthday parties, leaving parties and end of week gatherings all continued as normal. Those responsible for the leadership of Number 10 failed to keep it a safe space and should have set rules from the start that these gatherings should not continue.

“It was solely greater than a 12 months into the pandemic that Number 10 arrange a a method system and desk divider screens.”

7. Kangaroo courts and witch-hunts

Committee members condemned Mr Johnson for distancing himself from language like “kangaroo courts” and “witch-hunts” while giving evidence to the committee, but then using that same “abusive” language himself in his statement last week.

It said: “This leaves us in little question that he was insincere in his makes an attempt to distance himself from the marketing campaign of abuse and intimidation of committee members.

“This in our view constitutes a further significant contempt.”