Comments from prominent Boris Johnson supporters questioning the committee's work were cited in his report.
The free speech controversy erupted after a committee that investigated Boris Johnson at party gates named and shamed eight Tories in connection with an alleged pressure campaign.
The privileges committee, which earlier this month came to The conclusion that Mr Johnson misled MPs over lockdown-violating gatherings in Downing Street made a move in a new report.
Politicians highlighted were Nadine Dorris, Lord Goldsmith, Mark Jenkinson, sir Michael Fabricant, Brendan Clark-Smith, Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, Dame Priti Patel and Dame Andrea Jenkins.
All eight are prominent supporters of Mr. Johnson. Comments they made questioning the committee's work were cited in the report, including some describing the body as a «kangaroo court.»
Some of those involved hit back after the report was released on Thursday morning, accusing the committee is overreacting.
Mr Clark-Smith tweeted:
their previous work, I am shocked and disappointed that my name is mentioned in this new report. This raises serious questions about freedom of speech in a democratic society, and my colleagues and I will continue to defend these principles in the future. 2/2
— Brendan Clark-Smith, MP (@Bren4Bassetlaw), June 29, 2023
Sir Jacob accused the committee of «trying to stop free speech», while Ms Dorries, quoting a pro-Johnson colleague said: «If they don't want to be accused of being a kangaroo court, they should stop jumping around so much.» «.
In its report, the committee claims that Mr. Johnson's supporters made a concerted effort to pressure those who are investigating him and influence the outcome.
Committee of seven deputies, four of whom are Tories, denounced what he called assaults on his integrity and suggested that members' personal safety was more at risk due to such behavior.
It stated that there had been «unprecedented and coordinated pressure» on the committee, and suggested that in the future similar investigations should be carried out by an external body if something like this happened again.
No punishment for the eight Tories was not offered. committee. Other MPs could propose sanctions, but they are unlikely to be approved by the Tory-majority House of Commons.
Instead, the committee wants a motion in the House of Commons that notes its report and says MPs must not undermine the integrity of the body. The government must decide whether to put forward this proposal.
Part of the proposed sentence states that «Members of this House shall not challenge the probity of this committee or its members, or attempt to lobby or intimidate these members, or encourage others to do so, as such conduct undermines the proceedings.» The House of Representatives is itself capable of inspiring contempt.”
What Boris Johnson’s allies said
One part of the report stated: “The pressure was especially on the conservative members of the committee. It was expressly intended to oust these members from the committee and thus frustrate the intention of the Chamber to conduct an investigation or prevent the investigation from reaching a conclusion that the critics did not want. from the Labor Party Harriet Harman], who was appointed to the committee by a unanimous decision of the House of Representatives.
“This unprecedented and coordinated pressure has not affected the conduct or outcome of our investigation. However, this has had a significant personal impact on individual members and has caused significant security concerns.
“If the abuse of members performing duties entrusted to them by the House of Representatives continues, it is reasonable to conclude that, in the future, members will refuse to to serve on a committee, or there may be reluctance on the part of persons approached as external advisers to fulfill this role.”
The appendix to the report compiles comments from the eight Conservative politicians mentioned, including those made on social media and during on-air interviews.
One comment made by Ms. the careers of the Conservative deputies who were members of this committee. Are they suddenly on the chicken run to safety? Gongs? Were promises made? We need to know if they were. Fairness must be observed at all levels of this process.”
Another letter from Mr Jenkinson said: «When the witch hunt is forgotten, future generations will look back in wonder,» and Sir Jacob told BBC Radio 4: «I think it gives the kangaroo court respectability.»
p>
In addition to the addendum to the report, Lord Cruddas and Lord Greenhalgh, two members of Johnson's pro-Conservative Democratic organization, were criticized.
Some of those singled out in the report immediately opposed its findings , and Mr. Jenkinson tweeted:
When I published the previous report, I said that he exaggerated. Before posting, I did not address the committee.
However, another great example of gross abuse of authority is that the committee uses a tweet that does not belong to them and is about media harassment of Boris Johnson. https://t.co/clLfh18L6b
— Mark Jenkinson MP 🇬🇧 (@markjenkinsonmp), June 29, 2023
Sir Michael wrote:
I stand my ground. Some members of the Committee of Privileges treated their witness Boris Johnson with disdain with gestures and other actions. If the case was in court, the judge would call them to order. Respect for the Committee must be earned. pic.twitter.com/t8qpglLIB3
— Michael Fabrikant 🇬🇧🇺🇦 (@Mike_Fabricant) June 29, 2023
Rishi Sunak's spokesman said the PM has 'total confidence' in Lord Goldsmith, one of the Tories . Named the one who currently holds the position of Minister of Energy in the government.
Свежие комментарии