Boris Johnson would have faced a 90-day suspension from the House of Commons after committing 'repeated contempt' of Parliament with the Committee on Privileges found his partisan denials banned.
The Privileges Committee-recommended suspension of action, including deliberately misleading MPs, would pave the way for a by-election of the former prime minister if he had not resigned in anticipation.
Mr Johnson made what he called «an abnormal conclusion» by accusing a group of Tory-majority MPs of lying, which he repeatedly tried to denounce.
Boris Johnson's Privileges Committee report
Here are the highlights of the partygate results.
Johnson Report Crosshead – Sanction
The Privilege Committee said Boris Johnson would have been suspended for 90 days had he not resigned as MP.
The unprecedented sanction would spark a recall petition, leaving him facing a by-election in his Uxbridge. and the seat of South Ruislip.
Boris Johnson jogging near his home in Oxfordshire
MPs said the sanction was stricter than it could have been because Mr Johnson spent the last week deriding the committee as a «kangaroo court».
The sanction is much longer than the one the MP faced SNP Margaret Ferrier. — was so tall because Mr Johnson was a former prime minister.
Johnson Report Crosshead — Passage to the House of Commons
The committee decided that Mr Johnson should be stripped of his pass to the House of Commons in light of his misleading Parliament.
p>
They recommended additional sanctions that would be subject to a vote by all MPs because he resigned as an MP, which means he cannot be removed.
All former MPs have a Commons pass as former members, allowing them to socialize in the various bars and restaurants of Parliament, even if they have quit politics. The withdrawal of a pass is extremely rare.
The committee's report states: «In view of the fact that Mr. Johnson is no longer a member, we recommend that he not be granted a former member's pass.»
Johnson Report Crosshead — Six Events
The report lists six events at Downing street where the lockdown rules were not respected.
It was further concluded that there was no way Mr. Johnson could really believe that they were «necessary for the job».
Downing Street garden party. Photo: Guardian/eyevine
And they noted that he did not want to speak during interrogation, that he would have told the general public that the work activities were solely to boost morale in accordance with the isolation rules.
They said that this was “unlikely, given balance the likelihood that Mr. Johnson, in the light of his cumulative direct personal experience of these events, could sincerely believe that the Rules or Guidelines are being followed.” The Committee concluded that Mr Johnson had not only misled the House, but had intended to mislead the House.
They listed a number of ways in which he was «disingenuous» during the investigation and said it amounted to «deliberately shutting down his mind, or at least acting recklessly.»
MPs said this was «highly unlikely «. that Mr. Johnson «could himself believe the statements he made to the House of Representatives at the time he made them, especially since he could continue to believe them to this day.»
They concluded: «Someone who repeatedly recklessly and continues to deny what is obvious is a person whose behavior is sufficient to demonstrate intent.»
«Many aspects of Mr. Johnson's defense are not credible: taken together, they form a sufficient basis for the conclusion he intended to mislead.”
Johnson Report Crosshead — Five Ways
In its opinion, the privileges committee listed five ways in which the former prime disrespect for parliament.
>
MPs said he was guilty of:
- deliberately misleading the House of Representatives
- deliberately misleading the Committee
- Breach of confidence
- Involvement in a campaign of abuse and attempts to intimidate the Committee
< li>Challenging the Committee and thereby undermining the democratic process of the House
Johnson Crosshead Report — Privileges
The committee said it extended the proposed sanction because Mr Johnson attacked the «decency, honesty and honor» of its members in «biting terms».
On Friday night, the former prime minister released a 1,000-word statement , which stated that the MPs «pushed him out anti-democratically.»
The MPs said: «This attack on the committee acting from the most democratically elected House of Representatives is tantamount to an attack on our democratic institutions.
“We believe that these statements are completely unacceptable. In our opinion, this behavior, together with the blatant breach of confidentiality, is yet another serious act of disrespect.”
Johnson Report Crosshead — Lie
MPs were also angry at Mr. believes it was a «kangaroo court».
When he appeared before the committee, he stated that he had full respect for its members and tried to distance himself from allies who spoke of a «witch hunt».< /p>
“We note that in his June 9 statement, Mr. Johnson himself used precisely such offensive terms to describe the Committee,” they said.
This leaves us in no doubt that he was insincere in their attempts to distance themselves from the campaign of insults and intimidation of committee members. In our opinion, this represents another serious disrespect.”
Johnson Report Crosshead — Partygate
Mr. Johnson said his aides «repeatedly assured» that the events in question were not breaking the rules.
But the report said: «He contented himself with giving the impression that the events (plural) against which the allegations were made were in fact «not events» and, to paraphrase, it would be absurd to suggest that the legislators at the heart of the government were also rule breakers…
“In fact, the only assurances of which we can be sure were given to Mr. Johnson, were obtained in a hurry on the basis of the “line to be taken” in the press, and were not subject to investigation prior to any of the Prime Minister’s meetings, did not come from high-ranking permanent civil servants or state lawyers, but from two media advisers and based only on their personal recollections.”
The Committee said that an attempt to pretend that the “repeated” two media advisers, were «fake ex-post excuses»
Johnson Report Crosshead — As MPs
The committee gave four reasons why they concluded that Mr. Johnson deliberately misled the House of Representatives.
- His repeated and persistent denials of the facts, such as his refusal to acknowledge that sufficient efforts were not made to enforce social distancing at gatherings where the lack of social distancing is documented in official photographs, and that he did not see or hear anything to alert his. violations that occurred.
- The frequency with which he closed his mind to these facts and what was obvious, so that in the end the only conclusion that could be drawn was that he deliberately closed his mind.
- The fact that he sought to rewrite the meaning of the Rules and Guidelines to match his own evidence, such as his claim that «imperfect» social distancing was perfectly acceptable when there were no mitigating measures, rather than lifting it . meeting or holding it online, and his allegation that an outdoor or morale meeting was a legitimate reason for holding the meeting.
- His own post-event explanations, such as the nature and extent of assurances, what he received, the words used, the purpose of the assurances, who they came from… His view of his own Fixed Penalty Notice (that he was confused as to why he received it) is instructive.
< /st >
Свежие комментарии