Boris Johnson

Johnson warned the deal would either leave Northern Ireland "captured by the EU legal order" or mean that "the whole of the U.K. was unable properly to diverge ...

Though the opposition Labour Party has said it supports Sunak's deal, the PM's authority may take a hit if he is forced to rely on opposition votes. Speaking of Johnson and Truss he said: “Both of them should be backing the Windsor Framework today… plan to unilaterally override the contentious Northern Ireland protocol — which kept the region bound to EU standards on goods. was unable properly to diverge and take advantage of Brexit." He can be remembered for the great acts of statecraft that he achieved, or he can risk looking like a pound shop Nigel Farage.” In a sign of lingering Tory acrimony over Brexit, he's already been dismissed as a "pound shop Nigel Farage" by a serving minister.

The former UK prime minister will defend himself against claims that he lied to Parliament over the partygate scandal.

Sir Charles Walker, another member of the committee, is standing down at the next election. Ms Harman, due to stand down at the next general election, has long been an outspoken advocate for equality in politics and a strong feminist. But the ultimate decision will lie with the full House of Commons. A “core bundle” of documents to which the panel of MPs and Mr Johnson may refer to in the course of the questioning will be published later this morning. The committee has said: “The evidence strongly suggests that breaches of guidance would have been obvious to Mr Johnson at the time he was at the gatherings.” The committee has been clear that the purpose of the inquiry is to consider whether Mr Johnson misled Parliament, rather than comb over the various details of the partygate furore.

It has been 11 months since the privileges committee launched its inquiry into Boris Johnson to establish if he misled parliament over lockdown parties in ...

The next step is to take oral evidence from Boris Johnson and others involved. - a date when two parties were reported to have taken place, at least one of which resulted in fines. But it will fall to MPs to decide whether to accept the findings of the report and to follow through with any sanction. But the committee said his submissions contained "no new evidence" in his defence, and an earlier version had to be re-submitted because of "errors and typos". In its findings, it can conclude that an individual has been found to have "committed a contempt" in misleading the House and it can recommend sanctions, ranging from an oral or written apology through to suspension for a specified period or even expulsion from the Commons. Technically, the only powers the committee has is to issue that report to the Commons for MPs to consider. He said he "shared the anger" of the public and was "furious" to see the clip, adding: "I apologise unreservedly for the offence that it has caused up and down the country, and I apologise for the impression that it gives. The committee has confirmed the hearings will take place in public to make sure the probe is "transparent", although requests to hear evidence anonymously or in private "will be considered on a case by case basis". The privileges committee is made up of seven MPs - four Conservatives, two from Labour and one from the SNP. MPs from all sides of the Commons questioned whether Mr Johnson had misled the Commons over what he knew - a serious breach of parliamentary rules - and they voted in favour of the privileges committee carrying out an inquiry. Mr Johnson also accused both Labour and the SNP of "playing politics" when he faced questions about the video from both party leaders. As report after report dropped, question upon question was asked by MPs in the Commons about who was involved - and many of them were directed at the prime minister.

The ex-prime minister is fighting accusations he misled Parliament over lockdown parties in No 10.

"He could see what was happening and allowed the culture to continue." He said he and Mr Reynolds then discussed whether to go ahead with the event. Another submission from a No 10 official said Mr Johnson often "saw and joined gatherings" in Downing Street. Mr Cain said Mr Reynolds said he would speak to the prime minister but "he was sure it was okay". Mr Cain said Mr Cummings later confirmed that he had "informed the PM", but they had argued about other issues and "he was clearly very frustrated". It is a Q&A form, dated 6 February 2023, which asks Mr Case whether he gave Mr Johnson any assurance that "Covid rules were followed at all times in No 10 and specifically in relation to gatherings covered in the Sue Gray report".

Former prime minister questioned by MPs over whether he misled House over breaches of Covid rules.

“I accepted this but questioned whether it was realistic to argue that all guidance had been followed at all times, given the nature of the working environment in No 10. Mr Johnson took a break from the committee hearing to rebel against his successor on the prime minister’s new Brexit arrangements for Northern Ireland. I asked the relevant people, they were senior people.” Mr Case replied to the inquiry’s questionnaire asking whether he assured Mr Johnson that Covid rules were “followed at all times” by saying “No”. Boris Johnson was accused of relying on “flimsy” assurances before issuing his denials about rule-breaking parties during lockdown. At one point in the hearing, Mr Johnson said that when he insisted to the Commons that the “guidance” had been followed “at all times” in No 10 he should have said it was all “rules” that had been adhered to.

With Labour backing the Windsor Framework agreement signed last month, the British government should win a vote on the framework comfortably.

A source close to Ms Truss said she also plans to vote against the post-Brexit deal for Northern Ireland. Mr Johnson, who agreed the original Northern Ireland Protocol with Brussels as a way to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, had earlier this month indicated that he would find it “very difficult” to support the Windsor agreement. She is understood to believe that it does not “satisfactorily resolve the issues thrown up by” the Northern Ireland Protocol and “almost fatally impinges” on the UK’s ability to diverge from EU rules and regulations. In a statement, Mr Johnson said: “The proposed arrangements would mean either that Northern Ireland remained captured by the EU legal order – and was increasingly divergent from the rest of the UK – or they would mean that the whole of the UK was unable properly to diverge and take advantage of Brexit. “Instead, the best course of action is to proceed with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, and make sure that we take back control.” Mr Johnson, who had already voiced concerns about the deal brokered with Brussels, confirmed that he will not be backing the deal when MPs vote on the Stormont brake in the House of Commons later on Wednesday.

Boris Johnson has said he will vote against the EU and UK's new Brexit deal. The former UK prime minister, who had already voiced concerns about the deal ...

It remains to be seen how large a rebellion British prime minister Rishi Sunak will face, when the secondary legislation on the Stormont brake comes before MPs. The former UK prime minister, who agreed the original Northern Ireland Protocol with Brussels as a way to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, had earlier this month indicated that he would find it “very difficult” to support the Windsor agreement. The DUP has already said its eight MPs will vote against the regulation to implement the Stormont brake as it continues to seek changes to the overall framework.

But former PMs Boris Johnson and Liz Truss joined 20 other Tory MPs and the DUP to vote against the agreement.

was unable properly to diverge and take advantage of Brexit," he added. But in a statement issued before the vote, Mr Johnson said it was "unacceptable". Despite originally billing the agreement as a "great deal for our country," Mr Johnson went on to join Tory Brexiters in bemoaning the economic impact of the checks it introduced. The original Brexit withdrawal deal negotiated by Mr Johnson introduced a series of checks on goods sent from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, in order to avoid a border with the Irish Republic. The vote is on a key part of the deal, known as the Stormont brake, that would give a future Northern Ireland Assembly a way to challenge new EU goods legislation. [writing in the Telegraph before the vote](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/22/go-back-eu-get-us-better-deal-prime-minister/) that Mr Sunak should "negotiate a better deal".

Boris Johnson has sworn "hand on heart" he did not lie to MPs about partygate events in Downing Street - and said a gathering where he was pictured holding ...

He also mentioned the Sue Gray report a handful of times. She recently resigned from the civil service to become Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer's chief of staff. "I asked the relevant people. David Garfinkel's dad, Ivor, died during the pandemic and he wasn't able to be with him in hospital. "I was confident, not because there has been some kind of cover-up. When asked if Mr Johnson believed exceptions to the workplace rules and social distancing guidelines applied to Number 10 but not to hospitals and care homes, he said: "Of course not." They had been working very hard. "Perhaps if I had elucidated more clearly what I meant and what I felt and believed about following the guidance, that would have helped," he said. He said: "It's clear from what I've said that I was assured repeatedly by different people and on different occasions that the rules have been followed." He calls it "sickening" and "soul destroying" that people running the country couldn't keep to the rules when millions of ordinary Britons were following them. "I was misremembering the line that had already been put out to the media about this even, which was 'COVID rules were followed at all times'," he said. He added that there is no evidence of officials raising issues about breaking rules "because that never happened" as he accused the committee of not giving people at the events the chance to explain themselves.

Former PM questioned by privileges committee about whether he knowingly misled the Commons over Covid rule breaches at No 10.

He did not quite lose his temper, but it was probably a mistake to take a swipe at Harman’s integrity and it should not have taken him as long as it did to disown the “kangaroo court” smears cast out by his supporters. Johnson lost his job partly as a result of Partygate, and the Brexiter Tory faction he now leads has, on the basis of today’s vote (see 3.20pm), been reduced to oddball rump of 22. But it does not have to be a suspension of 10-days or more, and it is not hard to see why the committee might opt for a lesser punishment. (See 3.08pm.) And his question about what Johnson would have said if asked at a press conference if a crowded drinks do was allowed in a workplace under the Covid guidance was one of the best of the day. In its report earlier this month the privileges committee said that it would consider whether Boris Johnson misled the house and, if so, it would consider “whether that was inadvertent, reckless or intentional”. The other key exchange came when Harriet Harman expressed dismay at Johnson telling MPs all rules and guidance were followed on the basis of such “flimsy” evidence. Boris Johnson’s former boss and ex-editor of the Daily Telegraph Max Hastings has told Andrew Marr:: “I don’t think you can right off Boris Johnson until he is buried at a crossroads with a stake driven through his heart… Bernard Jenkin, a senior Conservative MP on the committee, told him that the cross-party group of MPs did not agree with his interpretation of the guidance. Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, told the World at One he would vote against the government even though he was in favour of the Stormont brake, which he said “could turn out to be useful”. Because I think he’s winning in the court of public opinion, who see this as a kangaroo court.” The former prime minister was left fighting for his political career after a tetchy three-and-a-half-hour evidence session in which he repeatedly claimed No 10 parties, with alcohol and little social distancing, had been “necessary” for work purposes. Harriet Harman, chair of the privileges committee investigating whether Johnson deliberately misled MPs over lockdown gatherings, expressed dismay at the “flimsy nature” of assurances he received that events were within the rules.