THE content of the motion tabled for the House of Commons which aims to refer the Prime Minister to the privileges committee for misleading parliament has been published.
Opposition leaders from the SNP, Labour, LibDems, SLDP, Greens, Plaid Cymru and Alliance Party of Northern Ireland have all backed the motion.
Speaker Lindsay Hoyle has given the green light for MPs to debate and vote on whether the PM misled parliament in previous statements about rule-breaking in Number 10 – during which he argued Covid guidance had been followed at all times.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson faces crunch vote after apology fails to win over opposition MPs
There are two crucial dates contained in the motion - December 1, 2021, where Johnson told MPs “all guidance had been followed” in Downing Street, and December 8, 2021, after the video of former senior government spokesperson Allegra Stratton joking about parties emerged and caused fury amongst the public.
If successful, the motion would refer Johnson to the privileges committee - which examines issues relating to contempt in parliament, and has the power to summon reports and documents.
The motion has been tabled in the names of Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford, Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey, Plaid Cymru’s Liz Saville-Roberts, the SDLP’s Colum Eastwood, Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and Alliance Party MP Stephen Farry.
It notes that given the PM was handed a fixed penalty notice in relation to events in Downing Street and the two statements he made to the Commons in December last year, that the PM should be referred to the committee to “consider whether the hon Member’s conduct amounts to a contempt of the House”.
It adds that “the Committee shall not begin substantive consideration of the matter until the inquiries currently being conducted by the Metropolitan Police have been concluded”.
If Johnson is referred to the committee, it’s possible that the Sue Gray report, which was substantially redacted due to the Met investigation, could be released in full.
READ MORE: Douglas Ross given 'terminal decline' warning by former senior Tory MSP
The two dates of contention in the motion were both in December 2021.
The first after Starmer asked the PM outright: “As millions of people were locked down last year, was a Christmas party thrown in Downing Street for dozens of people on 18 December?”
Johnson replied: “What I can tell the right hon and learned Gentleman is that all guidance was followed completely in No 10. May I recommend that he does the same with his own Christmas party, which is advertised for 15 December and to which, unaccountably, he has failed to invite the deputy Leader of the Opposition?”
The second date, on December 8, came after Stratton’s resignation after a damning video came to light showing Number 10 aides laughing about answering questions about a potential Christmas party.
The PM said that he “understood and shared the anger” felt across the country at the leaked footage of Number to staff “seeming to make light of lockdown measures”.
Johnson added that he himself was “furious” at the footage, and then apologised “unreservedly” for the offence it caused and the “impression it gives”.
READ MORE: Holyrood hears damning evidence calling for greyhound racing ban
He then added: “I repeat that I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken.
“That is what I have been repeatedly assured. But I have asked the Cabinet Secretary to establish all the facts and to report back as soon as possible. It goes without saying that if those rules were broken, there will be disciplinary action for all those involved.”
Johnson has repeatedly denied that he misled the House.
Thursday's debate will see Tory MPs whipped to support the PM, despite the fact that Johnson will be in India on a trade trip.
What does the full motion say?
The full text of the motion reads: “That, this House (1) notes that, given the issues of fixed penalty notices by the police in relation to events in 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office, assertions the RT hon Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip has made on the floor of the House about the legality of activities in 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office under Covid regulations, including but not limited to the following answers given at Prime Minister’s Questions: 1 December 2021, that all guidance was followed in No. 10., Official report vol. 704, col 909; 8 December 2021 that I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken, Official Report vol. 705, col. 379, appear to amount to misleading the House and; (2) orders that this matter be referred to the Commitee of Privileges to consider whether the hon Member’s conduct amount to a contempt of the House, but that the Committee shall not begin substantive consideration of the matter until the inquiries currently being conducted by the Metropolitan Police have been concluded.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel