FORMER prime minister Boris Johnson could face further contempt of Parliament charges after launching a “narcissistic attack” on MPs investigating him over his partygate assurances.
Sir Chris Bryant, the chairman of the Privileges Committee who recused himself from the inquiry into Johnson and was replaced by veteran Labour MP Harriet Harman, said the former Tory leader’s criticisms were “in effect an attack on the whole” of the House of Commons.
Johnson accused the Commons partygate inquiry of conducting a “witch hunt” and compared the process to a “kangaroo court” as he announced he was immediately quitting the green benches on Friday.
READ MORE: Stephen Flynn: 'Not a single tear shed in Scotland' at Boris Johnson's resignation
He said “most members of the committee – especially the chair – had already expressed deeply prejudicial remarks about my guilt before they had even seen the evidence” as he argued that they should have stepped back from conducting the probe.
Bryant said the comments could land Johnson in further hot water with the committee, which is due to meet on Monday to discuss the timetable for publishing its report.
While the committee’s findings have yet to be released, Bryant said Johnson had “effectively leaked” that it had concluded he had lied to Parliament when he said Covid rules had been followed in Downing Street, despite there being alcohol-fuelled lockdown parties in No 10 during the pandemic.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, he said: “They may want to conclude that there has been an additional contempt of Parliament by the way that Boris Johnson has behaved in the last 24 hours and in the attacks on the committee, which are in effect an attack on the whole House.
“I don’t think anybody can now be in any doubt that Boris Johnson holds Parliament in contempt.”
Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, branded it “absolute rubbish” for Johnson to claim the committee’s partygate inquiry had not been fairly conducted.
Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live, she said the committee was “highly respected” and pointed to it having a Conservative majority.
The panel is made up of four Tories — Sir Bernard Jenkin, Sir Charles Walker, Alberto Costa and Andy Carter — two Labour MPs, including Ms Harman, and one SNP representative.
Rayner added: “Their report is also subject to a vote in the Commons where the Tories currently have a 66-seat majority, so this idea that he hasn’t been given a fair hearing is absolutely for the birds.
“It is absolute rubbish and tosh, as he would say. It is just another way of Boris Johnson not accepting responsibility for his actions.”
Bryant also expressed difficulty in comprehending how Johnson could suggest MPs investigating him had been motivated by a desire to reverse Brexit.
In his resignation statement, the former Uxbridge and South Ruislip said: “I am not alone in thinking that there is a witch hunt under way, to take revenge for Brexit and ultimately to reverse the 2016 referendum result.
“My removal is the necessary first step, and I believe there has been a concerted attempt to bring it about.”
Bryant continued: “How he can possibly believe that Sir Bernard Jenkin, an arch Brexiteer with whom I’ve rowed about Brexit many times, how he could possibly conceive of him in that light? I think is difficult to understand.”
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