The consensus amongst journalists is that Boris Johnson will survive yesterday's debacle following the publication of the interim Sue Gray report.
There was not a single ministerial resignation yesterday, although one private secretary did resign.
Although the Tory backbenchers were almost absent of those willing to support the prime minister, those ministers sitting alongside him looked as if they wished to hang their heads in shame and cover them with their hands, but they did not resign.
And those few Tory MPs who had the courage to make clear that they have had enough of this rotten prime minister are insufficient in number to tip the balance that requires him to face a vote of no confidence amongst his own MPs.
We got, as a consequence, what was the clearest possible evidence that our Parliamentary democracy is rotten.
Kier Starmer pointed this out, powerfully, in what was probably his best moment as Labour leader to date. His analysis was forensic and was delivered with obvious malice. It clearly rattled Johnson, as it should have done. He made blatantly false accusations in response, straight out of the far-right meme book.
Theresa May was scornful in the style of a headteacher and played her part in exposing his lies to perfection.
Caroline Lucas was appropriately passionate.
And I am sure that Ian Blackford staged his intervention, but if he did then it was well done. He was expelled from the House for making the suggestion that Boris Johnson had lied to it when it was glaringly obvious that he had. The relevant exchange in which the lie was proffered was recorded in Hansard on 8 December 2021 when this question and answer were exchanged:
In the Sue Gray report the following events were reported (with others):
It was also noted that in that report that:
What this very clearly means is that the events of 13 November 2020 are now subject to a police investigation.
What were the regulations at the time? According to the Sue Gray report they were that:
Quite straightforwardly, in that case the event in the Downing Street flat was inevitably contrary to the regulations in force at the time. As Theresa May made very clear, it really was quite impossible for the prime minister to have believed otherwise presuming that, as we have to, he was aware of the regulations, or should have been, as the law deems to be the case.
We ended with the farce that a person who spoke the truth was expelled from the House of Commons for stating that the prime minister had lied to it, which he had, and for refusing to withdraw his allegation, which would have required him to perjure himself by telling a lie. This was the key element in the exchange:
Blackford was then ordered from the chamber.
What this exposes is that we have a Parliamentary system no longer fit for purpose. When the truth cannot be told without fear of repercussion the possibility of holding power to account has ceased to exist. That is the sorry state that we have reached in the UK.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Forgetting about all the big issues around this, I really feel for the “serfs” @ No10 ( custodians, secretaries, kitchen staff, cops, security, cleaners etc) who had to put up, clean up and shut up whilst this rabble were trashing the place. Imagine having to go into work everyday, impotent in the face of this apparent Hooray Henry massive. Oh, has anyone asked who paid for the booze? Did Boris think they were work events because the bill was footed out of petty cash?
Indeed. We have to remember that within no. 10 there are civil servants from the lowest grades who have to work, many of whom will be struggling to pay their rent let alone anything else. (If I remember right several hundred recieved emergency payments in order to bring them up to minimum wage). These same people may not have been instructed to attend various events but passive aggressive threats about not being a team player etc and other tricks would have made it very hard not to cooperate.
I’m assuming “Kia” Starmer is a typo rather than derision.
Autocorrect
Corrected
Thanks
Perfectly functional but a little bland?
This feels like a particular nadir, but the parliamentary system has always existed to protect those in power. It’s just amplified now because of the way the media works
I recall Chris Bryant having to apologise for calling Hunt a liar despite it being evident he had done so. This was in 2012.
Dennis Skinner was booted for calling Cameron dodgy dave after Cameron had clearly misled parliament in the aftermath of the Panama papers. (Incidentally I think Cameron’s stuff around that should have been far more damaging than partygate, but the national shrug over it all was deafening)
The Chilcott report was almost hilarious in the ways it avoided calling Blair a liar over the Iraq war. Still no one has said in parliament that the prime minister lied to them numerous times.
It’s deeply frustrating watching the way MP’s (of all parties) behave in parliament and deeply disturbing to read about the way they behave in Westminster.
The worst of it all is I don’t see how it changes. I really hope I’m wrong, but Starmer doesn’t really come across as someone who would change anything about the way Westminster works.
I do think the opposition missed a trick here. When Blackford was ordered from the House the entire opposition benches should have followed him out. Ending the debate, but you cannot debate with a liar.
Yes, what would happen if opposition MP after opposition MP stood up and called Johnson a liar… and then walked out.
Could be interesting! Watching the questioning of the PM yesterday just demonstrated how a really brazen liar cannot be held to account. Our whole system is based on some Victorian notion of “honour and decency” that is past its sell-by date. Yes, there have always been rogues… but today they are protected rather than called out by colleagues.
Labour needs to switch the attack to Johnson’s enablers – ie. all Tory MPs that maintain him in power.
Clive, a really good idea. I wonder what it would take to get a concerted response of that kind.
I’m envisaging an ‘I am Spartacus’ moment with every opposition MP calling Boris a liar and being asked to leave.
It would be good
Absolutely This is exactly why we need better systems of regulation in place. The current systems are failing us.
https://www.change.org/One_independent_regulatory_body_for_UKpoliticians
The complete farce of the Sue Gray/Partygate debate in Parliament yesterday was good entertainment but unfortunately, as you so clearly point out, was a dreadfully serious condemnation of the rotteness of Tory rule and must be condemned in the strongest terms. Well Done Starmer, May, Blackford, Lucas, Mitchell et al. Johnsons’s remarks slandering Starmer about not prosecuting Jimmy Saville is unforgivable.
Parliament Live is usually hard work to watch, but yesterday afternoon was pure theatre. I didn’t think Starmer was as good as some commentators – his barrister training means he twists the dagger better when there are facts to quote – but he was given an open goal and didn’t miss. As you say Blackford somewhat staged his climax, but did make the important point very forcefully.
And then the backbenchers: among the toady Conservatives complimenting Johnson on his world-beating achievements and leadership of the Western world against Putin (a role which ended up going to Macron anyway) there were clearly those with serious concerns. Theresa May suitably icy, Andrew Mitchell staging his own bit of drama, and Aaron Bell’s spellbinding soliloquy. Labour backbenchers were pretty much repeating versions of the same question, but all quoting real-life stories that left Johnson sweating as he blustered to evade answering.
I suspect the parliamentary Conservative party is actually seriously rattled. That was my conclusion from the rapid U-turn following an MPs’ meeting about publishing the complete Gray report once police enquiries were complete, despite Johnson refusing to commit to that at least twenty times in the debate. I rather agree with the humorous question from a Scots MP that it may now be a case of “hobble, hobble, quack, quack”.
I think they are worried today
David Allen Green says that a substantive debate can be held on whether or not an individual has lied. It just can’t be an accusation made in the course of a debate.
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1488437773933723649
He linked to this:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmproced/writev/language/p19.htm
I’d be interested to know if this could actually happen. Doesn’t Rees Mogg control the Commons timetable?
I was also wondering if the question of procedure for breaches of the Ministerial Code could be a matter for the Parliamentary Standards Select Committee. If Parliament is indeed sovereign over the Executive wouldn’t that be a matter for them to look at with a view to altering the way Ministers are held to account for breaching it?
Why should the PM be arbiter when it is painfully obvious that the Executive isn’t capable of self regulating.
The SNP has done it
Indeed – in case we forget, there was a debate on 30 November 2021 when Johnson was directly called a liar several times.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-11-30/debates/DA41937F-F795-4A37-8C9E-9940192FBC64/ConductOfTheRightHonMemberForUxbridgeAndSouthRuislip
The SNP set it up
I agree with all this but my take is that it is Parliament that is unable to uphold the law – not Johnson or the Tory party.
Parliament’s credibility is now on the line – and you know what – it may have already be gone. I bet Putin is in stitches over this.
All MPs should now be entitled to a vote of confidence in the PM.
And they should really all vote to have him removed.
Instead we get party politics from the Tories and the threat of Lynton Crosby making a return to make it all better.
Who legislates the legislature? Who makes sure Parliament is doing its job?
Seemingly no one.
I ask you…………………………………
I think we have just seen a “soft” coup. Johnson will lie ad infinitum, he will be protected by a Speaker subservient to the arcane and preposterous conventions of the House and there will be not a single sanction against him, and no accountability. The majority of his party will support him regardless of all the evidence of his unfitness because they are frightened of the consequences of rebellion and still believe he will be a winner once all this has blown over. (Maybe like Thatcher he will be saved by a little war)
Much as though I’d like to see all the opposition call him a liar and walk out I don’t think many have the stomach to “diss” parliamentary convention en masse. Just think of the headlines in the gutter press.
The way the BBC Today program has ‘gone easy’ on Conservative ministers over the last few years, has been frustrating . This morning Nick Ross was quite different with Dominic Raab. Maybe the Corporation realises that the appeasement of the government is not winning them any friends among the public and, that this government will cut their funding and offers no clear future after 2027?
On Sunday there was a ten minute Radio 4 Point of View attacking the audit culture which is ruining academia.
There has been a major turning of the tide. Once that happens even seemingly fixed structures can disappear. Brexit, austerity, privatisation and sanctity of the City of London may face a deeper scrutiny.
I think it was Nick Robinson – once a Tory – but he eviscerated Raab
Indeed: Robinson was president of the Oxford University Conservative Association, before taking a turn to journalism.
In another of those moments of synchronicity, Robinson (sitting, front, left) and Johnson (standing, back, right) are both in a photograph of the standing committee of the Oxford Union in 1985. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/15/oxford-union-president-boris-johnson-neil-sherlock