WHAT DID THE PRIMIE MINISTER KNOW AND WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?

I have now read the report from:

House of Commons Committee of Privileges

Matter referred on 21April 2022 (conduct of

Rt Hon Boris Johnson):

Final Report

Fifth Report of Session 2022–23

Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report

Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 15 June 2023

 

The opening summary of the report – advisedly repetitious so as to confirm and emphasise the actions taken by the committee – paragraph 7 states:

 

7. We took written evidence, submitted with statements of truth, from witnesses present at the relevant times, to inform us of what Mr Johnson would have known at the time of his statements to the House. We heard oral evidence under oath from Mr Johnson. In response to Mr Johnson’s proposed reliance on material that was not supported by a statement of truth, we ourselves obtained further evidence on his behalf. We relied only on first-hand evidence and not on hearsay. We considered evidence supplied by the Government, including emails, WhatsApp messages and photographs. We received a limited number of WhatsApp messages from Mr Johnson. We paid a visit to No. 10 to inspect for ourselves the locations of the various gatherings to which Mr Johnson referred in the House. We considered all of the evidence that we received and came to conclusions about the facts.

 

As I stated in my previous blog, members of the Committee who had been to Downing Street before, would know just what the situation might have been like and indeed, as I surmised, all the members of the Committee inspected the locus in quo. What else could they do given the explanations made by Mr Johnson about his conduct and movements?

 

One must keep in mind that the purpose of the committee was to determine, not that certain events took place in Downing Street in contravention of guidelines and rules in force during the pandemic lockdown (that was a given) but whether or not Mr Johnson lied to the House about the conduct of those events. He repeatedly made statements denying any wrongdoing had taken place. He claimed those statements were made as a result of advice he had received about the matter, and that so far as he knew at the time those statements were made, they were accurate. That they turned out to be wrong was unfortunate but not deliberate on his part. He firmly believed, hand on heart (he claimed) what he was saying was true; therefore, he is not responsible by reason of ignorance.

 

The Committee saw Mr Johnson as the Prime Minister. Their brief was to determine just how ignorant the leader of the Government could have been. What did the Prime Minister know and when did he know it?

 

We have all been here before. Nixon and his Watergate coverup. Tony Blair and his “I believed what I was doing was right” in relation to non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Is it something in the water these ‘leaders’ drink that turns to arrogance and narcissism? Is it “If I believe it, it must be true”? Boris knew it from the first 'cheers!'

 

What the Commons Committee of Privileges determined after seeing, hearing and reading all the evidence they were given, was that it was not ignorance but deviousness. Mr Johnson’s own employment history of being fired for deception was only repeating itself. He lied and lied again. Regrettably it was in the most important job in anybody’s life.

 

Whoever is Prime Minister, president or ruler of any kind, is important not just in their life but in all our lives.  What they do in the United States, Russia, Ukraine, France, Turkey, Hungary, Myanmar, China and everywhere else affects the quality of our lives. The cost-of-living crisis is everywhere, but exacerbated more specifically in the United Kingdom by Brexit. The National Health Service is being destroyed by the governments of the last 13 years. This is all part of Boris Johnson’s and his predecessors’ legacy.

 

What is interesting is the manner in which Mr Johnson was finally expunged. It was a simple thing. Were the people in Downing Street having a few too many after hours knees ups? Without a moments thought Boris denied it all, as was his usual approach to stuff he thinks of as trifling; but, a few tabloid guys, who love this kind of stuff, after about a year, got hold of the photos and video nonsense and it all came dribbling out. All so long ago they cried, who cares about silly parties? And that was the mantra, all very silly and we have cost of living and Ukraine to worry about. Boris even hot footed to support the Ukraine for a great photo op as the first foreign leader on the scene. Isn’t he marvellous? Stop being silly going on about something so last year. The repeated assurances in the face of glaringly obvious pictures raised questions of ethics and in due course he lost his mojo and to top it off the Committee of Privileges was brought into action. It became a matter of truth. The committee’s relatively short but forensic examination of the question punctured the ego and the resultant petulance overflowed with accusations of witch hunt and kangaroo court just as Mr Trump has done in the United States. In fact, Mr Trump has written the book on this stuff. Like Trump, Mr Johnson still has his supporters, who seem not to have taken in what the report actually says. For god’s sake, just look at the pictures if you can’t read.

 

What is so silly is that all he had to say, at first time questioned, was “There are some questions. I’m looking into it and changes will be made”. He could have waffled his way out of it for years. It is easier for him to lie.

 

Mr Trump has been twice impeached. The United States’ Congress’s version of the Committee of Privileges. It is, sadly, a far more complicated process and conviction requires at least two thirds of the Senate, or 67 Senators, to agree on a finding of guilt. Mr Trump survived because of party lines. Here, Mr Johnson faced a group of seven MP’s, four from his own party who spent a year looking into the matter. This was no quick fix. Their recommendations now go before the House for approval. Party lines have been shelved and each MP will vote with their conscience. A free vote and a simple majority will settle things.

 

The United States Constitutions have put up such barriers to safeguard the integrity of the individual, that it has become almost impossible to deal with a miscreant in the shape of a Donald Trump. It was never contemplated that such an individual, a chronic liar and psychotic narcissist would ever be in such a position of authority, let alone be elected President.

 

I am sure that there are many American citizens who would relish the institution of a Committee of Privileges to report on the flotilla of lies put out by Mr Trump, leading to his being expunged from the American landscape.  As a result, various Justice Departments will have to bring indictments and prosecutions to successful conclusions, for anything like that to happen. Even then it is not certain that millions won’t vote for him. He will exhaust every legal protection offered by the constitution he seeks to dismantle. What a country. What do we know? We’ve known it for years.