|
Re: Johnson may have misled Parliament over parties, say MPs
https://apple.news/AMZAdmy3rQr6jpojl1AJtTw
Quote:
The document published yesterday by the privileges committee was not its final report into Boris Johnson’s conduct, but a summary of the issues that the MPs intend to raise with him in a public hearing this month.
Their document began by restating the context for the investigation. In April last year, the Commons voted to commission the committee to investigate whether Johnson was in contempt of the House when answering questions from MPs about lockdown rule-breaking.
They said they were considering four overarching matters: “What Mr Johnson said to the House; whether what he said was correct or whether it was misleading; how quickly and comprehensively any misleading statement to the House was corrected; and if it is established that the House was misled, whether this actually constituted a contempt of the House by impeding the functions of the House”.
If the committee finds that any of Johnson’s statements were misleading, it will then “consider whether that was inadvertent, reckless or intentional”.
The committee said: “We are not conducting an investigation into ‘partygate’ or the culture and behaviour of No 10 and officials who worked there over the relevant period. While we are concerned to establish the facts of what occurred in No 10 for the purpose of discharging our obligation . . . we are not repeating the inquiry which was conducted by the Metropolitan Police or the investigation conducted by [Sue Gray] . . . Our inquiry has not considered the conduct of any individual other than Mr Johnson because our mandate from the House is to look specifically at Mr Johnson’s conduct.
|
__________________
There is always light.
If only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
If my post is in bold and this colour, it's a Moderator Request.
|