Boris Johnson has been accused of changing the ministerial code to help “save his skin” ahead of a new Partygate inquiry that could publish more photos and subject him to a public grilling by MPs.
The prime minister faced a barrage of criticism after he amended the rules on Friday to make clear that ministers will not always be expected to resign for breaching the code of conduct. Under new sanctions, they could apologise or temporarily lose their pay instead.
Johnson also blocked his independent ethics chief, Christopher Geidt, from gaining the power to launch his own investigations, and rewrote the foreword to the ministerial code, removing all references to honesty, integrity, transparency and accountability.
It comes as the PM faces an inquiry by the privileges committee into whether he misled parliament over lockdown parties in Downing Street – which could itself be a breach of the ministerial code.
Labour and the Liberal Democrats accused Johnson of rigging the system to “get himself off the hook” ahead of the inquiry.
No 10 said a new version of the ministerial code, published on Friday alongside a government statement saying it is “disproportionate to expect that any breach, however minor, should lead automatically to resignation or dismissal”, has the backing of the Committee on Standards in Public Life and Lord Geidt, the adviser on ministerial interests.
Ministers who knowingly mislead parliament are usually expected to resign – which is stated elsewhere in the code. However, Downing Street declined to say if Johnson would resign if found to have done so.
One reason given for changing the rules was to “avoid incentives for trivial or vexatious complaints, which may be made for partisan reasons”.
Chris Bryant, the Labour MP and chair of parliament’s standards committee, said the weakening of the system was “appalling”.
“The new ministerial code is a disgrace. It means that the tiny semblance of accountability disappears. ‘If you break the rules, just rewrite the rulebook’ is the motto of this despicable government,” he said.
Can’t be bothered reading through the whole article. I heard this discussed on the Press preview on Sky News last night plus it’s been discussed on LBC radio this morning.
If Boris is proved to have lied to parliament he’ll still have to stand down. So this headline is really misleading.
BJ and his cronies have, as is well-known, “misled” Parliament many times:
Boris Johnson and his ministers have made at least 27 false statements to parliament since the 2019 general election – and have failed to correct them.
An investigation by The Independent, working with Full Fact, has found that the prime minister made 17 of the statements, while four were made by Matt Hancock as health secretary, two by home secretary Priti Patel, and one each by attorney general Suella Braverman, culture secretary Nadine Dorries, Afghan resettlement minister Victoria Atkins, and Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of the House of Commons.
The figures have sparked accusations of a “crisis of honesty”. Labour accused the government of disrespecting the public with a “litany of lies and falsehoods”, while the Conservative former attorney general Dominic Grieve said the total suggested “a disregard both for good governance and truth”.
None of the statements has been formally corrected – a process that is required under the ministerial code.
The Independent has only included statements made either in parliament or to parliamentary committees, and has counted each false claim once, even if it was repeated.
BJ personally, of course, is an habitual, proven and well-documented liar.
I haven’t read the article, but all the way through the Brexit debate there were false claims made by both sides and the remain side was aided and abetted by the speaker of the house.
is that because you didn’t search very thoroughly.
The electoral success of Boris Johnson demonstrates that, like it or not, the electorate doesn’t mind if the PM is a liar. What they can’t stand, however, is a hypocrite who pretends otherwise. That, in a sentence, is the Labour leader’s morality. It may prove politically fatal.
I disagree with that. A hypocrite is par for the course for a politician, indeed something essential in the horse trading world of politics but a liar ---- NEVER. I really don’t believe that the electorate knew let alone realised that Bunter was a liar let alone to the extent that he is.
Omg where have you been, one of the accusations he keeps getting thrown at him is that he got sacked for lying.
And if you honestly believe that Kier Starmer doesn’t lie and is hypocritical about it, you really must be living in a different world to me.
When I voted for him I knew he told porkies, but that’s par for the course in politics, the thing about Boris that I like is that he doesn’t pretend to be all squeaky clean and that to me is honesty.
Sadly, your research has not revealed a like for like comparison, as even the first paragraph of your link indicates - the thrust of the article is “liar” vs “hypocrite” …
Has Boris Johnson been sacked before for lying?
Yes, the Prime Minister was formerly sacked as vice-chairman and shadow arts minister for publicly lying.
Former Tory leader Lord Michael Howard sacked Johnson back in September 2004 for appearing to publicly lie about an affair he had with his colleague, a Spectator journalist Petronella Wyatt. Howard was leading the Conservatives during 2003 to 2005.
Lord Howard has since said that his Director of Communications at the time was convinced that Johnson had lied to Howard - so proceeded to strongly advise that he sacked Johnson to show he had taken action.
In July 2019, Lord Howard told iNews : “I took that action, I’m not entirely sure that I was right to take that action, but I’m happy to set the record straight.”
That wasn’t the first time he was sacked for lying, in 1988 he was reportedly sacked by the Times newspaper in 1988 for fabricating a quote from his godfather, the historian Colin Lucas in an article.
I live in a different world from most people! As for Bunter he was accused of lying in the past but as far as I am aware was never proven to have lied. Starmer? Whataboutery has no place in examining the abysmal conduct of the Fat Oaf. He HAS to go.
In 2019, Johnson was accused of lying to the Queen over the advice he gave her on suspending parliament for five weeks. The power to suspend, or prorogue, parliament lies with the Queen, who conventionally acts on the advice of the prime minister.
The supreme court ultimately ruled the prorogation unlawful – and Johnson was faced with accusations of lying to the Queen. Asked whether he had lied to the monarch about his reasons for the suspension, he replied: “Absolutely not.”
and sacked from the Times for “inventing” the truth:
In the late 1980s, Johnson was sacked by the Times newspaper over a front-page article about the discovery of Edward II’s Rose Palace, in which Johnson allegedly invented a quote from his godfather, the historian Sir Colin Lucas.
He later said: “The trouble was that somewhere in my copy I managed to attribute to Colin the view that Edward II and Piers Gaveston would have been cavorting together in the Rose Palace.” It turned out that Gaveston had actually been killed 13 years before the palace had been built.
