Boris Johnson should be banned from parliament for ‘unprecedented’ lies, rules privileges committee

Being discussed already on
www.gransnet.com/forums/news_and_politics/1324801-Boris-Johnson-has-resigned-with-immediate-effect

Our final conclusion is in relation to sanction. Although Mr Johnson’s resignation as an MP renders it impossible for a sanction of suspension to be imposed, we draw attention to the fact that before the events of Friday 9 June we had provisionally agreed to recommend a suspension long enough to engage the provisions of the Recall of MPs Act. In the light of Mr Johnson’s further contempts, we put on record that if he had not resigned his seat, we would have recommended that he be suspended from the service of the House for 90 days for repeated contempts and for seeking to undermine the parliamentary process, by:
• Deliberately misleading the House
• Deliberately misleading the Committee
• Breaching confidence
• Impugning the Committee and thereby undermining the democratic process of the House
• Being complicit in the campaign of abuse and attempted intimidation of the Committee
In view of the fact that Mr Johnson is no longer a Member, we recommend that he should not be granted a former Member’s pass.

The Independent should be ashamed of its sloppy language.

The Committee cannot and has not ‘ruled’. And it hasn’t - and could not - suggest banning him. It has recommended that he does not get unfettered free access to the Parliamentary estate. He’d still be allowed in, he’d just have to apply for a visitor’s permit. And obviously he’d be allowed back if he was re-elected.

Casdon

Being discussed already on
www.gransnet.com/forums/news_and_politics/1324801-Boris-Johnson-has-resigned-with-immediate-effect

I thought this deserved its own thread. I have never seen anything like it in my lifetime. It is not about Johnson, I my view but about Parliament and our Democracy.

Siope

The Independent should be ashamed of its sloppy language.

The Committee cannot and has not ‘ruled’. And it hasn’t - and could not - suggest banning him. It has recommended that he does not get unfettered free access to the Parliamentary estate. He’d still be allowed in, he’d just have to apply for a visitor’s permit. And obviously he’d be allowed back if he was re-elected.

I don't think this is about the journalism either. A very Johnsonesk deflection.

I hope this recommendation brings back some veracity to politics but then, I was always a dreamer.

I thought this deserved its own thread. I have never seen anything like it in my lifetime. It is not about Johnson, I my view but about Parliament and our Democracy.

I agree, DaisyAnne. Just this once I don't see why we shouldn't have two threads running on a similar topic. This may attract posters who don't realise it's on the other thread, or who don't want to scroll to the end to find it.

I've posted the link to the full report here and on the other thread.

committees.parliament.uk/publications/40412/documents/197199/default/

A very Johnsonesk deflection.

Apologies if that’s how it came across. I wasn’t trying to deflect, but I do think the media’s sloppiness has helped Johnson, and if this report is about anything, it’s about the importance of accuracy, and how much words matter.

Is it possible to prevent him from every becoming an MP again? I hope so, and that it's enforced.

The next stage in the process - having used the garlic - is for the House of Commons to vote on the recommendations contained in the report.
And don’t forget that the pen is mightier than the sword and this will run and run - sigh.

In a weird sort of way, that would be anti-democratic. If enough members of a political party want him to represent them, and then he gets enough votes in an election……..

Not sure we should proscribe would-be representatives.

Just hope people have sufficient sense.

ronib

The next stage in the process - having used the garlic - is for the House of Commons to vote on the recommendations contained in the report.
And don’t forget that the pen is mightier than the sword and this will run and run - sigh.

I know.

Siope

^A very Johnsonesk deflection.^

Apologies if that’s how it came across. I wasn’t trying to deflect, but I do think the media’s sloppiness has helped Johnson, and if this report is about anything, it’s about the importance of accuracy, and how much words matter.

If only we could see expressions. I see where you are coming from. Sorry if I jumped to conclusions.

The Marsh Family hit the nail on the head, as ever....

www.facebook.com/watch?v=159398460347628

Ashcombe

The Marsh Family hit the nail on the head, as ever....

www.facebook.com/watch?v=159398460347628

Brilliant, the Icarus analogy is spot on.

Although it is notionally a free vote on Monday a lot of Tories will abstain, many will not want to condemn him, so we cannot assume the vote will be against Johnson.

Katie59

Although it is notionally a free vote on Monday a lot of Tories will abstain, many will not want to condemn him, so we cannot assume the vote will be against Johnson.

Well, at least according to Mad Nad. www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nadine-dorries-boris-johnson-partygate-report-b2358120.html
I can’t see it happening, I think it’s the the all mouth and no trousers brigade who are trying to whip up this storm.

I am trying to find clarifications of the report. First one is that the Committee found Johnson to have committed five types of contempt of Parliament. Not five counts of one type of contempt but many counts under five types. These are:

1. Deliberately misleading the House

2. Deliberately misleading the Committee (Carries a possible purgery outcome)

3. Breaching confidence

4. Impugning the Committee and thereby undermining the democratic process of the House.

5. Being complicit in the campaign of abuse and attempted intimidation of the committee.

I congratulate the Committee of Privileges for a job well done and especially given the abuse and attempts to intimidate them. The Tory members have demonstrated minds independent of Party interest. It will take more than garlic. Perhaps he could be deported to Florida, Rwanda or Transylvania.

Listening to various vox pops today it seems that the only people left supporting Johnson are middle aged/elderly women and the constant refrain is that he got things done and saw the bigger picture. Virtually everyone of them said that - almost as though they're reading from a prompt sheet.

If we look at nuber 4 in the list in my last post, shouldn't Sunak be telling his party that the whip will be withdrawn from anyone who does the same thing?

Shouldn't Ferrier, spreading covid, and Roberts, handy handy, also be subject to more punishment. If not, why not, smacks of Harman and Co, being selective in who gets the most puishment. Believe three of same commitee just about absolved them of the definite harm both of these MPs did.

It is well worth listening to "The rest is politics" podcast which has just been released.

Freya5

Shouldn't Ferrier, spreading covid, and Roberts, handy handy, also be subject to more punishment. If not, why not, smacks of Harman and Co, being selective in who gets the most puishment. Believe three of same commitee just about absolved them of the definite harm both of these MPs did.

No it doesn't.

Don't you think a Prime Minister who has been held in contempt of Parliament in five different ways should be held to the highest standards?

Freya5

Shouldn't Ferrier, spreading covid, and Roberts, handy handy, also be subject to more punishment. If not, why not, smacks of Harman and Co, being selective in who gets the most puishment. Believe three of same commitee just about absolved them of the definite harm both of these MPs did.

Their misdemeanours are of nowhere near the same volume or scale, or impact. It’s just an attempt at obfuscation, which only the most diehard Johnson supporters won’t see for exactly what it is. Actually, it’s pathetic.