Boris Johnson sent findings of Privileges Committee Partygate probe

ITV News' Political Correspondent Harry Horton talks through the risks for Boris Johnson

Boris Johnson has been sent the findings of a report into whether he misled Parliament when claiming Covid rules were followed on Downing Street at all times during the pandemic.

The former prime minister has two weeks to respond to the Privileges Committee before the report is finalised and made public.

He could end up losing his seat in Parliament through a by-election, depending on what punishment the committee decides to recommend.

A spokesperson for the Committee said: “The Committee is proceeding in accordance with its previously published procedure. Under that procedure, if the Committee decides to criticise Mr Johnson, it will not come to a final conclusion until it has taken into account any further submissions from Mr Johnson.

"The Committee will then report to the House in the usual way, and it will be for the House- not the Committee- to decide on this matter.”

MPs will vote on whether to approve whatever sanction the Committee recommends.

Could Boris Johnson lose his seat?

If the Committee decides Mr Johnson committed contempt of Parliament, recommends a punishment of 10 or more days suspension, and MPs vote to impose it, a by-election could be triggered if 10% of voters in his constituency want one.

Mr Johnson, who held his Uxbridge seat with a majority of 7,210 in 2019, would have to decide whether to fight for re-election or stand aside for another Tory.

The former prime minister and MPs close to him have been trying to discredit the Privileges Commitee investigation, with ex-ministers in his government labelling it a "left-wing stitch up."

What has Boris Johnson said?

The former prime minister has always denied committing contempt of Parliament, insisting that any statements given to Parliament were made honestly.

Despite being fined by police himself, along with dozens of staff, Mr Johnson claims he was unaware at the time that he was breaking the rules and says staff assured him they always acted in accordance with the regulations.

In his written evidence to the Privileges Committee, Mr Johnson writes: "So I accept that the House of Commons was misled by my statements that the Rules and Guidance had been followed completely at No 10.

"But when the statements were made, they were made in good faith and on the basis of what I honestly knew and believed at the time. I did not intentionally or recklessly mislead the House on December 1 2021, December 8 2021, or on any other date. I would never have dreamed of doing so."

He conceded in his evidence to the Privileges Committee that his statements to Parliament "did not turn out to be correct", but insisted he corrected the record at "the earliest opportunity".

The Partygate: The Inside Story podcast brings you fresh revelations and our whistleblowers in their own words in the definitive behind-closed-doors story of how ITV News uncovered one of the biggest scandals of our era...

Even more Partygate allegations surface

Mr Johnson was referred to police over allegations of Covid-rule-breaking again in May, this time over claims of breachesa at Chequers, the prime ministerial countryside mansion.

The former Conservative party leader's ministerial diary allegedly revealed visits by friends to Chequers, his former country home, during the pandemic, The Times first reported.

The Cabinet Office, who discovered the apparent rule-breaking, passed on its findings to the Metropolitan Police and Thames Valley Police.

The department found what appeared to be notes of several visits to Chequers, in Buckinghamshire, during preparations for a public inquiry into the pandemic, The Times reported.

The Guardian has also reported allegations of rule breaking at the Buckinghamshire retreat.

It claims Mr Johnson and his wife Carrie hosted a close friend at Chequers in May 2021 for an overnight stay while some Covid-19 restrictions were still in place.

A spokesman for the former prime minister said: “This was entirely lawful, and it was covered by relevant provisions in the Covid regulations, as The Guardian’s report makes clear.

“To suggest otherwise is totally untrue.”