- Posted by: Valerie Vaz MP
- Category: News
In light of the numerous statements made by the Prime Minster to the House about his knowledge of events reported to have taken place in Downing Street and the Cabinet Office during the coronavirus lockdowns, events which both he and the Chancellor of the Exchequer have been issued fines by the Metropolitan Police for attending, the House debated the Motion tabled in the name of Keir Starmer and supported by the opposition party leaders. The motion asks the Privileges Committee to investigate whether said statements made by the Prime Minster deliberately misled MPs, which would amount to contempt of Parliament.
The Privileges Committee is the appropriate committee to investigate as it polices the privileges of the Commons and has powers in relation to holding people in contempt of Parliament. It has existed in some form since 17th century to monitor the conduct of MPs and to investigate when asked to by the House.
That, this House;
(1) notes that, given the issue of fixed penalty notices by the police in relation to events in 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office, assertions the Rt hon Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip has made on the floor of the House about the legality of activities in 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office under Covid regulations, including but not limited to the following answers given at Prime Minister’s Questions: 1 December 2021, that all guidance was followed in No. 10., Official Report vol. 704, col. 909; 8 December 2021 that I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken, Official Report vol. 705, col. 372; 8 December 2021 that I am sickened myself and furious about that, but I repeat what I have said to him: I have been repeatedly assured that the rules were not broken, Official Report vol. 705, col. 372 and 8 December 2021 the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times, Official Report vol. 705, col. 379, appear to amount to misleading the House; and
(2) orders that this matter be referred to the Committee of Privileges to consider whether the hon Member’s conduct amounted to a contempt of the House, but that the Committee shall not begin substantive consideration of the matter until the inquiries currently being conducted by the Metropolitan Police have been concluded.
I voted for the motion and there was no opposition so the motion passed. In the meantime we await the outcome of the Met Police’s investigation and the publication of Sue Gray’s Report into the events.