Boris Johnson loses cool as he shouts 'complete nonsense' at partygate committee

Boris Johnson lost his cool during his three-hour grilling by the Privileges Committee on Wednesday as he accused its members of "complete nonsense".

Mr Johnson's temper flared in response to a suggestion from Sir Bernard Jenkin, a senior Tory backbencher, that he did not seek "proper" advice before telling MPs that no parties took place in Downing Street during lockdown.

"This is complete nonsense, I mean, complete nonsense," he said. "I asked the relevant people. They were senior people. They had been working very hard. Jack Doyle gave me a clear account of what had happened."

He had previously said a gathering he attended during the second national lockdown was "absolutely essential for work" as he appears before the Privileges Committee.

The former prime minister insisted "hand on heart, I did not lie to the House" shortly after swearing on the Bible.

07:52 PM

That's all for today...

Boris Johnson insisted "hand on heart" that he did not lie to Parliament about lockdown-busting parties in Downing Street as he endured a three-hour grilling by the Privileges Committee.

On an extraordinary day in Westminster, which also saw a major Tory rebellion over Rishi Sunak's Brexit deal fail to materialise, Mr Johnson said it was "absolute nonsense" that he had not sought "proper" advice over what was known about the partygate scandal as tempers flared.

While he rebuked those among his supporters who called the Committee a 'kangaroo court', the former prime minister did not go as far as promising he would accept the final decision of the cross-party group of seven MPs.

It felt as though there was no smoking gun, yet Mr Johnson appeared to struggle when pressed on the reassurances he had received. The Committee must now consider his verbal testimony, which saw him repeat a number of his core claims about what he believed about events in No 10 during the pandemic, in addition to reams of other evidence.

Elsewhere, his successor Rishi Sunak breathed a sigh of relief as only 22 of his Tory backbenchers - Mr Johnson included - voted against the Stormont Brake, a key part of the Windsor Agreement reached with the EU earlier this month.

Fears he would have to rely on Labour votes proved unfounded, and Mr Sunak will take heart from the fact the most fervent eurosceptics in his party could not even muster two dozen opponents. It has been wrongly assumed before the Brexit battles are done, yet Wednesday's vote was fairly conclusive proof enough of his MPs are ready for a ceasefire.

My colleague Jack Maidment will be back early tomorrow to bring you all the latest.

07:38 PM

Rishi Sunak publishes his tax returns

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has published his long-awaited UK tax documents covering the past four years, showing that he paid £432,493 in tax in the 2021/2022 financial year.

The release, following a commitment first made by the Prime Minister during his Tory leadership run last summer, also showed that he paid £393,217 in 2020/2021, and £227,350 in 2019/20.

In 2021/22, Mr Sunak's income from dividends was £172,415 and from capital gains was £1.6 million.

Read the full story here

06:59 PM

Boris might be finished – but we still have one thing to thank him for

Boris Johnson’s stock could hardly be lower, writes Michael Deacon.

The Privileges Committee’s inquiry into whether he lied to MPs over partygate is likely to end any faint hopes he may have of a political comeback. It may even result in him facing a by-election, and losing his seat in the Commons altogether.

But, no matter how tarnished his reputation may currently seem, and no matter how angry or let down some of his former supporters may be feeling, we need to put things in perspective. Because, whatever we may think about partygate, we should never let it overshadow the single most valuable service that Boris Johnson performed for this nation.

Michael Deacon: Why we have to hand it to Johnson

06:20 PM

Analysis: Why a Brexit rebellion failed to materialise today

06:13 PM

While we were watching...

Boris Johnson declared some £527,000 in speaking fees as part of the new register of MPs' financial interests, which was released during the Privileges Committee session this afternoon.

Mr Johnson declared £261,596, a London-based consultancy firm, and £266,031 from Kessler Topaz Meltzer and Check, an American law firm.

Some £369,605 of that figure has been deducted from a £2.5 million advance he received from Harry Walker Agency in January.

Separately, Mr Johnson declared an advance of £42,500 from Hodder and Stoughton, which is believed to be in relation to his widely-anticipated memoir.

06:07 PM

Max Hastings - who was once Boris Johnson's boss - tells LBC:

"I don't think you can right off Boris Johnson until he is buried at a crossroads with a stake driven through his heart."

05:51 PM

Analysis: Is there a smoking gun?

The verdict of the Privileges Committee remains some weeks away. After a marathon three-hour evidence session, however, the arguments of both its members and Boris Johnson feel even more familiar.

Whether the Committee find him in contempt of Parliament rests on the existence of a 'smoking gun'. In what we heard today, there seemed to be no single point that irrefutably proved Mr Johnson's case was wrong.

However there were legitimate questions about the depth of the advice the former prime minister had received, with it being noted that he had gone to members of his communications team for the reassurances he relied on rather than any in-house lawyers.

An exchange towards the end also suggested Mr Johnson may not accept the committee can be "fair and wrong", as Alberto Costa put it, "rather than unfair and a witch-hunt".

"I will wait to see how you will proceed with the evidence that you have," Mr Johnson said. "I will study your conclusions from the evidence... I believe that if you study this evidence impartially, you will come to the conclusion that I’ve given."

Time will tell...

05:37 PM

'Huge waste of time' ...

... is the verdict of Dominic Cummings, who was posting his own updates on his Substack website.

"[Boris Johnson's] whole defence rested on claims that he was repeating to the Commons assurances he'd been given by senior officials," Mr Cummings said.

"But the three most senior officials have said they did not give him the assurance that rules and guidance had been 'followed at all times'. When asked who gave him this assurance he says he doesn't want to name them but they exist. He’s trapped by his own lies and knows it."

05:26 PM

Boris Johnson's supporters are already weighing in

Nadine Dorries, a former culture secretary, said Mr Johnson was "very clear today".

"Not sure there is a reasonable person in the land who would think that the Committee could do anything other than totally exonerate him and not before time either," she wrote on Twitter.

Michael Fabricant, who was in the room to show his support for the former prime minister, added: "What on earth have others calling the Committee a 'kangaroo court' got to do with Boris's guilt or not? They are bringing themselves into disrepute."

05:22 PM

Boris Johnson: I still believe guidance was followed

Harriet Harman asks Boris Johnson if he will correct the record to the Committee about guidance being followed at all times.

"What I want to say is first of all the rules were followed... It was my belief at the time that I made those statements that the guidance was followed and it actually remains my belief."

Mr Johnson refers back to his words on May 25, 2022, the day of the Sue Gray. Ms Harman asks: "Do you still want to assert that it was certainly the case when you were present at gatherings to wish staff farewell that the guidance had been followed at all times?"

The former prime minister replies:"Yes, I do. I see no reason to withdraw what I said on May 25. I think the Committee and possibly the world was in possession of all the material that we've looked at today. My view remains that the guidance allowed for social distancing not to be carried out with rigid, drill-sergeant precision, particularly in circumstances such as the ones we were operating [in], providing we had mitigations."

That brings things to an end. Mr Johnson signs off: "Thank you, thank you very much. I've much enjoyed our discussion. I think it's been a useful - I genuinely think it's been a useful discussion and I hope it's been clear to the Committee what was in my heart and my mind on December 1 and December 8 of 2021."

05:19 PM

'I didn't have omniscience about what was going on'

Sir Charles Walker points to Boris Johnson's statements that he was repeatedly reassured there were no parties.

Sir Charles asks "how on earth" people would know this for sure with how big Downing Street was.

"I didn't have omniscience about what was going on in the building... but what they had to say was extremely valuable and they are extremely reputable people," Mr Johnson says.

The veteran Tory MP claims Jack Doyle, James Slack and other sources of Mr Johnson's reassurances "really had no idea what was going on, because if they had, it is highly unlikely 126 fixed penalty notices must have been given out".

Mr Johnson recalls how he was "very shocked" to receive his own fixed penalty notice. Asked if he was "reckless" and should have caveated his words in the Commons, he says: "It was based on my genuine understanding and belief. It wasn't obvious to me, it wasn't obvious to the other senior people that you described."

05:15 PM

Boris Johnson: Finding me in contempt would be 'unfair' and 'wrong'

Boris Johnson says "people will judge for themselves, on the evidence you have produced, on the evidence of this Committee".

Alberto Costa asks if he will accept the Committee can be "fair and wrong", rather than "unfair and a witch-hunt".

Mr Johnson responds: "If this Committee were to find me in contempt of Parliament having come and done something so utterly insane and contrary to my beliefs and principles as to come here, to come to Parliament and wittingly lie, I think that would not only be unfair but I think it would be wrong."

Asked if he would characterise it as a "witch hunt", he says: "I will wait to see how you proceed with the evidence you have. I will study your conclusions from the evidence. I deprecate the terms that you have used, I don't want to see good colleagues feeling that they're under pressure either way.

"I believe if you study this evidence impartially, you will come to the conclusion that I've given."

05:13 PM

'Your supporters seem to want it both ways'

Sir Charles Walker is now asking the questions. He notes Boris Johnson suggested he was concerned about Harriet Harman, an appointment which went through without a single cry of objection in the Commons.

Mr Johnson says his "anxieties about fairness" had been set out, and that he has "full confidence" in the Committee to be impartial.

Sir Charles adds: "Your supporters seem to want it both ways. They're hoping that the evidence you've given in 52 pages will exonerate you, that's what your desired outcome is. Just in case that doesn't happen, there has been a concerted effort to delegitimise the Committee, to call us a kangaroo court. Have you called us a kangaroo court?"

Mr Johnson replies: "You can tell by my presence this afternoon, by the seriousness with which I've taken your questions, by my attempts to answer in detail the points you've put to me, how seriously I take you and your Committee, the respect I have for this institution and Parliament... Whatever the issues of fairness I may have raised in my submission, this is the body that decides on standards and privileges.

"That's why I have come here, out of respect for the committee, out of respect for Parliament and because I do not believe that you can conceivably find me guilty of wittingly misleading Parliament on the basis of the evidence you have assembled."

Sir Charles asks if Mr Johnson regrets the 'kangaroo court' term being used by fellow Tory MPs.

"There should be no intimidation," Mr Johnson replies. Sir Charles weighs in: "Becaues I regret it!"

05:04 PM

Boris Johnson finally loses his cool

Moving on to his remarks at Prime Minister's Questions in December 2021, Sir Bernard Jenkin says the obligation not to mislead Parliament is "very serious", and adds he would want the advice of a lawyer if accused of doing so deliberately.

"I was not accused of law-breaking. I was asked to say what had gone on at a party or an event in the Media Room on December 18, 2020," Mr Johnson says.

Sir Bernard repeats that if there was any doubt, "the most thinnest scintilla of doubt about it, well you'd want to copperplate your assurances by taking proper advice - and I put it to you, Mr Johnson, that you did not take proper advice".

Mr Johnson responds: "Actually, I thought that the Leader of the Opposition would not bother with that story."

Sir Bernard asks again: "Why did you not take proper advice?"

Mr Johnson replies: "Nobody raised with me or had any concern before I stood up on December 1 about those events. I asked... This is complete nonsense! Complete nonsense. I asked the relevant people. And they were senior people! They'd been working very hard. Jack Doyle gave me a clear account of what had happened! The Cabinet Secretary wasn't there!

"You're wrong, because I did ask the Cabinet Secretary to conduct an inquiry on December 7."

04:59 PM

'Sensible' to speak to Doyle and Slack, says Johnson

Tory MP Alberto Costa asks Mr Johnson if he was using the assurances as a "deflection mechanism" from his knowledge of the gatherings.

Mr Johnson labels this a "ridiculous assessment": "I said in the Commons on December 8 that I had been repeatedly assured that there was no party and no rules had been broken. I was referring to the December 18 event of the previous year, of 2020.

"The assurances that I had received about that event were from people that I had the utmost respect for, and who were directly relevant to my understanding of what that event consisted of. It was entirely sensible to talk both to Jack Doyle and then to James Slack to get their honest take about what had happened."

04:57 PM

Boris Johnson did not receive 'direct' assurances about guidance

Boris Johnson acknowledges he did not receive "direct" assurances about guidance being followed.

Alberto Costa points to Jack Doyle's WhatsApp messages about the June 19, 2020 event, in which Mr Doyle said he was "struggling to come up with a way that the gathering was in the rules" and he was "not sure" it would "work" to suggest it was reasonably necessary for work purposes.

Mr Johnson responds that the message was sent "long after" the event itself, and that Mr Doyle was not there.

"At the time I thought it was so innocent it was actually briefed out to The Times."

Mr Costa asks Mr Johnson how Mr Doyle - his trusted adviser - was "himself clearly doubtful" about whether rules were followed, yet he appeared to have no such doubts himself.

04:51 PM

Boris Johnson refuses to name officials who gave him partygate reassurances

Asked by Alberto Costa who the officials were who gave reassurances in meetings he has referred to, Boris Johnson replies: "I can't name these officials."

Harriet Harman asks Mr Johnson if he was not naming them because he could not remember who they were, or he could not remember their names, or because of confidentiality.

"There's at least one adviser that I can think of who has asked not to be named," he says. "She would have been in the morning meeting and I don't want to-"

Mr Costa asks him to follow this up in writing to confirm the identity of the indvidual. Mr Johnson repeats he was "assured repeatedly by different people, on different occasions" that the rules were followed.

04:48 PM

'Why did you rely on assurances from political advisers?'

Alberto Costa notes the reassurances Boris Johnson received from James Slack and Jack Doyle.

"They're both individuals you had personally appointed to the position of director of communications at No 10. They were political advisers who dealt with the media. Why did you rely on an assurance from political advisers rather than from as I mentioned a permanent civil servant or more importantly a Government lawyer?"

Mr Johnson responds: "The simple answer is when I needed to discover what had happened or if the rules were broken, first of all I asked the senior adviser who was there, and that was Jack Doyle. The following week you can see that Jack Doyle confirms... he says in a WhatsApp to me 'you can be assured there was no party and no rules were broken'. I also then rang James Slack.

"And both Jack and James Slack are people I have the utmost regard for and I believe they would be completely straight with me about what had happened...

"The reason I didn't ask a lawyer or another senior Civil Servant was that they were the people who'd been there. They could give a view about the legality of that event that I didn't think a non-eyewitness would be able to do."

Mr Johnson notes Martin Reynolds is a lawyer, and there was evidence "that at least a couple of MP colleagues remember from the morning meeting did we follow the rules".

04:33 PM

Boris Johnson: May 20, 2020 drinks were a work event

Andy Carter refers to Boris Johnson's "implicit" belief the May 20, 2020 gathering was a work event.

"I implicitly believe that it was a work event," Mr Johnson repeats. "I was ushered out into the garden having been briefed shortly beforehand about what the event entailed. I met and thanked various groups of people who'd been working on Covid.

"When I looked back at that event, and this is what I said to the House, I tried to put myself in the place of a member of the public looking over the garden wall and seeing that. And I had to accept that even though it was I believe within the guidance and within the rules, I have to accept that members of the public looking at it would think 'that looks to me like something he was not allowing us to do'. I didn't feel it at the time. Do you see what I'm trying to say?"

Asked if he questioned any events he was going to, Mr Johnson responded: "Hindsight is a wonderful thing. In retrospect, I might have thought about some things, post-Sue Gray, post-the beginning of the coming to light of everything that did come to light. But no. At the time I thought we were working. I thought we were working. I promise you that is what officials in No 10 thought they were doing as well."

04:30 PM

'This is guidance. And I'm not going to pretend that it was enforced rigidly'

Asked about what mitigations were taken on November 13, 2020 at the Lee Cain event, Boris Johnson responds: "I've listed some of them but we avoided physical contact.

"We didn't for instance as the guidance says touch each other's pens, we didn't pass stuff to each other if we could avoid it. We kept ... you know, I would not wish to say that that was perfectly implemented."

Harriet Harman interjects: "Presumably we were passing drinks to each other because we've seen the picture."

Mr Johnson responds: "Of course. This is guidance. This is guidance. And I'm not going to pretend that it was enforced rigidly. But that's explicitly what the guidance provides for. We had Zoom meetings, we had a great reduction in the numbers of people in the building overall. We had signs telling you which way to walk. We had perspex screens. It really is worth going over again.

"That was the space where people congregated fast if I wanted to get a message out fast, that was the natural place to do. Yes, you don't see perspex screens there but that doesn't mean that there wasn't sanitiser and efforts to restrict the spread of Covid. And just - just - in all of this, bear in mind we believed, Martyn Reynolds believed, everyone responsible for the health of people in the building believed that the guidance was being very considerably augmented in a way that went beyond the guidance by the testing regime that I've described."

04:26 PM

These gatherings were 'critical' to functioning Government, suggests Johnson

Boris Johnson says he did not feel the need to correct the record on his comments to the House in December 2021 as it was not clear how the guidance had been breached.

"Perhaps if I'd elucidated more clearly what I meant and what I felt and believed about the following the guidance, that would have helped," he adds.

Andy Carter asks Mr Johnson: "Are you saying you thought these gatherings were so critical to the function of Government that it was permissible to hold them, even if they couldn't be social distanced?"

Mr Johnson replies: "The short answer is yes. I thought that it was essential to thank staff for their work."

04:20 PM

Fixed penalty notice 'boggled my mind'

"I thought they were work events, as I said to the House," Boris Johnson tells the Privileges Committee.

"I think that even this Committee I venture to suggest might concede that had they been in my shoes at that event, it might not have occurred even to them that this [June 19, 2020 event] was an event that was against either the rules or the guidance.

"It didn't occur to me, it didn't occur to the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, it didn't occur to the media department, we briefed it out. That was the only event for which I received an FPN.

"All the other events for the period I was there I can only conclude were deemed by the Met to be not rule-breaking events, because I wasn't issued with an FPN. Therefore you have two sets of events. The one for which I received an FPN, which boggled my mind because I couldn't understand why I got it, and the others for where I wasn't aware of rule-breaking at the time and I believed we were following the guidance."

04:15 PM

Boris Johnson: Nobody flagged any concerns to me over parties

Boris Johnson said he had received repeated assurances about the December 18, 2020 event.

Pressed by Andy Carter, the Tory MP for Warrington South, about why he told the House "all guidance was followed completely in No 10", Mr Johnson responds: "Between the event that took place and when I stood up to speak, in all the cases that you've mentioned, nobody came to me and said we've got a problem with this one, you need to worry about this. And there's no trace at that in the written evidence or in the electronic record.

"The reason I said what I said was because I thought, I believed then, that the whole of the No 10 team were doing a huge amount to follow the guidance. And I talked to Jack Doyle [Mr Johnson's director of communications during the partygate scandal]... and it's about... My diary says it was about 6 o'clock.

"He comes in and says the Daily Mirror's going to run this story. He mentions a few other events, two of which I knew directly about and knew that there was no issue with those... I asked him about this December 18 event. And I asked him to describe it. And bear in mind everything I've said about that evening."

04:10 PM

'Forgive me, I shouldn't mention the names of the officials'

Boris Johnson is asked about an event on December 18, 2020, a press office gathering with cheese and wine.

Mr Johnson recalls dealing with the delta variant and a "great deal of anxiety" about a no-deal Brexit, and insists he was not aware of a gathering despite being in Downing Street at the time.

He goes on to say it was customary to raise toasts to say farewell to employees, but accidentally names the two departing officials before catching himself.

"Sorry, forgive me, I shouldn't mention the names of the officials. I've said they're talented. But anyway."

04:00 PM

'People who say that we were "partying" in lockdown simply do not know what they are talking about'

Mr Johnson remembers "going round and thanking staff" at what he said "was not a large social gathering" on May 20, 2020.

"It was a gathering intended - And I really must insist on this point. People who say that we were 'partying' in lockdown simply do not know what they are talking about.

"People who say that that event was a purely social gathering are quite wrong. My purpose there was to thank staff, to motivate them in what had been a very difficult time and what was also a very difficult day in which the Cabinet Secretary had just resigned."

Ms Fovargue asks if he thought exceptions applied to workplace rules in No 10 "that didn't operate to the hospitals, the care homes, workplaces that were also operating under extremely difficult circumstances".

"Of course not," Mr Johnson insists, citing the mitigations he mentioned earlier.

03:56 PM

Boris Johnson: I was not aware of any concerns in May 2020

Labour MP Yvonne Fovargue turns to the event on May 20, 2020.

Boris Johnson insists he had not seen the infamous 'bring your own booze' email, and that his understanding was the garden drinks were to "thank staff... obviously in a ventilated area, the garden". He adds he was "briefly" aware of the event in advance.

"[It'd] been a very tough time, this was a day when the Cabinet Secretary had just stepped down. I think the Civil Servants needed to feel that the business of Government was being carried on. And they needed to feel thanked and motivated for their work and that's what I did."

Ms Fovargue points to Martyn Reynolds and Lee Cain's email warnings about the gathering's compliance with Covid rules.

However, Mr Johnson argues that Mr Cain "was concerned about the optics, not about the rules... and certainly no concerns were raised with me". He does not recall being made aware of any concerns being raised, and adds he had "no hand in organising" the event.

03:48 PM

Boris Johnson: My 'birthday party' was entirely innocent

Yvonne Fovargue, the Labour MP for Makerfield, is now at the helm of the questioning of Mr Johnson. She points to multiple remarks he made weeks before both gatherings that "people should be limiting" their contact with others, as well as his plea to "stay alert" and "maintain social distancing".

Mr Johnson agrees those rules were in place at the time. Asked about his birthday party, he says:

Mr Johnson says it was one of the "peculiarites of No 10" that he lives in the same building as Carrie Johnson, his wife, who was also fined over the event.

Ms Fovargue points to pictures that show there were people whose attendance was not "absolutely necessary", yet the ex-prime minister maintains he was not told the event contravened the rules and says that this was "un-obvious" to him.

"The Chancellor would have been just as surprised as I was," Mr Johnson adds. "It was a long time ago, I'm afraid it had entirely slipped my mind and I thought it was an entirely innocent event."

03:41 PM

Moving on...

Now in focus is the "birthday party" held for Boris Johnson on June 19, 2020 and the garden drinks for Downing Street staff on May 20, 2020.

Harriet Harman tells the Committee that at both times, the relevant rules included restrictions of gatherings on two or more people, and workplace guidance that there should be social distancing of two metres in the workplace "wherever possible", with "only absolutely necessary participants" expected to attend meetings.

03:38 PM

'We're not relying on Sue Gray's evidence'

Boris Johnson and Sir Bernard Jenkin continue their back-and-forth over the guidance, with Mr Johnson homing in on the phrase "wherever possible".

"Whatever your interpretation of the guidance may be, what matters is what I believe is our efforts to follow the guidance, why I thought they were credible and wholehearted."

Back to the November 27, 2020 event, Sir Bernard quips "we're not relying on Sue Gray's evidence, isn't that ironic?" after Mr Johnson cites Mrs Gray's estimate of a 15 to 20 person attendance.

The former prime minister cites the official in question's assertions the party "lasted for a very short time indeed", and says he was "certainly there very briefly indeed".

Mr Johnson adds he could not remember making a reported joke about the event being the least socially distanced in the UK. However, Sir Bernard notes this does not amount to a denial.

03:26 PM

What are your thoughts so far?

Let us know in the comments section of this live blog what you make of Boris Johnson's performance to date.

03:22 PM

Time for another break

Sir Bernard Jenkin flags three witness statements attesting to a lack of social distancing at a second event on November 27, 2020, which was an unplanned gathering for a second special adviser.

Boris Johnson replies that he was not at the event - before proceedings are interrupted by another Commons vote.

03:19 PM

November 2020 gathering not a party, says Johnson

Boris Johnson insists Lee Cain's leaving drinks were "not a social event... If anyone thinks that I was partying during lockdown, they're completely wrong. That is not a party. What I was doing was thanking staff or thanking one individual in particular for their contribution, and I believe that was my job."

Sir Bernard Jenkin, the senior Tory MP, asks him what he would have told organisations if asked about whether leaving parties which did not meet social distancing measures were allowed. Mr Johnson said organisations were "entitled to have mitigations", and that No 10 had plenty of those during the pandemic.

He said Covid measures had to be taken that "reflect the reality of your workplace".

03:13 PM

Harman grills Johnson over 'imperfect social distancing'

Sir Bernard Jenkin tells Boris Johnson: "The guidance does not say you can have a thank you party and as many people in the room as you like. You think it's very important to thank people. The guidance doesn't say that."

Mr Johnson insists he believed the Lee Cain leaving party on November 13, 2020 "was not only reasonably necessary, but essential for work purposes".

Sir Bernard moves on from the guidance to the rules, and points out the police issued fines over the gathering, albeit not to Mr Johnson - who repeats: "I thought it was essential for work purposes... for the reason I've given."

Harriet Harman interjects to say Mr Johnson raised the question of "imperfect social distancing", and says it was either two-metres or one-metre with mitigations like screens.

"The objective of social distancing is to maintain social distancing where possible, that's what it says," he snaps back. "So did we [social distance] in No 10. Up and down the country in spite of people's observance of social distancing, there were times when people drifted in one or two metres of each other. That I'm afraid is just inevitable."

03:07 PM

We followed guidance 'to the best of our ability'

Boris Johnson argues that "you can't expect" an "invisible electrified fence" between people in a working environment such as No 10.

"When I saw that, it did not mean to me that we had breached the guidance. It meant that we were following the guidance to the best of our ability, which is what the guidance provided for... Businesses are entitled and asked to decide what practical considerations they wish to give to implementing the guidance. And that is what we did.

"Why I believed when I stood up on December 1 that the guidance was folloewd completely at all times in No 10, what picture I had in my head... I knew from my direct personal experience that we were doing a huge amount to stop the spread of Covid in the building.

"We had sanitisers, we had people working where they could, we had restrictions on the number of people in rooms... And above all, as I said, we had testing, regular testing, that went way beyond what the guidance prescribed and in my view helped mitigate the difficulties we had in maintaining social distancing."

Sir Bernard Jenkin notes Mr Johnson said none of this to MPs. The former prime minister says it was an "important part of my job" to attend staff members' leaving drinks during the pandemic, adding: "That was the best place to do it. I accept that perfect social distancing is not being observed. But that does not mean that what we were doing, in my view, is incompatible with the guidance."

03:01 PM

Leaving drinks were equal to an 'urgent meeting', ex-PM suggests

Boris Johnson tells the Committee the leaving drinks on November 13, 2020 were "necessary".

"It was necessary because two senior members of staff, the effective chief of staff and the director of communications, were about to leave the building in pretty acrimonious circumstances or what were potentially acrimonious circumstances. It was important for me to be there and give reassurance.

"The salient point I would venture to make is that following that gathering, no fine was issued to me. My presence there was felt by the Met not to be unlawful. They agreed it was a work-related event."

Sir Bernard Jenkin insists he is asking about the guidance, but Mr Johnson says it "did not for one second occur to me that we were in breach of the guidance... given the need to have urgent meetings such as this".

"I believe that the guidance is being complied with," he adds.

02:59 PM

'Where possible' key to Boris Johnson's replies

Sir Bernard Jenkin, the veteran Tory backbencher, is the first member of the Privileges Committee to question Mr Johnson.

He says he was aware of the importance of keeping workplaces safe, pointing to him telling the Commons in September 2020: "It's very important that we get back into workplace in a Covid-secure way."

Sir Bernard tells Mr Johnson: "There can be no doubt that you understood what the guidance and rules meant and were intended to achieve."

Pictures are then shown of Lee Cain's leaving drinks, where the then prime minister could be seen standing in close proximity with six to eight other people. Sir Bernard reminds Mr Johnson of his assertion it was "certainly the case" that guidance had been followed. "The photographs show a lack of social distancing of two metres, which was required by the workplace guidance at the time. So do you accept you were present at this gathering and people were not socially distanced while you were there?"

Mr Johnson says: "I don't accept that people were not making an effort to distance themselves socially from each other, and that happened the whole time in No 10. Actually I think that the guidance by November 2020 stipulated that you should maintain one metre social distancing where possible with mitigation where two metres is not viable. At all stages, the guidance was intended to be implemented to be where possible. And that is absolutely clear from the guidance."

He said the "confines" of Downing Street made it "impossible" to socially distance at all times.

02:53 PM

Boris Johnson wraps up opening statement

02:53 PM

Boris Johnson: I was fully transparent at all times

As his final point, Boris Johnson insists "at all times, I was fully transparent with the House" and made it clear he did not intend to comment on partygate until the Sue Gray and Metropolitan Police investigations were complete.

"I provided a full correction of my honest but inadvertently misleading statement. I apologise. I apologise for inadvertently leading this House but to say I did it recklessly or deliberately is completely untrue, as the evidence shows.

"Whatever we got wrong I believe that officials in No 10 and the Cabinet Office and all Whitehall departments should be immensely proud of their efforts to protect this country from a loathsome disease. When I point out to this Committee that this disease almost killed me, it is only to stress how seriously I took the measures we needed to stop it spreading, as I believe did everyone in Downing Street."

02:51 PM

Boris Johnson: I was fully entitled to rely on my advisers

Boris Johnson cites senior advisers for his belief that the December 18, 2020 did not involve any rule-breaking.

Mr Johnson labels what he sees as the Committee's apparent insistence he should not rely on the advice and reassurances of officials as "ridiculous".

"I was dealing with the emergence of another variant, omicron, and the growing clamour for restrictions on another Christmas. I could not drop what I could doing, get up and go and institute a personal investigation into what sounded like a Daily Mirror try-on about an event that was now almost a year old.

"I had to rely on and was fully entitled to rely on what I was told by my senior trusted advisers. Government would be paralysed if ministers were not able to do so."

02:47 PM

'No one sang, the cake remained in its box'

Boris Johnson mentions the June 19, 2020 event "for which I and the current Prime Minister received fixed penalty notices", but repeats his insistence he never thought he was breaking any rules.

"I stood at my desk briefly before another Covid meeting began and had a kind of salad. A number of officials came in to wish me a happy birthday. No one sang, the famous Union Jack cake remained in its tupperware box, unnoticed by me, and was later discovered and eaten by my private secretaries.

"We talked as you would expect about Covid and what we were doing to beat the pandemic. It is a measure of how innocent we thought this meeting was that a slightly exaggerated version was briefed to The Times with singing and cake-eating, and yet nothing untoward was apparently detected either by the reporter or millions of eagle-eyed readers.

"My belief is we were following the rules and the guidance to the best of our ability given the circumstances. And that is what the guidance requires. You may now say that I was being obtuse or oblivious and that we should have enforced socially distancing more ruthlessly and we can argue that back and forth. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. We're talking about what I believed at the time."

02:44 PM

Boris Johnson: I will believe till the day I die I should have thanked staff

Boris Johnson says most of the events relied on by the Committee "are events I attended for a 10 or 15 minutes, perhaps a maximum of 25 in one case, to say farewell to a departing colleague".

"I know that people round the country will look at those events and think they look like the very kind of events we or I will believe till the day I die that it was my job to thank staff for what they had done, especially during a crisis like Covid which kept coming back, which seemed to have no end, and people's morale did, in the end, begin to end.

"But never mind what I think. The more important point is that the police agreed. They did not find that my attendance at any of these farewell gatherings was against the rules. I obviously did not know at this time that any of these events later escalated beyond what was lawful after I left."

02:41 PM

Boris Johnson: I 'emphatically' did not mislead the House

Boris Johnson suggests Committee chairman Harriet Harman's past comments about his partygate defence "which are plainly and wrongly prejudicial, or pre-judge the very issue on which you are ajuducating".

"I'm going to put your earlier remarks down to the general cut and thrust of politics... The Committee is in fact supposed to be inquiring strictly into what I said about rule-breaking rather than on statutory guidance so much of this interrogation is theoretically irrelevant.

"It is your job in which I want to help you to understand why I said what I said to Parliament and whether I set out to deceive. And I emphatically did not."

Mr Johnson insists his comments in Parliamnet were made "in good faith based on what I honestly knew and reasonably believed at the time... That belief, what was in my head, was based on my understanding of the rules and guidance. That did not mean that I believed that social distancing was complied with perfectly.

"That is because I and others in the building did not believe it was necessary or possible to have a two metre or one metre after June 24, 2020 electrified force-field around every human being. Indeed that is emphatically not what the guidance prescribes. It specifically says that social distancing should be maintained 'where possible, having regard to the work environment'. It is clear that in No 10 we had real difficulties in both working efficiently and at speed and maintaining social distancing. It's a cramped, 18th century townhouse."

02:38 PM

'You haven't got any evidence'

Boris Johnson tells the Committee: "If it was obvious to me that these events were contrary to the guidance and rules, it must have been equally obvious to dozens of others.

"What is so telling is the number of officials who say the same thing and the total silence of the written or electronic record about concerns that anyone wanted to raise with me.

"It would be one thing if the Committee had come here and said here are the emails or WhatsApps that show you were warned about rule-breaking before you made your statements to the House. You haven't got any such evidence because that never happened. But if you now say instead that it must have been obvious that we were going against the rules and guidance then let's be clear about what you are saying.

"You are not only accusing me of lying, you are accusing all those civil servants - advisers, MPs - of lying about what they believed at the time to be going on."

02:33 PM

MPs return to their places

That was quick! Boris Johnson is now back in his seat at the Privileges Committee once more.

Here we go again...

02:28 PM

And now for a brief break...

... as MPs vote to approve the Stormont Brake, a key part of the Windsor Framework agreed between Rishi Sunak and the European Union.

Boris Johnson confirmed to The Telegraph this morning he would vote against Mr Sunak's new deal.

My colleague Jack Maidment has all the Brexit coverage you need here

02:25 PM

The moment Boris Johnson swore on the Bible

02:24 PM

Boris Johnson takes aim at 'unfair' committee

"Not only has the Committee found nothing incriminating, it has gathered a huge amount of evidence that demonstrates very clear that those working in No 10 shared my belief that the rules and the guidance were being followed and that I received assurances that there was no rule-breaking at No 10.

"The best and fairest course now would be for the Committee to publish all the evidence it has assembled, so Parliament and the public can judge for themselves. Despite my repeated requests the Committee has refused to do this.

"As investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury, it has elected only to publish the evidence which it considers incriminating and not the evidence that I rely on and which answers the charges."

Mr Johnson claims he was banned by the Committee from publishing a "large number of extracts" he relies on in his defence: "That is manifestly unfair. Instead, and in the absence of any evidence that I deliberately misled Parliament, the Committee is trying to mount an argument that I must have known that the guidance was not being followed."

02:22 PM

Boris Johnson: Dominic Cummings has every motive to lie

Boris Johnson insists "as soon as it was clear I was wrong, I came to the House of Commons and I corrected the record as I promised I would".

"I genuinely did not know what the outcome would be and I was deeply shocked when fines were issued, not least since I had been told on a couple of occasions at least by Sue Gray that she did not think the threshold of criminality had been reached.

"I believe that the Committee's work helps to explain why I was shocked. You've been investigating this for more than 10 months, and I thank you for what you have done. You have collected and reviewed hundreds of pages of transcripts of Sue Gray's interviews and you have analysed many thousands of contemporary emails and WhatsApps and many other material.

"You have found nothing to show that I was warned in advance to show that events in No 10 were illegal, in fact nothing to show that anyone raised anxieties with me about any event whether before or after it had taken place. If there had been such anxiety about a rule-breaking event in No 10, it unquestionably would have been escalated to me.

"We all knew how vital it was to maintain public confidence in the fight against Covid. There's only one exception of course which is the testimony of Dominic Cummings which lacks documentary evidence and plainly cannot be relied upon. He has every motive to lie."

02:17 PM

'Hand on heart, I did not lie to the House'

Harriet Harman says if there is a vote called, the sitting will be suspended so Boris Johnson will be allowed to vote.

Mr Johnson tells the Committee gatherings "went past the point where they could be said to be necessary for work purposes".

"That is wrong, I bitterly regret it, I understand public anger and I continue to apologise for what happened on my watch, and I take full responsibility. But the purpose of this inquiry is not to reopen Partygate.

"I am here to say to you hand on heart I did not lie to the House. When those statements were made they were made in good faith and on the basis of what I knew and believed at the time."

02:15 PM

Boris Johnson swears on Bible

Quite a moment as Mr Johnson says:

02:15 PM

'Evidence we have raises clear questions'

Mrs Harman says the Committee "need to understand why Mr Johnson said to Parliament that no rules or guidance were broken in No 10 when we have evidence that he knew what the rules and guidance were, and he was present at gatherings where those rules and guidance were breach."

She insists the Committee is yet to reach its conclusions and will consider the former prime minister's evidence: "The evidence we have already raises clear questions and this is Mr Johnson's opportunity to give us his answers."

02:15 PM

Footage of Boris Johnson's partygate lines shown to Committee

The Privileges Committee is played a clip of Boris Johnson telling Prime Minister's Questions on December 1, 2021: "What I can tell the Rt Hon gentleman is that all guidance was followed completely during No 10."

A clip is then shown of PMQs on December 8, when he said: "I repeat Mr Speaker that I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken and that is what I have been repeatedly assured."

In the same session, he is shown saying: "I'm sickened myself and furious about [the Allegra Stratton video] but I repeat what I said to him, that I have been repeatedly assured that the rules were not broken."

And then "I have been repeatedly assured that no rules were broken", followed by his response to a question about a party on November 13: "No, but I'm sure that whatever happened the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times."

On May 25, 2022, the Committee is then shown a clip of him saying: "When I came to this House and said in all sincerity that the rules and guidance had been followed at all times, it is what I believed to be true. It was certainly the case when I was present at gatherings to wish staff farewell, and the House will note that my attendance at these moments, brief as it was, has not been found to be outside the rules. But clearly this was not the case for some of those gatherings after I had left, and at other gatherings when I was not even in the building."

02:08 PM

The moment Boris Johnson arrived in the Committee room

02:07 PM

Harriet Harman: This is about whether Boris Johnson told the truth

Harriet Harman, the Privileges Committee chairman, insists the inquiry is "not looking at the rights or wrongs" of Covid rules "or repeating the Partygate Inquiry".

"What the House has mandated us to look at is whether Mr Johnson told the truth to Parliament to the best of his knowledge about No 10's compliance with those Covid rules and guidance. It is about the truth, and that is why this inquiry goes to the heart of the trust on which our system of accountability depends."

Mrs Harman notes the Committee reflects the political balance of the house, with a Conservative majority.

"We are examining what Mr Johnson said to the House about gatherings in No 10, whether what he said to the House was correct or not, whether and if so how quickly and comprehensively any misleading statement was corrected. If a statement was misleading, we will then consider if that was a genuine error or whether it was reckless and intentional, and whether the record was corrected in good time."

02:05 PM

'Our democracy depends upon trust'

Harriet Harman says the job of Privileges Committee is to decide whether Boris Johnson misled the House, committed a contempt, and did so in an "intentional or reckless" way.

"We proceed on the basis that what we are told by ministers is accurate. Parliament expects proactive candour and transparency. If what ministers tell us is not the truth, we can't do our job. Our democracy depends upon trust, that what ministers tell MPs in the House of Commons is the truth. And without that trust our entire parliamentary democracy is undermined.

"Everyone makes mistakes, and when ministers do they are expected to correct that at the earliest possible opportunity, which is what happens routinely.

"But misleading intentionally or recklessly or refusing to answer, or failing to correct, impedes or frustrates the functioning of the House and is contempt."

02:00 PM

Ask not for whom the bell tolls...

The sound of Big Ben - and a "Bye Bye Boris" parody song being played outside Westminster station - echo around Westminster as the clock strikes two.

01:59 PM

Boris Johnson heads for the Committee

01:48 PM

Stay off Twitter this afternoon, Labour MPs told

Labour MPs have been told to keep quiet on Twitter about this afternoon’s committee hearing with Boris Johnson, Tony Diver hears.

The party has emailed its own MPs to tell them they are not to tweet their own opinions about the evidence — and instead retweet frontbenchers Steve Reed and Wes Streeting.

Let’s see how many of them keep to Sir Keir’s edict…

01:40 PM

Not long now...

There are 20 minutes to go until Boris Johnson faces the Privileges Committee.

You can follow all the key developments here, and watch live at the top of this blog.

01:34 PM

'A deadly strain of Boris fever is infecting the Tories again'

My old friend Boris Johnson has returned, like one of those tropical diseases you hoped you had shaken off for good, writes Petronella Wyatt.

According to distinguished members of the medical profession, the prognosis may be worrying. As soon as Johnson comes back, whole sections of the Tory party, which has been recovering its health under Dr Sunak, will come down with Boris Fever again.

Boris Fever, which is a mystery disease, can, as we know, imperil the lives of entire governments. For many months, the Tories have been under the assiduous care of senior consultants, Sunak and Prof Hunt, who are devoting their lives to eradicating this killer virus.

But there are grave concerns that the whole party will have a severe attack of it this week, in the form of a new strain called the Privileges Committee.

Mr Johnson says the Privilege Committee is unlawful, and according to some of his allies, who are terminally infected, looked forward to yesterday’s appearance before it.

The former premier then claimed that his statements to the Commons on Partygate were made in "good faith" and that it was "his duty to toast departing colleagues", which must be one of the most improbable claims since "Ugandan discussions".

Read more: 'I pray the Tories have developed herd immunity to Boris'

01:25 PM

Meanwhile... Brexiteers urge Tory MPs to reject Sunak's deal

The European Research Group of Tory Brexiteers has urged its members to vote against Rishi Sunak's Windsor Framework this afternoon in a fresh blow to the Prime Minister.

Mark Francois, the ERG chairman, made the recommendation at a meeting of the group this morning which was attended by approximately 30 Tory MPs.

Mr Sunak is facing a growing Tory revolt over his Brexit deal with rebels now believing as many as 35 Conservative MPs could vote against the Government.

Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Jacob Rees-Mogg and Priti Patel have all publicly confirmed that they will rebel.

Jack Maidment, my colleague, is guiding you through all the latest here

01:23 PM

Telegraph View: Boris Johnson’s trial raises big questions

Telegraph View: The better question MPs could be asking

12:58 PM

Anti-Johnson protesters gather outside Parliament

A small crowd of anti-Brexit, anti-Conservative activists have gathered for their usual weekly protest outside Parliament and are playing music including 'Bye Bye Boris', a parody of the Bay City Rollers hit 'Bye Bye Baby', and 'The Lunatics Have Taken Over the Asylum'.

Unsurprisingly, the signs being held aloft by Steve Bray and his supporters are mostly focused on partygate.

12:51 PM

Here he comes... Boris Johnson seen leaving his home

12:40 PM

Watch: What Johnson told the public about partygate

Ahead of Boris Johnson's grilling by the Privileges Committee, here is a reminder of what he told the public about Downing Street parties during the partygate row - including his insistence "the rules were followed at all times".

The Committee's verdict on whether he "knowingly or recklessly" misled MPs by saying this could ultimately seal his political fate one way or the other.

12:21 PM

Sunak and Starmer in heated clash over partygate

Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer have clashed over partygate during Prime Minister's Questions.

Mr Sunak - who was fined alongside Boris Johnson over a gathering in June 2020, accused the Labour leader and his party of being "soft on criminals".

Sir Keir retorted: "The only criminal investigation he's ever been involved in is the one that found him guilty of breaking the law."

Mr Sunak pointed to his comments at the time "respected the decision" of the Metropolitan Police and noted his "unreserved apology".

The Prime Minister added the findings of Sue Gray's investigation "confirm that I had no advance knowledge of what had been planned having arrived early for a meeting... But he doesn't need to me to tell him that, he's probably spoken to the report's author much more frequently than I have."

12:06 PM

Boris caught up in blue-on-blue battles

The Privileges Committee is not the only political waves Boris Johnson is making today.

As The Telegraph revealed this morning, Mr Johnson will vote against his successor Rishi Sunak's Windsor Framework.

Steve Baker, the Northern Ireland Office minister who has backed Mr Sunak's revised deal, told broadcasters Mr Johnson "has a choice".

"He can be remembered for the great acts of statecraft that he achieved or he can risk looking like a pound shop Nigel Farage."

11:57 AM

Other blogs are available

Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson's former aide, is running his own "live blog" today via his Substack website.

"Live blogging today on the trolley [Mr Cummings's nickname for Mr Johnson] and other random SW1 junk," Mr Cummings wrote on Twitter.

He has already said Westminster is "overrating the chances of him returning this year even if he manages to escape this inquiry", and claimed that Rishi Sunak could use a "vast trove of material in PET (the part of the Cabinet Office that deals with scandals) to smash the Trolley up".

11:49 AM

Key questions answered, from the dossier to what sanctions Johnson could face

Boris Johnson faces a grilling over partygate that could ultimately make or break the rest of his political career.

He is to appear before the Privileges Committee for up to four hours as he fields questions from a seven-strong group of senior MPs, who will determine whether he deliberately misled Parliament over what he knew about Downing Street gatherings.

Here, The Telegraph takes a look at what lies ahead for Mr Johnson, his "bombshell" defence dossier, and the possible consequences if the committee rules against him.

11:33 AM

Don't interfere with Privileges Committee, Speaker warns MPs

Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the Commons, has written to MPs regarding the Privileges Committee investigation into Boris Johnson.

Sir Lindsay pointed to his previous comments about how the Committee, which some of Mr Johnson's backbench supporters have vociferously criticised, "should be left to get on with it".

He added: "The committee must be allowed to complete its work without interference, both in relation to the evidence it is taking today and during the time before its report is published.

"I would like to remind you that interference with or intimidation of a committee is otentially a contempt of the House and restraint is appropriate while the Committee's work continues."

11:29 AM

The key revelations from today's partygate evidence

Two Downing Street aides have denied telling Boris Johnson that all Covid guidance was followed.

Both Simon Case, who was the Cabinet Secretary, and Jack Doyle, who was director of communications at the time when partygate emerged, replied "no" when asked if they had assured Mr Johnson that the guidance was adhered to at all times.

The privileges committee has published its 110-page partygate evidence dossier this morning, just hours before Boris Johnson will face a grilling which could determine his future as an MP.

Amy Gibbons and I take a look at the key points

11:23 AM

Inside Boris Johnson’s preparations for partygate grilling

If political danger can be measured in the hours of preparation dedicated to a given event, then Boris Johnson is all too aware of what is riding on the partygate hearing, writes Ben Riley-Smith, our Political Editor.

The former prime minister likes to project a flying by the seat of his pants image, all ruffled hair and quick wit. But the opposite has been true for this 2pm Privileges Committee session.

Behind the scenes, some of the country’s most renowned lawyers – at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds to the taxpayer – have been putting Mr Johnson through his paces.

The early work by Team Boris since he left office last September focused on battling the committee's remit, questioning its approach and fighting over terms.

But in recent weeks, a more singular focus has come into view – making sure he survives what they see as a seven-member firing squad awaiting him today.

No eye-rolls, no gesticulations: The key points around Johnson's prep for today

11:00 AM

Weaponised' photographs and 'selective' evidence: Key points of Boris Johnson's defence

Boris Johnson's evidence to the privileges committee forms the basis of his defence ahead of his four-hour partygate grilling by MPs this afternoon.

In the balance is whether Mr Johnson knowingly and deliberately misled MPs about lockdown-breaking parties in Downing Street when he insisted no Covid rules were broken.

The 52-page document has been described by the former Prime Minister’s allies as his "bombshell defence dossier".

Camilla Turner, our Chief Political Correpsondent, has the full story

10:43 AM

'These drinks in the garden'

An email from a No 10 official to Internal Events/Facilities Management forms part of the 110-page evidence document.

The official wrote on May 18, 2020, the day of the "BYOB" event in the Downing Street garden:

Someone from the Facilities Management Service Desk proceeded to reply two minutes later:

10:39 AM

What Boris Johnson told MPs about partygate

December 8, 2021

Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November?

No, but I am sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.

December 8, 2021

I have been repeatedly assured that the rules were not broken.

January 12, 2022

As I have said to the House, I believe that the events in quesiton were within the guidance and were within the rules, and that was certainly the assumption on which I operated... I hope that he will wait until the facts are established and brought to this House.

January 12, 2022

When I went into that garden just after 6 o'clock on May 20, 2020, to thank groups of staff before going into my office 25 minutes later to continue working, I believed implicitly that this was a work event, but with hindsight, I should have sent everyone back inside.

10:33 AM

No 10 official: Boris Johnson could have shut down parties

The evidence of one No 10 official to the Privileges Committee may cause some difficulty for Boris Johnson later today.

An extract of the aide's written submission states:

10:16 AM

Lee Cain: Garden party was ‘purely a social function'

Lee Cain, who was then Mr Johnson’s director of communications, said it was "clear" that the garden party in May 2020 was "purely a social function", writes Amy Gibbons, our Political Correspondent.

Mr Johnson said in his own evidence to the committee that he understood the gathering to be a "socially-distanced outdoor meeting to boost staff morale and teamworking after what had been a very difficult period". He added: "In my view, an opportunity to thank staff and boost morale was essential for work purposes."

But Mr Cain said: "From memory there were around 40 people in attendance including the PM, the PPS, Mrs Johnson and - unusually - advisers from other departments. They were joined by a cross section of staff from across Downing Street. It was clear observing all who attended and the layout of the event that this was purely a social function."

He also said he did not recall "personally" having a conversation with Johnson about the party, but it would have been "highly unusual" for him not to have raised a "potentially serious communications risk" with the PM.

But Mr Johnson said: "I can categorically state that no-one at the time expressed to me any concerns about whether the event complied with the Rules or Guidance."

09:56 AM

'Just be robust and they'll get bored'

Privileges Committee evidence reveals Jack Doyle, Boris Johnson's former director of communications, told a No 10 official "just be robust and they'll get bored" when first approached by a journalist over partygate.

Mr Doyle told the aide to "say something as robust as we can manage" when Pippa Crerar, the then political editor of the Daily Mirror, approached No 10 over drinks that took place in December 2020 at Downing Street.

"Key thing is there were never any rules against workplace drinking, so we can say with confidence no rules were broken. Ignore the Xmas quiz' bulls--t - who cares. Just be robust and they'll get bored," Mr Doyle wrote.

09:48 AM

Boris Johnson was questioned on if PMQs responses were 'realistic'

Martin Reynolds questioned Boris Johnson's plan to tell the Commons that all rules had been followed, Privileges Committee evidence shows.

Mr Reynolds, his former principal private secretary, said he questioned how "realistic" Mr Johnson's comments were.

"He did not welcome the interruption but told me that he had received reassurances that the comms event was within the rules.

"I accepted this but questioned whether it was realistic to argue that all guidance had been followed at all times, given the nature of the working environment in No 10."

09:39 AM

James Slack appears to back Boris Johnson's account

James Slack, one of Boris Johnson's former top press aides, told the Privileges Committee: "To the best of my recollection, the account given by Mr Johnson is correct."

09:38 AM

Jack Doyle's written evidence

Jack Doyle has denied giving Boris Johnson any assurances that Covid guidance was "adhered to at all times" in Downing Street during lockdown.

He denied advising Mr Johnson that "no parties were held in No 10" while restrictions were in place.

"We made every effort to comply with the Covid-19 guidelines to the greatest extent that we were able," Mr Doyle added. "It is difficult to say that the guidelines of this nature [e.g. Perspex screens] were followed at all times, and it would not be possible for me to say that they were."

09:33 AM

One No 10 official: Dec 18 2020 event was a party

The December 18, 2020 event was a "tight cross-press office party", one No 10 official is quoted in the Privileges Committee evidence as saying.

They also told the Cabinet Office investigation: "There were WhatsApps. It was planned and the party had been cancelled and I look back at it now and it was planned to be a tight cross-press office party.

"There wasn't that much social distancing, people were very close, not touching though."

09:31 AM

'At no point at the time did I consider the leaving presentation law-breaking'

One former No 10 official is quoted in the Privileges Committee dossier as saying they did not consider the Jan 14, 2021 leaving drinks event to be a party.

"At no point at the time did I consider the leaving presentation or subsequent discussion with colleagues to be law or rule-breaking, nor would I have described it as a party."

09:28 AM

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson knew May 2020 event was a party

Dominic Cummings said the "BYOB" event organised by Martin Reynolds during lockdown was a "mistake".

Mr Johnson's former top aide insisted he had not given him any reassurances around the gathering.

Mr Cummings is also quoted as having told the Cabinet Office investigation team: "The idea the PM could have thought this drinks event was 'work' is comical, given the tables covered in bottles of drink, everyone standing around drinking etc.

"The PM certainly knew it was a drinks party because I told him and when he walked outside he saw a drinks party."

09:22 AM

Simon Case: I never gave any partygate reassurances

Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, told the Privileges Committee he never gave Boris Johnson any reassurances around Covid rules being followed in No 10.

09:13 AM

Breaking: Privileges Committee publishes evidence

The Privileges Committee has publish its 110-page partygate evidence dossier this morning, just hours before Boris Johnson will face a grilling which could determine his future as an MP.

09:08 AM

Boris Johnson allies: 'This circus has gone on for long enough'

Around a dozen of Boris Johnson's supporters have been tweeting their defences of the former prime minister.

Chief among them is Simon Clarke, the former levelling up secretary, who said: "There has been a huge degree of wisdom after the fact here.  Boris was working tirelessly to overcome the pandemic, with a team who had to be in No 10 to discharge that task, and placed reasonable reliance on the advice he received as to events.

"Lest we forget, the extremely anodyne 'event' for which he and the then Chancellor were fined took place between meetings."

Nadine Dorries, who was Mr Johnson's culture secretary, insisted he did not deliberately mislead the Commons, while Sir James Duddridge, a close ally of the former prime minister, pleaded "for God's sake" to get back to prioritising the economy.

Scott Benton, a 'Red Wall' MP elected as part of Mr Johnson's 2019 general election landslide, added: "This circus has gone on for long enough. Boris is no longer PM and the country are sick and tired of this soap opera. It’s time to move on."

08:49 AM

Liz Truss to vote against Rishi Sunak's Brexit deal

Liz Truss will vote against Rishi Sunak’s new Brexit deal for Northern Ireland this afternoon, a source close to the former prime minister has said.

08:48 AM

Priti Patel to vote against Windsor Framework

More from Christopher Hope:

08:28 AM

Sir Iain Duncan Smith to vote against PM's Brexit deal

Christopher Hope, The Telegraph's associate editor, has discovered Sir Iain Duncan Smith will vote against the Windsor Framework this afternoon. He writes:

08:20 AM

'Quite a lot' of Tory Brexiteers will vote against Rishi Sunak's Windsor Framework, says Sir John Redwood

Sir John Redwood, a former minister who will vote against Rishi Sunak's Brexit deal this afternoon, said he believed "quite a lot" of his Tory colleagues will do the same.

Asked to put a number on the Tory rebellion, Sir John told Times Radio: "Well, I have no idea. The ERG will have a meeting this morning when we will discuss it with each other and see whether we all agree or not.

"The ERG doesn’t run a whip. There is only one whip for the Conservative Party, the official Conservative whip.

"On this occasion quite a lot of Conservatives who want Brexit will not be able to follow the Conservative whip."

08:11 AM

Tory MP predicts 'endless rows' with EU if Windsor Framework is implemented

Sir John Redwood denied that Tory Brexiteers were being "unrealistic" in opposing the Windsor Framework and demanding another way forward.

The senior Conservative MP told Times Radio: "I would say no, I am being true to the spirit of the vote that I and many millions of others cast to remove the EU law and EU control from our country and there will be far more going on about it, endless rows about it, if we sign this agreement and if Parliament endorses the agreement.

"It is an invitation to the EU to push and push, to control more and more things, and for the UK to get angry about it just as we did when we were a member."

07:52 AM

Pictured: Boris Johnson goes for a morning run ahead of his partygate grilling

07:48 AM

Senior Tory MP: Boris Johnson voting against Brexit deal could prompt bigger Tory rebellion

Boris Johnson's announcement that he will vote against Rishi Sunak's new Brexit deal could prompt more Tory MPs to oppose the Windsor Framework, a former Cabinet minister has said.

Tory Brexiteer Sir John Redwood told Times Radio: "Well, it may do because he obviously knew a lot about these negotiations as he had to try and rescue the very poor negotiation that Theresa May had conducted.

"But I think more importantly will be the MPs focusing on this issue after many other noises off about other subjects and I hope they are all focusing on it overnight and this morning because the ERG did produce some extremely important legal advice which was published yesterday and I would recommend all MPs read that before voting on it because it gives a rather different portrait of how this agreement might operate in practice from some of the pother more bullish interpretations we have been hearing from the Government."

07:40 AM

Jeremy Hunt: 'Falling inflation isn't inevitable'

Jeremy Hunt said that "falling inflation isn't inevitable" as he responded to the latest figures published by the Office for National Statistics this morning (see the post below at 07.38).

The Chancellor said: "Falling inflation isn’t inevitable, so we need to stick to our plan to halve it this year.

"We recognise just how tough things are for families across the country, so as we work towards getting inflation under control we will help families with cost of living support worth £3,300 on average per household this year."

07:38 AM

UK inflation rises unexpectedly

Away from partygate and Brexit, the Office for National Statistics has just published the latest inflation figures.

They showed that the Consumer Prices Index rose by 10.4 per cent in the 12 months to February this year.

That is up from the 10.1 per cent recorded in January. The figure had fallen each month since a peak of 11.1 per cent in October.

Today's figures represent a set back for the Government as it tries to deliver on Rishi Sunak's pledge to halve inflation by the end of the year.

07:33 AM

Boris Johnson to vote against Rishi Sunak's Brexit deal

Boris Johnson will vote against Rishi Sunak’s Brexit deal this afternoon in a major boost for Tory rebels who warn it is not the right solution for Northern Ireland, The Telegraph can reveal.

The former prime minister said in a statement to this newspaper that the proposals would keep Northern Ireland "captured by the EU legal order" and were "not acceptable".

Mr Johnson is expected to interrupt his appearance during the House of Commons Privileges Committee hearing on partygate to vote when the division bell rings.

There is also a growing belief among Eurosceptic rebels that Liz Truss, another former prime minister, will vote against the Brexit deal - though her office is yet to confirm that is her plan.

You can read the full story here.

07:29 AM

Privileges Committee to publish 'core bundle' of partygate evidence at 9am

The Privileges Committee is set to publish its partygate evidence this morning, just hours before Boris Johnson will face a grilling which could determine his future as an MP.

The committee will publish what the BBC reported will be a "core bundle" of evidence at 9am which will be referred to throughout this afternoon’s session with the former premier which is due to get underway at 2pm and could last for up to four hours.

07:26 AM

Good morning

Good morning and welcome to today's politics live blog.

It is a massive day in Westminster, with two major stories running in parallel.

Boris Johnson will appear in front of the Privileges Committee as part of its partygate investigation at 2pm in a session which could last four hours.

It is likely to be one of the most-watched parliamentary hearings in recent history and could have a huge impact on Mr Johnson's political future.

Meanwhile, MPs will vote on Rishi Sunak's new Brexit deal this afternoon in a moment of huge importance for the Prime Minister's premiership.

The DUP has said it will vote against the deal and a number of Tory Brexiteer MPs, potentially dozens, are expected to follow suit.

It should still clear the House of Commons because Labour has committed to backing the Government but it will still be a moment of high drama - especially since Mr Johnson has said he will vote against Mr Sunak's plans.