Boris Johnson is likely to accept a verdict suggesting he ‘recklessly misled’ Parliament over partygate in a bid to avoid a by-election, according to a political commentator.
MPs on the privileges committee have been investigating the ex-PM for 12 months, a reality which came to the fore when he was subject to a televised questioning over the matter.
Speaking on GB News, Hope says there is a sense of inevitability over the matter, with Boris Johnson likely to accept being found guilty of wrongdoing.
While the former PM refuses to admit any wrongdoing, it is believed he will accept the finding to avoid a potential by-election.
Boris Johnson is likely to accept he 'recklessly misled' Parliament, according to Christopher Hope
Parliament / GB News
Christopher Hope told Esther McVey and Philip Davies: “It’s quite a nuanced position. Essentially, Johnson denies knowingly misleading Parliament over these parties during lockdown.
“What is being made clear to me by MP allies close to Johnson is that he will accept a verdict of ‘recklessly misleading’ if that’s where this ends up.
“He recognises this is a political trial, not a judicial one. It’s clear from the questioning, the MPs on the committee feel he should have known more about the parties than he did.
“The idea is, if he accepts ‘recklessly’ as opposed to ‘intentionally’ misleading Parliament, that means he will end up with a ban of less than 10 days.
Boris Johnson said the investigation against him was 'cynical stitch up' PA“More than 10 days means Lindsay Hoyle could call a by-election which would mean a huge circus given Boris Johnson has a majority of 7,210 from the last election in South Ruislip.
“Also, what it would do to the Tory Party. If MPs were asked to vote to ban Johnson from the Commons, maybe end his political career, I’m not sure how party members would think about that.
“This is a very bad look for the Tory Party, but this is the landing zone where it might end up.”
MPs on the committee hinted towards the end of the questioning that they were moving towards a ruling of ‘recklessly’ rather than ‘deliberately’ misled Parliament.
Sir Charles Walker asked him towards the end of the session: “If not deliberate, is it possible that it was reckless, or slightly reckless, not to have caveated your statements to the house with ‘to the best of my knowledge’ or ‘I really do hope’?
“It was the certainty of the statements. Is it possible to accept that, actually, there was a degree of recklessness?”
Johnson responded: “No. Nobody wants to be in a position where they are misleading the house.”
The privileges committee, chaired by Labour grandee Harriet Harman, is considering whether the ex-PM committed a contempt of Parliament.
