they will make the initial conclusion probably before the report. then it goes to the house of commons as a whole to make the decision. as i say, i think it is a fair analysis if it is not the most serious breaches it is not the most serious breaches it is not the most serious punishment, but that will be for them to decide. and? fascinating, thank you very much indeed. iamjoined by i am joined by the legal commentator joshua rosenberg. what is the legal status of the ceiling? it is joshua rosenberg. what is the legal status of the ceiling? status of the ceiling? it is a parliamentary status of the ceiling? it is a parliamentary proceeding, | status of the ceiling? it is a i parliamentary proceeding, not status of the ceiling? it is a - parliamentary proceeding, not a court, and for that reason, boris johnson s lawyer will not be allowed to address the committee. we think you will be sitting there, may whisper suggestions to the former prime minister, may pass boris johnson notes, b
were no parties, nothing happened and so on, on, and after the police report and so grave a smack report, that s when he told parliament what was happening. that is the challenge he has to face and he says he has done what he can. he has to face and he says he has done what he can. very quickly, an interesting done what he can. very quickly, an interesting choice done what he can. very quickly, an interesting choice of done what he can. very quickly, an interesting choice of lawyer- done what he can. very quickly, an interesting choice of lawyer for- interesting choice of lawyer for borisjohnson, a brilliant lawyer worked across many cases. boris johnson, a brilliant lawyer worked across many cases. brilliant la er, worked across many cases. brilliant lawyer. defeated worked across many cases. brilliant lawyer, defeated boris worked across many cases. brilliant lawyer, defeated boris on worked across many cases. brilliant lawyer, defeated boris on the - worked across many
it isa it is a big day here on the political front. the house of commons privileges committee investigating whether former prime minister borisjohnson knowingly misled parliament over the partygate affair has published its evidence bundle ahead of the hearing on wednesday afternoon. 0ur political correspondent, nick eardley, joins us from westminster. there are a lot of documents, well over 100 pages. some of the first ones are all about a famous garden party that took place in downing street back in may 2020 at the height of some of the covid 19 restrictions in england and the committee has published a bunch of documents with different pieces of evidence from officials who worked there at the time including the prime minister director of communications saying he did not think this event was a good idea. we have also got, in public, for the first time, some comments from martin reynolds who was the private
account from martin reynolds, a senior official in number ten saying he had a conversation with boris johnson about prime minister s questions, where borisjohnson wanted to say that all rules and guidance had been followed. he says he cannot remember exactly when, but he cannot remember exactly when, but he believed. sorry, he did not welcome an interruption but told me he had received assurances that a comms event was within the rules. i accepted this, martin reynolds said, but questioned whether it was realistic to argue for that this is a key bit, questioned whether it was realistic to argue that all guidance had been followed at all times given the nature of the working environment in number ten. he agreed to delete the reference to that guidance. you see on screen there, seven to february, the goose the 8th of february because that is the day the prime minister s questions was, but he then turned up, sorry 8th of
parliament that rules and guidance were followed at all times. look, i mean, 110 pages of documents, some of which are not as interesting as the others, some are screen grabs from the advice at the time, we will go through all of that, but some of this will give us an impression of the discussions that were going on in downing street and more widely and government at the time. and will be used to make the argument on the counter argument over whether boris johnson should have known the rules were followed, which would undermine his argument that he was completely honest with parliament when he said they were. and? are you getting some level of guidance that if this committee were to find not deliberate misleading, but reckless. which has its own interpretation, doesn t it? that he recklessly misled the house of commons on this. whether it would then be too far to suspend borisjohnson whether it would then be too far to suspend boris johnson for ten