Crucial to Boris Johnson’s political future, the administrative inquiry into “partygate” on Wednesday implicated the responsibility of the Downing Street summit for a whole series of alcoholic parties held in the Prime Minister’s residence during the anti-coronavirus lockdowns. COVID.
While he had seemed in a position in recent weeks to overcome this scandal likely to dislodge him from power, the head of the Conservative government had to work once again to make an act of contrition, saying that he was assuming but wanted to “go from before “.
This time he was reacting to the conclusions of senior civil servant Sue Gray, deemed intractable. This report details, event by event, emails and photos in support, what was happening behind the scenes of power while the British were confined: very alcoholic pots – until sometimes being indisposed – with altercations, music, departure through backdoors and sometimes disrespect for security or maintenance staff.
Without naming those responsible or recommending sanctions, Sue Gray blames the power at the highest level for these events which “should not have been allowed to happen”.
“Some of the less experienced officials believed that their participation in some of these events was permissible given the presence of senior leaders. Senior leaders, whether political or official, must take responsibility for this culture,” she said.
In front of the deputies, Boris Johnson assured to assume “full responsibility for everything that happened”, renewing his apologies but showing himself determined to remain in office to “focus on the priorities of the British”, war in Ukraine and galloping inflation.
Labor “Beergate”
Labor opposition leader Keir Starmer unsurprisingly called for his departure to “restore dignity” to power: “You cannot both make the law and break it”.
But the latter is himself weakened by an ongoing police investigation into the “beergate”, these beers and curries shared with his campaign team last year despite the restrictions.
And in the absence of elections, the question now is whether these new elements will be sufficient to rekindle anger within the majority, a peaceful time, or even to demonstrate that the head of government lied to Parliament by assuring that no rules had been broken, which could hasten his departure.
“Are you ready to defend this attitude publicly day after day? launched Conservative MP Tobias Ellwood to his colleagues.
After seeing his popularity drop during the winter due to “partygate”, Boris Johnson managed to appease his troops by showing himself at the forefront of Western support for Ukraine in the face of the Russian invasion.
His party, however, suffered heavy losses in local elections in early May, tarnishing the image of a winning machine at the ballot box that has long protected the former mayor of London, and historic inflation is fueling discontent.
Parliamentary inquiry
The government must announce a new plan to help households strangled by soaring energy bills, which the opposition has linked to the desire to forget about “partygate”.
Highly anticipated, the work of Sue Gray had long been delayed by the investigation carried out in parallel by the police. The latter ended last week by revealing the scale of breaches of anti-COVID rules imposed by Downing Street in response to the pandemic which has claimed nearly 180,000 lives in the United Kingdom.
A total of 126 fines were handed out for breaches in eight events, including one to Boris Johnson himself for a surprise birthday drink in June 2020.
This assessment was nevertheless considered relatively lenient for the Prime Minister, who had participated in seemingly more serious rallies.
Boris Johnson has always refused to resign. But if the new elements published convince more than fifty members of the majority to let go of him, he risks finding himself targeted by a motion of no confidence, almost three years after his triumphant arrival in Downing Street in the midst of the psychodrama of Brexit.
The report could also fuel accusations of lies that will be examined by another planned investigation, this one parliamentary. If the latter concludes that he misled the House of Commons by claiming not to have broken the rules, he is supposed to resign.