Lib Dems ask committee to consider ‘potential withdrawal’ of Johnson honours
It comes as the Government attempts to draw a line under the honours row.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Liberal Democrats have asked the Forfeiture Committee to look into the “potential withdrawal” of the honours bestowed by Boris Johnson, as Prime Minister Rishi Sunak sought to draw a line under the saga.
In a letter to the committee, which considers cases where the holder of an honour may have brought the system “into disrepute”, the party’s Cabinet Office spokeswoman Christine Jardine urged members to “open an investigation into the potential withdrawal of all of Boris Johnson’s honours which fall under the scope of your Committee”.
It comes as the Government attempts to draw a line under the honours row, which has seen Johnson loyalists warning that Tory MPs could face deselection by their local Conservative associations if they backed the finding that the former prime minister deliberately misled the Commons.
Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride said on Monday that the “caravan has got to move on” from the former prime minister after the Commons overwhelmingly backed the sanctions against him.
But ministers have continued to face questions, with Tory politician Shaun Bailey under pressure to turn down his peerage after a video emerged of a mid-lockdown party at Conservative Campaign Headquarters.
The Forfeiture Committee deals with honours such as knighthoods rather than peerages, which can only be removed by an act of Parliament.
Ms Jardine, who in her letter to Sir Chris Wormald appeared to recognise the limits of the committee, nonetheless said that the circumstances surrounding Mr Johnson’s list are “unprecedented”.
In her letter, Ms Jardine said: “Members on his honours list include individuals who were implicated in the Partygate saga.
“The latest revelations around the Conservative HQ Christmas ‘Jingle and Mingle’ event, in contravention of Covid restrictions, has further deepened public anger about Boris Johnson’s conferral of honours.”
“I am therefore urging you to open an investigation into the potential withdrawal of all of Boris Johnson’s honours which fall under the scope of your Committee.
I am therefore urging you to open an investigation into the potential withdrawal of all of Boris Johnson’s honours which fall under the scope of your Committee
“Clearly, the circumstances around this list, and the events which have occurred since its release, are unprecedented and have brought the honours system into disrepute.
“I believe that there are grounds for examining whether Boris Johnson’s resignation honours list can be revoked in its entirety.
“Further, the Forfeiture Committee states that it will consider withdrawing honours from individuals if their behaviour results in censure by a regulatory or a professional body, or any other behaviour that is deemed to bring the honours system into disrepute.
“To accept an honour from Boris Johnson is an act which itself brings the system into disrepute and I would argue that it is, therefore, grounds for revoking.”
The Prime Minister, who did not vote on Monday as MPs backed the findings of the report into Mr Johnson’s conduct, “respects” the decision of the House, Downing Street said.
Mr Sunak blamed a diary clash for his absence from the Commons and has declined to give his opinion on the scathing report by the Privileges Committee on his predecessor.
Asked whether Mr Sunak believes his predecessor did mislead the House, the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: “He respects the decision the House has come to, this follows extensive work by the committee. But beyond that I don’t have anything more to add.”
Asked whether the Prime Minister thought the matter was now closed, the spokesman said: “Yes.”
The Prime Minister was accused by Labour of being “too weak” to stand up to his predecessor, who still commands a fan base among Conservative voters.
Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner said: “It’s astonishing that a Prime Minister who promised integrity, professionalism and accountability still doesn’t have an opinion about his disgraced predecessor being found guilty of repeatedly lying to Parliament.
“Instead of turning the page on Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak is showing just how weak and indecisive he is. It’s a total failure of leadership.”
Mr Stride said Mr Sunak had been busy with “long-standing events” including hosting his Swedish counterpart, Ulf Kristersson, on Monday and did not want to put pressure on colleagues.
I don’t think it’s odd that under those circumstances he wouldn’t want to weigh in and start suggesting a particular course of action
The Work and Pensions Secretary told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I don’t think it is odd that he should be in a position before a vote which is a free vote in which he has made clear it is for the House to decide on these matters.
“I don’t think it’s odd that under those circumstances he wouldn’t want to weigh in and start suggesting a particular course of action.”
Only seven MPs voted against the report, with even some of Mr Johnson’s staunchest allies abstaining.
But the vote has deepened tensions in the Tory party, with the former prime minister openly criticising Mr Sunak.
Much of the Government payroll did not take part in the vote but some Cabinet ministers including Commons Leader Penny Mordaunt and Justice Secretary Alex Chalk supported it.
Joy Morrissey, who was appointed assistant whip by Mr Johnson and continues to hold the role under Mr Sunak, said she joined those voting against the “deeply flawed” report.
“This report with all its flaws risks a chilling impact on the rights of parliamentarians and I felt I needed to make a stand against that. It sets precedents that will last long and reach deep,” she wrote on her website.
Mr Johnson will be denied the pass to Parliament usually granted to former MPs after the sanction recommended by the cross-party committee was endorsed by 354 votes.
Senior Conservative MP Tobias Ellwood earlier said Mr Bailey, a former London mayoral candidate, should reconsider the peerage handed to him by the former prime minister.
The former minister told the BBC’s Radio 4 Today programme that there are “big questions” surrounding it, adding: “Absolutely he needs to consider that, if I’m frank.”
Mr Stride suggested there could be a way to remove Mr Bailey’s peerage if the Metropolitan Police come to a damning conclusion about the event in December 2020.
“There are then mechanisms involving the Forfeiture Committee that can lead to changes to honours that have been given in the past. But I don’t want to start pre-judging that process,” he told Today.