Page:Fifth Report - Matter referred on 21 April 2022 (conduct of Rt Hon Boris Johnson).pdf/53

 that no Covid rules were broken. That is what I have been repeatedly assured.” On two further occasions in this session of PMQs Mr Johnson iterated that he had been “repeatedly assured that the rules were not broken”. Asked whether there had been a party in No. 10 on 13 November 2020, Mr Johnson replied, “No, but I am sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times”.

173. It is not in dispute that Mr Johnson received assurances in advance of PMQs on 1 December 2021 from Jack Doyle, Director of Communications at No. 10, and in advance of PMQs on 8 December 2021 from James Slack, Mr Doyle’s predecessor in that role. In addition to Mr Johnson’s evidence, Mr Doyle and Mr Slack in their evidence confirm this.

174. In addition, Sarah Dines MP and Andrew Griffith MP, Mr Johnson’s PPSs at the time, stated in evidence that assurances were given to Mr Johnson by officials at one of the ‘morning meetings’ in advance of PMQs. However, neither Ms Dines nor Mr Griffith can remember the exact date of the meeting or meetings, nor can they specify which individuals gave these assurances, other than that Ms Dines is “about 90% sure” that one of them was Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, and each remembers the content of the assurances differently. Mr Case himself has given evidence that he did not give an assurance to Mr Johnson and does not know that anyone else did. Mr Johnson himself told us that he does not claim Mr Case gave him an assurance.

175. When asked in oral evidence to identify any official who had given him an assurance at one of the morning meetings, Mr Johnson was unable to do so other than to undertake to send the Committee details of “one adviser that I can think of who has asked not to be named”. His lawyers later wrote to us that “[o]n reflection, Mr Johnson is still not sure of these matters and does not wish to speculate”. On this matter we conclude that either Mr Johnson was being deliberately evasive with the Committee or that he has deliberately failed to abide by his undertaking to be candid about an important issue of fact.

176. The only assurances that can therefore be said with certainty to have been given to Mr Johnson were those from his then Director of Communications, Mr Doyle, and his previous Director of Communications, James Slack. Both men were concerned chiefly with media-handling and both were, at different times, political appointees of Mr Johnson in that role. Mr Slack had previously been appointed Downing Street Press Secretary by Theresa May, but his overall career arc–having been political editor of the Daily Mail before coming to work for the Government, and having moved on subsequently to work as a political correspondent on The Sun–suggests that, as with Mr Doyle, it would be incorrect to see his role at No. 10 as that of a politically neutral career civil servant, or someone with the necessary competence to judge on matters of Covid compliance.

177. It was understandable, given the timing, that Mr Johnson’s initial comments in the House on 1 December 2021 were heavily reliant on the advice of his media team at No. 10. However, by the time of the next PMQs on 8 December, following a period in which the issue of gatherings at No. 10 had continued to dominate the news media, he had had a