22nd April 2022
As the cliché of American political reporting has it: what did the president know, and when did he know it?
Applying this same sort of question to current British politics, it may not be important so much that the prime minister (says he) did not realise he had misled the house of commons on four occasions, but about when he realised he had done so.
Here we need to look at this Twitter thread by the estimable Alexander Horne:
However, the rule also has a second limb – which to my mind is equally important. Ministers are expected to correct “any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity.” Thus, it is not sufficient for the PM to say that he did not “knowingly” mislead Parliament. /4
— Alexander Horne (@AlexanderHorne1) April 22, 2022
It will be impossible for any sensible person to believe that the prime minister did not realise at the time he misled the commons that he was lying.
Of course he did.
But – let’s pretend that the prime minister inadvertently misled the house of commons and that he believed in the truth of what he was saying.
Let’s pretend.
At some point between then and this week, he would have come to the realisation that he had misled the house of commons.
That might be when he had subsequent advice and briefings in respect of his evidence to the Sue Gray investigation.
It might have been when he had sight of the Sue Gray report.
It might have been when he had subsequent advice and briefings in respect of his evidence to the metropolitan police investigation.
But it is unlikely that the first time he realised was when he received his (first) fixed penalty notice.
Now, let us turn to a curious form of words used by the prime minister last Tuesday in his statement to the house of commons (emphasis added):
“Let me also say—not by way of mitigation or excuse, but purely because it explains my previous words in this House—that it did not occur to me, then or subsequently, that a gathering in the Cabinet Room just before a vital meeting on covid strategy could amount to a breach of the rules.”
At the time, that the two words “or subsequently” struck me as odd and in need of explanation.
The words did not seem like mere surplusage.
And now, given Horne’s highly useful and informed thread, the meaning of those two words are apparent.
For it is one thing for the prime minister to claim that he did not realise at the time of his four statements that he was misleading the house of commons.
But it is quite another for him to also maintain that he corrected “any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity”.
At some point between the four misleading statements to the house of commons and last week’s statement, the prime minister became aware that those four statements were not true.
(Of course, he knew at the time he misled the house, but let us continue pretending for the sake of exposition and analysis.)
And if and when the Sue Gray report is published (and/or the briefing given to the prime minister for the metropolitan police inquiry is disclosed) it may become plain that the prime minister did not correct “any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity”.
Those two words “or subsequently” are going to be doing a lot of work.
For, if it can be shown that even if the prime minister did in good faith mislead the house of commons on each of those four occasions, he also needs to satisfy the privileges committee that he corrected “any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity”.
And it may be that the Sue Gray report – or other information – may show that is just not true.
Given the powers of the privileges committee, that will not be a comfortable position for the prime minister.
He should brace, brace.
**
Thank you for reading – and please support this blog so that it can carry on.
These free-to-read law and policy posts every week day take time and opportunity cost to put together, as do the comments to moderate.
So for more posts like this – both for the benefit of you and for the benefit of others – please do support through the Paypal box above, or become a Patreon subscriber.
***
Comments Policy
This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.
Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated and comments will not be published if irksome.
For more on this blog’s Comments Policy see this page.