You may have seen our coverage yesterday of Boris Johnson's evidence to MPs over whether he misled Parliament. But what did he say and how is he defending himself?

• Johnson accepts that he misled Parliament over lockdown parties at No 10 during the pandemic, but says that he did not do so intentionally or recklessly
• He also claims he corrected the record "at the earliest opportunity"
• He argues it was "reasonable" for him to rely on assurances from his advisers that the rules were followed
• Johnson rejects the committee's suggestion that it should have been "obvious" to him that Covid guidance was breached because he attended some of the gatherings
• If this was the case, Johnson argues it would also have been "obvious" to others but he says the vast majority of those who gave evidence to the committee did not believe they had broken the rules
• He also attempted to discredit the committee's interim report, describing it as "highly partisan"

Gem O'Reilly
Live reporter

Image source, James Greig

2020, the year that was ever changing. Our lives saw lockdowns from 26 March through to a relaxing of restrictions on 23 June and Eat Out to Help Out, external in August. Then on 31 October Boris Johnson announced a second national lockdown.

For many of us it was a strange time, filled with uncertainty around our health, our work and our families. But for those who lost relatives in the pandemic and couldn’t attend their funerals, it was devastating. Journalist, James Greig was one of those.

James lost his grandmother in April 2020, she was 97 years old.

His family decided against a virtual funeral and in the end, only five people were able to attend.

Speaking ahead of Johnson's appearance before the Committee of Privileges, James tells me that he found Partygate "annoying".

"The hypocrisy was frustrating when normal members of the public were breaking the rules and they were criminalised. People were getting fined thousands of pounds while our lawmakers were breaking rules.”

This excerpt from the committee's dossier of evidence shows a No 10 official messaging Jack Doyle with concerns about leaks of Boris Johnson having a "piss up" at a leaving drinks party which took place the night before Prince Philip's funeral.

Downing Street staff held a leaving party on 16 April 2021 for "Slacky", who is mentioned in the text, referring to James Slack, the former PM's head of communications.

You might remember this was the party where staff were reportedly sent to a nearby shop with a suitcase, which was brought back "filled with bottles of wine", as revealed by the Telegraph, external.

A No 10 spokesperson told the paper that Johnson wasn't at Downing Street that day.

In a couple of hours or so, Boris Johnson is due to appear in front of the Privileges Committee for questioning about his statements on the Partygate scandal.

Here are this morning's key developments:

• An evidence "bundle" was published by the committee earlier, acting as a reference material for the hearing at 14:00 - you can read it here, external
• The 110-page document includes screenshots from the UK government website, emails between No 10 officials, transcripts of speeches by Boris Johnson and photos of the gatherings
• It includes evidence from Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, who says he never advised Johnson that all Covid rules had been followed in No 10
• But an MP quoted in the evidence appears to contradict this, saying she was "90% sure" Case agreed with Johnson during a meeting that all rules had been obeyed
• One No 10 official said Boris Johnson had the opportunity to stop the lockdown partying in Downing Street, but allowed the culture to continue
• Martin Reynolds, another aide quoted in the evidence, says he advised Johnson to modify what he said at PMQs in December 2021 - taking out a line about Covid guidance being followed in Downing Street

We'll hear more of what Boris Johnson has to say later. He has accepted that he misled Parliament with his statements over lockdown-busting parties, but denies doing so deliberately.

Chris Mason
Political editor

Yes, today is about Boris Johnson.

But it is also about truth, lies (vehemently denied), believability and integrity.

In other words, the very building blocks upon which public debate is built.

It is also about where power lies.

The capacity of parliament to hold a former prime minister to account, with potential consequences for his reputation and his future.

So, yes there is theatre.

Yes, there is fascination - and irritation - in Boris Johnson.

But there is a bigger picture too.

Image source, .

We're now looking at submissions related to the leaving do the former prime minister attended in No 10 in November 2020 and the Christmas quiz at a party in Downing Street the following month.

If you can cast you mind as far back as November 2021, you might recall reading the Mirror's report about this. , external

The bundle of evidence released today by the Privileges Committee reveals an exchange between a No 10 official and Jack Doyle, the then No 10 press chief, about how to respond to questions from journalist Pippa Crerar, who then worked at The Mirror.

In the messages, Doyle asks the official to "pull together our best possible defence on this one".

The official then suggests: "'Covid rules have been followed at all times' or something".

In response, Doyle tells the official they have to say "something as robust as we can manage" and to "ignore the 'Xmas quiz' bullshit - who cares".

"Just be robust and they'll get bored," Doyle adds.

Let's unpack something mentioned by Nick in his post below, about the standout material in a fresh document of evidence from the Privileges Committee.

The evidence states that Boris Johnson agreed to delete a line he planned to say during an appearance at Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) on 8 December 2021, following a request by his aide Martin Reynolds.

Johnson had planned to state that all Covid guidance had been followed in Downing Street. In his written submission to the committee, Reynolds recalled asking Johnson about the line. He said his boss "did not welcome the interruption but told me that he had received reassurances that the comms event was within the rules."

Reynolds went on to write: "I accepted this but questioned whether it was realistic to argue that all guidance had been followed at all times, given the nature of the working environment in No 10. He agreed to delete the reference to guidance."

Crucially, though, Johnson went on to tell the Commons during PMQs: "The guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.”

Nick Eardley
Chief political correspondent

Image source, EPA

There are a few things in the document that stand out.

Firstly, key aide Martin Reynolds raised concerns about Johnson saying at Prime Minister's Questions that all rules and guidance were followed.

That claim was removed from Johnson's opening statement – but was included later.

Secondly, the top civil servant in the country makes clear he didn’t tell the then-PM that all rules and guidance had been followed.

Thirdly, director of comms Jack Doyle did say no rules had been broken, but distinguished that from guidance.

There are different claims from others.

But I think that’s going to be a key question later: did Boris Johnson ask all his aides? Did he probe enough? And what did they tell him?

Image source, PA Media

Boris Johnson has been snapped again - this time as he left his London home before being questioned by the Privileges Committee this afternoon.

Like other MPs today, he'll also be voting on the Windsor Framework - the government's post-Brexit trade plan for Northern Ireland - which he says he will vote against.

Image source, PA Media

Our chief political correspondent, Nick Eardley, has been outlining the evidence that published by the Privileges Committee this morning about a Downing Street garden party in May 2020.

Nick explains that Martin Reynolds - who was the prime minister's principal private secretary at the time - sent out an email to suggest having some drinks.

The publication details the extent to which the party was an organised event, with emails sent out to arrange putting some tables out.

We told you a short while ago that top civil servant Simon Case has denied giving any assurances to Boris Johnson that Covid rules or guidance were obeyed at all times in No 10.

But it's worth bringing you the evidence from Tory MP Sarah Dines, which features on the subsequent page of the Privileges Committee document that was published this morning. Her words appear to contradict Case.

In her written submission, Dines recalled a meeting with Johnson in the cabinet room, during which Johnson is said to have asked: "We did follow the rules at all times, didn't we?"

She claimed that more than one person in the room responded: "Yes, of course." She was not exactly sure who these people were, but that she was sure they were civil servants.

She then said she was "90% sure one of them was Simon Case".

Following our previous post about the Downing Street garden party in May 2020 - and claims that Boris Johnson was most definitely warned that it would be a big risk - here's a quick reminder of what Boris Johnson has said on the subject in his defence.

In his own evidence given to the Privileges Committee, he wrote the following:

In his submission, he also accused Cummings, his former chief adviser, of having an "animus" against him, arguing: "He cannot be treated as a credible witness".

A former private secretary of Boris Johnson’s has expressed regret at sending out a “bring your own booze” party invitation during lockdown.

In the bundle of written evidence released by the Privileges Committee this morning, Martin Reynolds said “with the benefit of hindsight, the language used was totally inappropriate and gave a misleading impression of the nature of the event”.

Reynolds quit as Johnson’s principal private secretary in February last year.

Boris Johnson had the opportunity to stop the lockdown partying in Downing Street, but allowed the culture to continue - according to one No 10 official.

In their evidence, the unnamed employee says that the route Johnson would take through Downing Street looked straight into the press room, so it would have been “impossible” not to know they were happening.

More now on the exchanges between Lee Cain, Dominic Cummings and Martin Reynolds over the May 2020 garden party - as captured in today's evidence from the Privileges Committee.

In his written evidence, Cain, who was then the No 10 communications director, says he received an email from Martin Reynolds, former principal private secretary to Boris Johnson, on 20 May 2020 proposing a gathering in the No 10 garden.

Cain says he raised concerns that the garden party in Downing Street would be a "communications risk". The newly-published document includes a screenshot of the email in which he did so.

His written evidence says he and Reynolds then discussed whether to go ahead with the event. He says Reynolds said he would speak to the prime minister but "he was sure it was okay".

Cain says Dominic Cummings, Johnson's chief adviser at the time, agreed the gathering "should not take place" and pledged to "raise the issue with Martin and the prime minister". Cain writes Cummings later confirmed that he'd "informed the PM" but they had argued about other issues and "he was clearly very frustrated".

Cain says he does not recall if he "personally had a conversation with the PM" about the party. However he says it would have been "highly unusual" for him not to raise serious communications risk with the PM directly.

In this excerpt from the evidence released a short while ago, cabinet secretary and top civil servant Simon Case denies that he gave any assurances to the then prime minister that Covid rules or Covid guidance was obeyed at all times in No 10.

Case was appointed cabinet secretary in September 2020 and before that was permanent secretary at No 10, focusing on the Covid response.

Image source, Privileges Committee

According to the evidence released this morning, Johnson didn’t see meeting in the No 10 garden with a bottle of wine as a breach of the rules.

This came out in undated evidence he gave to Sue Gray's inquiry about lockdown parties in Downing Street.

He said: "I would encourage people into the garden for the pandemic.

"I felt it would be wrong to stop people going into the garden.

"It is democratic and conducive to staff wellbeing - where to go to draw the line?

This is the sort of material we're seeing in that 110-page document freshly published by the Privileges Committee.

It shows a screengrab - with redactions - of an email exchange between Martin Reynolds, who was Boris Johnson's principal private secretary, and the then Downing Street communications director Lee Cain.

It shows Cain advising his colleague that a drinks event in the garden of No 10 on 20 May 2020 was a "comms risk". We already saw some of this communication when Sue Gray published her report last year.

The document however also quotes Cain as saying he went on to have a conversation with Johnson's then chief adviser Dominic Cummings, who went on to speak to the then-PM about the risk. We'll bring you more on that shortly.

Image source, Privileges Committee

James FitzGerald
Live reporter

Our team is looking through this document carefully to see if there are any new bombshells - or at least more detailed evidence that we hadn't seen before - ahead of Boris Johnson's grilling by the Privileges Committee this afternoon.

There's no summary or overarching "narrative" to the information we're looking at. The paper effectively functions as reference material for the hearing at 14:00, and we're expecting the panel of MPs to make reference to specific page numbers as they question him.

So, if you're planning to follow Johnson's appearance, this is the key thing to have on hand.

A reminder that you can join us in accessing it here, external.

Here's a very broad overview of the 110 pages of evidence published by the Privileges Committee just now:

• The document includes multiple references to Covid guidance at the time of alleged rule-breaking - cross-referencing what Johnson said and did
• It's full of screenshots from the UK government website with relevant guidance at different points of the pandemic period
• It includes photos of the gatherings Johnson attended with dates
• There is evidence of Johnson's acknowledgement of the guidance set at the time
• There are extracts of evidence provided by officials in No 10 to the committee - and emails between staff about gatherings
• Also included are extracts of Johnson's speeches to the public around regulations and transcripts from the Commons showing exactly what was said and when