We've just heard that the by-elections to replace Boris Johnson in Uxbridge and South Ruislip and Nigel Adams in Selby and Ainsty will be held on 20 July.

Here’s a bit more detail of one of the examples the committee was looking at from our political correspondent Jonathan Blake, explaining MPs' conclusions on Johnson's birthday gathering.

The committee says it found the former PM's explanation of why he thought the gathering – where he claimed he was “ambushed by cake” - was within the rules “unconvincing”.

See more from Jonathan below.

Image source, PA Media

The Privileges Committee has been looking into whether Boris Johnson knowingly misled Parliament when he denied that events held in Downing Street during the pandemic had breached lockdown rules.

In evidence given in March, the former prime minister admitted his statements had misled Parliament but denied doing so on purpose.

He said social distancing had not been "perfect" at the gatherings but that the guidelines, as he understood them, were followed at all times.

The committee said Johnson deliberately misled the Commons about what he knew about gatherings.

Image source, PA Media

Labour MP Sir Chris Bryant has told BBC Radio 4’s the World at One programme that he’s “slightly surprised everyone’s decided to put members of the committee on trial” and that doubters should “read the report…there’s no grand oratory, it’s not showing off”.

He says it clearly lays out “14 different ways that Boris Johnson lied to Parliament, not just recklessly but deliberately and intentionally”.

Sir Chris recused himself from chairing the Privileges Committee inquiry into Boris Johnson because of his previous outspoken criticism of the former prime minister in relation to Partygate.

Referring to attacks on the suitability of chair Harriet Harman and Sir Bernard Jenkin to sit on the committee, Sir Chris pointed out the committee’s verdict was “unanimous…even if you were to take those two members out of the committee you would still have all of the other five coming to the same conclusions”.

He also pointed out that Johnson was prime minister when it was agreed for the committee to be set up with Harman as chair.

"We shouldn’t fall for the Trump-like behaviour of Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson which is just to throw out an awful lot of chaff so people don’t read the report which shows Boris Johnson is a liar, he’s a scoundrel, he’s behaved appallingly." he said.

How much was Boris Johnson’s legal bill?published at 14:40 British Summer Time 15 June 2023

14:40 BST 15 June 2023

Image source, PA Media

The lawyers who worked for Boris Johnson during the committee’s investigation cost £245,000 - which has been funded by taxpayers.

The use of publicly-funded legal support was defended by a senior civil servant who said other former ministers had also received legal support during public inquiries.

He gave the Grenfell fire and infected blood products inquiries as examples of precedents, but provided no examples of inquiries carried out by MPs.

Labour’s Thangam Debbonaire, the shadow leader of the Commons, said they should make sure that Boris Johnson “pays back every penny” of the bill.

Image source, EPA

Conservative MP Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg was in Boris Johnson's cabinet, and was given a knighthood in the former prime minister's resignation honours list last week.

He has told BBC Radio 4's World at One programme a Commons motion backing the Committee report would be passed next Monday, with the support of opposition parties and a "small number of Tory Boris-haters".

But Rees-Mogg, a staunch ally of Johnson, claims the report is "fundamentally flawed", and the real problem is that Labour's Harriet Harman chaired the inquiry and drafted the report, despite having tweeted "aggressively" - he says - against the then-PM in April 2022.

Defending Johnson and others who have attacked the report and the inquiry process, Rees-Mogg argued there was nothing wrong with criticising Parliament, which made mistakes and was "not perfect".

A former attorney general and Conservative MP has rejected Johnson's claims that the Privileges Committee was biased against him, saying there's no evidence the cross-party group "had it in" for the former PM.

Dominic Grieve said the sanctions the committee recommended for Johnson were "a result of his own actions", adding "the history of his lying is just epic".

Andrew Humphrey
Live reporter

As we head into the afternoon and reaction to the stinging criticism of Boris Johnson by the Privileges Committee continues to pour in, I'm taking over editing of our live coverage.

If you're just joining us, here's a quick recap to bring you up to speed:

• Boris Johnson was found to have deliberately misled Parliament in a report by a committee of MPs
• The committee says it would have recommended suspending Johnson from the House of Commons for 90 days
• He was also found to have been complicit in a "campaign of abuse" against MPs investigating him

• Johnson has dismissed the report as a "political assassination" and his supporters have criticised the inquiry and the committee chair Harriet Harman
• PM Rishi Sunak has so far avoided giving his thoughts on the report and the fallout

More support for Boris Johnson, this time from Conservative MP Sir James Duddridge, who has insisted history will treat him more kindly than the Privileges Committee.

The MP for Rochford and Southend East suggested the findings were an attempt to humiliate the former PM.

He tweeted, external: "Why not go the full way, put Boris, in the stocks and providing rotten food to throw rotten food at him.

"Moving him around the marginals, so the country could share in the humiliation.

"History will hold Boris in higher regard than this committee. I thank him for his service."

Earlier today, a spokesman for the Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK group said the report's findings came as no surprise.

Speaking to the BBC about the parties Johnson attended in lockdown, David Garfinkel said: "His justification was that he had to be at a leaving event. Why was that so important when people were dying of Covid and burying their loved ones?

"He was in a leaving event for 25 minutes. It took less than three minutes for them to switch off the ventilator for my dad when he died. He didn't need to be at leaving events.

"I think for bereaved families... we followed all the rules. We had to live through the consequences of not being with our loved ones at the end, when they passed away, and we'll have to live with that for the rest of our lives."

Yasmin Rufo
Reporting from Uxbridge

I’ve been speaking to people in Uxbridge and South Ruislip who have been represented by Boris Johnson as an MP since 2015, and the general feeling here is of apathy.

One of his constituents, Shaun Burke, tells me that “he doesn’t care anymore”.

“It’s been months of scandals, lies and inquiries. He’s doing everything other than focusing on helping his constituents with real problems.”

However, many people in Uxbridge are telling me that he’s been a good MP.

Lesley Thompson said Johnson is a patron of the charity shop she works in and he’s “been very involved and supportive”.

Asked about her thoughts on the report, she said: “It doesn’t surprise me but I can imagine it was a difficult time. Lots of people in government made mistakes then - it’s not right just to target him.”

Nick Eardley
Chief political correspondent

Image source, Reuters

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak doesn’t want to discuss this report in any detail.

He did an interview this morning – but that was before the report was made public. Asked several times, Sunak declined to comment because he hadn’t seen it – and we don’t expect to hear from him later.

Part of the reason are the splits over Boris Johnson in the Conservative Party.

Many MPs want to see the back of Johnson - but some are already speaking up to say they think the punishment went too far. Some are preparing to vote against the report’s findings in Parliament on Monday.

At the daily lobby briefing for journalists, the PM’s spokesman would not confirm if Sunak would take part in the vote.

So far, many Conservative MPs have held back from commenting publicly on the committee's findings - though, like Michael Fabricant in our previous post, allies of the former PM have been quick to criticise them.

Former cabinet minister, Sir Simon Clarke, who was given a knighthood in his resignation honours list, said he was "amazed at the harshness of today’s report".

"I believed Boris before and I believe him today. This punishment is absolutely extraordinary to the point of sheer vindictiveness, and I will vote against this report on Monday," he tweeted, external.

Bassetlaw MP Brendan Clarke-Smith, said he was "appalled", external by the "spiteful, vindictive and overreaching conclusions".

"I’m backing fairness and justice - not kangaroo courts," he added.

Education Secretary Gillian Keegan said Johnson had “made his decision, he made the decision to resign” after he saw the report last week, while adding: “Boris has achieved an awful lot."

Downing Street would not be drawn on the report, saying: "In line with proper process, it's now for the House and MPs to consider its findings."

No 10 brushed off a Liberal Democrat call for Johnson to be stripped of his funding to continue running an office as a former PM.

It also rejected suggestions that his honours list should be rescinded, saying: "When it comes to honours, that's a long-standing convention, the prime minister has abided by convention, that's not going to change."

Boris Johnson ally Michael Fabricant has queried whether committee members acted fairly as they took evidence from the former prime minister.

The Conservative MP for Lichfield said some MPs were "pulling faces and looking skywards".

Click below to hear more of his thoughts.

In 2020, Leshie Chandrapala's father Ranjith, 64, was due to retire from his job as a bus driver.

On 24 April that year he developed Covid-19 symptoms, and was in hospital six days later. Three days after that, Ranjith died.

His daughter, Leshie, from Ealing, is angry at the former prime minister.

"It really is our nation's great shame that Boris Johnson was our prime minister. We wouldn't have had these outcomes with a different leader."

Leshie, 43, says Johnson shouldn't be allowed to stand for public office again.

"This is the moment that he should take responsibility. Now is the time to be contrite. He owes the nation and especially the bereaved a huge apology."

Leshie couldn't visit her father in hospital due to the restrictions in place at the time. The day before he died, she watched him over Facetime as he lay attached to a ventilator.

"My dad was the love of my life. I will always be traumatised by not being able to be there for him."

Image source, The Scottish Parliament

Speaking at First Minister's Questions, Humza Yousaf has accused Johnson of betraying the people of Scotland and the UK.

"When they of course couldn’t visit a loved one, when they couldn’t attend funerals of a loved one, Boris Johnson was breaking the rules and having parties at Number 10."

Chris Mason
Political editor

The Privileges Committee substantially increased the suggested sanction against Boris Johnson in light of his behaviour in recent days.

Its report says at this stage last week the committee “had provisionally concluded” that Johnson deliberately misled the House and should be sanctioned for it by being suspended for a period that could lead to a by-election – ie 10 days or more.

But, the MPs write, “in light of Mr Johnson’s conduct in committing a further contempt on 9 June 2023, the Committee now considers that if Mr Johnson were still a Member he should be suspended from the service of the House for 90 days for repeated contempts and for seeking to undermine the parliamentary process.”

In other words, his repeated public statements, including labelling the committee a “kangaroo court” increased the severity of their proposed punishment.

The report says this statement by Johnson last week was a “very serious contempt” because he breached confidentiality and knew the committee couldn’t respond publicly.

I understand the increase in the proposed sanction was dramatic – the sanction would have been nowhere near 90 days had Johnson said nothing publicly until now.

While this is rather academic given Boris Johnson’s voluntary departure from the Commons, it is a measure of the anger felt by the committee at how the former prime minister has chosen to behave since Friday.

How long have previous suspensions been?published at 12:27 British Summer Time 15 June 2023

12:27 BST 15 June 2023

The committee said that if Boris Johnson had not resigned it would have recommended a 90-day suspension.

That would have been a very long suspension by historical standards.

The House of Commons has published a list, external of suspensions since 1949.

The only suspension longer than 90 days was for Labour’s Keith Vaz. He was suspended for six months in 2019, after a committee found "compelling evidence" he offered to pay for a class A drug and had paid-for sex in August 2016.

After that, the longest suspension was six weeks for Conservative MP Rob Roberts, who was found to have sexually harassed a member of his staff.

The DUP’s Ian Paisley was suspended for 30 sitting days for failing to declare two holidays paid for by the Sri Lankan government and lobbying on its behalf.

Image source, PA Media

More Labour reaction to the report now, from Chris Bryant - who chairs the Commons Privileges Committee but recused himself from the inquiry into Partygate.

He criticised Mr Johnson's allies for their "confected anger".

“Finally, justice for all those people who lost their livelihoods, because they stuck by the rules during the lockdowns and couldn’t hold their loved ones hands as they died, while Johnson and his cronies partied”, he told BBC Wales.

Bryant added: “He lied. Repeatedly lied. And he did so knowingly, he’s a scoundrel, and I hope we never see him back in politics again.”

So far, there has been no comment from Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, though his official spokesman has suggested he may not have yet had a chance to read the Privileges Committee report.

"I'm not aware he has," the spokesman says, adding that Sunak has been with police on an immigration raid this morning.

"This is the work of a parliamentary committee the House voted on to carry out their work," the spokesman says.

"Its conclusions and recommendations are for the committee and its members have fulfilled their mandate from the House.

"In line with proper process it's now for the House and MPs to consider its findings."

Image source, PA Media