Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Key Partygate Inquiry Update Finds Failures Of Leadership; U.N. Security Council Meets To Discuss Russia-Ukraine Tension; U.K. P.M. Faces Parliament After Partygate Details Released. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired January 31, 2022 - 10:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:00:27]
ANNOUNCER: Live from CNN, Abu Dhabi, this is CONNECT THE WORLD with Becky Anderson.
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Well, I'm Becky Anderson. In this hour, we'll bring you two live events on what are two extremely important
stories. In New York, the U.N. Security Council meeting, as we speak with a focus on the current tensions between Russia and Ukraine. We will get you
to New York shortly.
First, though, to London. Difficult to justify failures of leadership. That's just some of what is in a key report into the so called Partygate
scandal rocking Downing Street. A reminder. This is a report into alleged lockdown parties at number 10. The home of the Prime Minister. Well, Boris
Johnson, the British Prime Minister, as well as the U.K. and the rest of us now, getting a look at that report and it is strong stuff.
For instance, this quote, at least some of the gatherings in question represent a serious failure to observe not just see high standards expected
of those working at the heart of government, but also of the standards expected of the entire British population at the time. Mr. Johnson getting
ready to brief Parliament about this in about 25 minutes time and we are monitoring what is going on inside the house.
We will get you to that statement as soon as he stands up in the house. Before that, CNN Salma Abdelaziz standing by for us at Downing Street
joining us live there. Is this the full report? Let's be quite clear. And just take us through what we know at this point.
SALMA ABDELAZIZ, CNN REPORTER: Becky, this is quite extraordinary, because this was supposed to be the soft landing. Let's start at the beginning.
There's two investigations going on right now into allegations of multiple parties occurring during the course of lockdown, during the course of two
years right behind me here under the Prime Minister's roof. What we just have right now is the report from Gray.
That's the investigation that's been going on for weeks. But Gray was asked to keep the most serious details, the most flagrant possible violations out
of this report because the second report is being conducted by the police. And the police may find that criminal offenses were committed if COVID
rules were broken at these gatherings. So this report that was released today, again, was supposed to be the soft report, the one without any
teeth.
The one that the Prime Minister might be able to get away with. But you read this, Becky, and there is nothing soft about this. One part of the
report says excessive consumption of alcohol at the workplace should not happen. I mean, it's -- it reads like Sue Gray is scolding the government.
But it doesn't hold the high standards that the British public accepts. That there were serious failures of leadership.
I mean, the report goes on and on to speak about not just a culture of drinking and partying. Sorry, I'm just going to turn around behind me here
because I think that Prime Minister Boris Johnson is getting into the car right now to go to Parliament. We can have quite the task ahead of him once
he gets there because he's going to really have to justify the unjustifiable here. This is a report that shows this government did not
just have a culture of drinking and partying under lockdown.
It apparently had a culture that did not allow fellow employees to speak out. There's a part of the report that says some staff wanted to raise
concerns but felt unable to do so. It paints the picture of a government that quite honestly doesn't take the job of leadership, doesn't take the
seriousness of the Office of the Prime Minister, as it should during the time of pandemic. The only saving grace in here, Becky is, again, the
details that were kept out means that there's no name details.
There's no specifics. There's nothing that really improve input -- incriminates rather, Prime Minister Boris Johnson directly but it paints a
picture of a government under his leadership that absolutely does not meet the standards that would be expected, Becky.
ANDERSON: What are the consequences here?
ABDELAZIZ: The consequences here are huge. You already have largely a British public that has turned against the Prime Minister. The latest
polling shows that two-thirds of adults in this country want the Prime Minister to resign. And that's not just because of the allegations of
partying here, Becky, that's because there's an overwhelming feeling that the Prime Minister lied to the country and he lied badly.
[10:05:00]
ABDELAZIZ: He took people for, fools he continuously denied, denied, denied even in the face of pictures and videos and multiple media reports. So it's
a prime minister who's truly truly lost public trust. But again, it's not going to be the public that's going to push the Prime Minister out. This is
all about his party, the Conservative Party, whether or not they see that this is still the Prime Minister to support.
Whether or not they still see this as a man who's fit for leadership. Because if you read these details about this government in this report, you
would think well, this is a prime minister overseeing a government that is being accused of not holding the standards of office, of disregarding the
British public, of excessively consuming alcohol at the workplace under his roof. So you would think, how does the Prime Minister justify that to his
party?
How could they continue to see him as the man who is fit for the job who's right to lead this country and you still have more coming here, Becky. You
have that police probe. That's still coming. And that in that public anger, Becky, it just continues to rise. The more and more people find out about
this because again, it's about that sacrifice that people made over and over and over again.
Not being able to be with their loved ones. I mean, we were speaking last week with families who weren't able to have funerals, weren't able to say
goodbye to their loved ones who are dying of COVID-19 because they followed the rules. It's simply unforgivable for them, Becky. Simply unforgettable.
And that's what the Conservative Party is going to deal with that anger really deep rooted here.
ANDERSON: Well, certainly the -- certainly the opposition believe it is time that he went. You are right to point out the polls suggest the British
public believe it is time that he went whether his party believe the same is still an open question. At this point we will though hear more from the
British Prime Minister at the bottom of this hour in Abu Dhabi. It is just after five past 7:00. We will listen to a mid-afternoon statement from the
British Prime Minister when he stands up in the House of Commons in about 25 minutes time.
All right. Well, this hour as well, the United Nations Security Council set to meet on Russia's troop buildup along the Ukrainian border. The Russian
ambassador is speaking now at the U.N. Let's listen in.
VASSILY NEBENZIA, RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS (through translator): This is not only unacceptable interference in the domestic
affairs of our states (INAUDIBLE) attempts to mislead the international community on the situation in the region, and also the reason for the
current global tensions. We are being asked to convene a skewed council meeting on unfounded accusations that we have refuted frequently.
Furthermore, we have -- we frequently refuted, often consistently refuted. Furthermore, the open format for discussion proposed by the U.S. on this
extremely sensitive topic is making this a classic example of megaphone diplomacy and working in public -- for the public, rather. There's a need
to review this and we've all stated this frequently. We do not think that this will help to bring this council together.
Rather we fully understand that the desire of our American colleagues to whip up hysterics, regarding its own situations or regarding the proposed -
- or the so-called Russian Act of Aggression is something that they want to do including within the Security Council from this roster. Security council
colleagues are being put in an extremely difficult position.
This is a great harm this hysterical to Ukraine itself. The president of which, as we've seen, has asked Western countries just a few days ago not
to whip up hysterics regarding the deployment of Russian troops near the border since this all harms the Ukrainian economy. We do not need this
panic said President Zelensky rather we need it -- rather, this is needed for those people who believe in the myth of the Russian aggression.
The Ukrainian officials have talked about a lack of threat from Russia. In particular this pertains to the Minister of Defense, Mister -- the
president himself, Mr. Zelensky who have said themselves that they do not see in this activity that we are being talked about today as a threat. We
are prepared to (INAUDIBLE) best to you later. We would urge all colleagues to not use the rostrum of the security council to push forward the
propaganda and beliefs of our colleagues.
[02:10:09]
NEBENZIA: We would also like to remind members of the Security Council that the Russian delegation in December announced its plans to have an annual
discussion of the situation in Ukraine. During our Presidency of the Council that starts from tomorrow. The 7th anniversary of the adoption of
the package of measures of the Minsk agreements will be an excellent opportunity for us to constructively show the Security Council's commitment
to 2022 (INAUDIBLE)
That is the international basis for Ukrainian settlement. The event planned for -- it is planned for the 17th of February. If our American colleagues
really need to say in public any additional information about this, they can fully do this during the planned meeting in February. We would urge all
sensible members of the council not to support this provocative proposal and treat the U.N. Charter with respect. Thank you.
MONA JUUL, PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL: The Representative of the Russian Federation, I give the floor to the representative of the U.S.
LINDA THOMAS-GREENFIELD, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: Thank you very much, Madam President. As colleague stated, we have called for this
meeting. And we've called for this meeting because of what we have all witnessed over the course of the past few months, in terms of the actions
of the Russian Federation, on the territory of -- on the border with Ukraine.
They indicate that it's in their own territory, but it is also very close to their neighbor's border. It's a neighbor that has been invaded already
before. It's a neighbor that has Russian troops occupying their territory. We have had numerous meetings, over 100 meetings over the course of the
past few weeks both with Russian officials and in consultations with our European and Ukrainian colleagues.
All of these meetings have been in private. We think it's now time to have a meeting in public and have this discuss in a public forum. We have worked
with the Ukrainians at their request, to provide assistance to them so that they can prepare for what they see as inevitable, including having provided
$200 million in assistance in recent weeks. And over $5 billion in assistance since 2014. And that is so that they can be prepared.
You've heard from our Russian colleagues that we're calling for this meeting to make you all feel uncomfortable. Imagine how uncomfortable you
would be if you had 100,000 troops sitting on your border in the way that these troops are sitting on the border with Ukraine. For us, this is about
peace and security. It's about honoring the U.N. Charter that calls on us as members of the Security Council to protect peace and security.
So this is not about antics. It's not about rhetoric. It's not about U.S. and Russia. What this is about is the peace and security of one of our
member states. Thank you very much, Madam President.
JUUL: I think the representative of the United States. In you -- of the request and the comments made by members of the Security Council, I intend
to put the provisional agenda to a vote. Accordingly, I shall put it to the world now. Will those in favor of the adoption of the provisional agenda
please raise their hand. That was against. Absentia.
[10:15:10]
JUUL: The result of the voting is as follows. Tens votes in favor, two votes against, three abstentions. The provisional agenda has been adopted.
In accordance with rule 37 of the council provisional Rules of Procedure, I invite the representative of Belarus, Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine to
participate in this meeting. It is so decided. In accordance with rule 39 of the Council's Provisional Rules of Procedure, I invite Miss Rosemary
DiCarlo Under Secretary General for Political and Peacebuilding affairs to proceed to participate in the meeting.
It is so decided the Security Council will now be given its consideration of item two of the agenda. Recording the Security Council latest Note 507
on its working methods. I wish to encourage all speakers, both members and non members of the council to deliver the statements in five minutes or
less. Note 507 also encouraged prefers to be succinct and to focus on key issues.
In this period refers are further encouraged to limit their initial remarks to seven to 10 minutes. Everyone is also encouraged to wear a mask at all
times, including while they're delivering remarks. I now give the floor to Rosemary DiCarlo.
ROSEMARY DICARLO, UNITED NATIONS UNDER-SECRETARY-GENERAL FOR POLITICAL AND PEACEBUILDING AFFAIRS: Thank you, Madam President. The United Nations is
closely following the ongoing diplomatic discussions on the future of European peace and security architecture. Among representatives of the
Russian Federation, the United States, members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the European Union, and the organization for the Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
We hope the outcome of these talks will strengthen peace and security in Europe, including for Ukraine. Madam President, although not an active
participant in these exchanges. In all his contacts, the Secretary General has unequivocally supported the ongoing diplomatic efforts at all levels.
Still, we remain greatly concerned that even as these efforts continue, tensions keep escalating and a dangerous military buildup is in the heart
of Europe.
It is reported that over 100,000 troops and heavy weaponry from the Russian Federation are positioned along the border with Ukraine. Unspecified
numbers of Russian troops and weaponry are also reportedly being deployed to Belarus ahead of large scale joint military exercises in February, on
the borders with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states. NATO members are reportedly planning additional deployments in Eastern European member
states.
And NATO has advised that 1500 troops are now on high alert. Accusations and recriminations among the various actors involved in the ongoing
discussions have created uncertainty and apprehension for many that a military confrontation is impending. Madam President, the Secretary journal
has made clear that there can be no alternative to diplomacy and dialogue to deal with the complex, long-standing security concerns and threat
perceptions that have been raised.
He has expressed his strong belief that there should not be any military intervention in this context, and that diplomacy should prevail. He's been
equally explicit that any such intervention by one country in another would be against international law and the United Nations Charter. His
expectation is that we all contribute to avoiding confrontation and to creating conditions for diplomatic solution to endless crisis.
We therefore welcome the steps taken so far, by all involved to maintain dialogue. We urge and expect all actors to build on these efforts and to
remain focused on pursuing diplomatic solutions by engaging in good faith. We further urge all actors to refrain from provocative rhetoric and actions
to maximize the chance for diplomacy to succeed.
[10:20:07]
DICARLO: Achieving mutual understanding and lasting mutually acceptable arrangements is the best way to safeguard regional and international peace
and security in the interest of all. Madam President, let me repeat the full commitment of the United Nations to the sovereignty, political
independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders in accordance with relevant General
Assembly resolutions.
It is important, especially at this time, with the international community to intensify its support for the efforts of the Normandy for and of the
OSC-led Trilateral Contact Group to ensure the implementation of the Minsk agreements endorsed by this council in its resolution 2202. We welcome the
recent meeting of the Normandy for advisors in Paris, and their agreement to reconvene shortly in Berlin as another sign that diplomacy can work.
We commend these efforts and those of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission. Likewise, United Nations agencies in Ukraine are committed to continue
delivering on their mandates, in accordance with the humanitarian principles of neutrality, impartiality, humanity and independence. Safe,
unimpeded humanitarian access must be respected under any circumstances to provide support to the 2.9 million people in need of assistance with the
majority and non-government-controlled areas.
In this regard, I encourage member states to contribute to the humanitarian response plan. Further, the U.N. human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine
continues to document civilian casualties in the conflict area. Madam President, no one is watching the current diplomatic efforts more than the
people of Ukraine. They have endured a conflict that has taken over 14,000 lives since 2014. And that tragically is still far from resolution.
It is painfully obvious that any new escalation in or around Ukraine would mean more needless killing and destruction. Whatever one's position
regarding the current situation, or the status of -- the status quo in eastern Ukraine, this should be inconceivable. The fact that it is not
should give us pause. The principles enshrined in the U.N. Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, and multiple other commitments to safeguard regional
and international peace and security are crystal clear.
Any escalation or new conflict would deal another serious blow to the architecture, so painstakingly built up over the last 75 years to maintain
international peace and security, just when we need it most. Once again, I'd like to stress the Secretary General's appeal to all concerned to take
immediate steps to deescalate tensions and continue on the diplomatic path. The United Nations stands ready to support -- to support all efforts to
that end. Thank you, Madam President.
JUUL: I thank Rosemary DiCarlo for her briefing. I now give the floor to those council members who wish to make statements. I give the floor to the
representative of the United States.
THOMAS-GREENFIELD: Thank you, Madam President. And thank you, Undersecretary General DiCarlo for your briefing. Colleagues, the situation
we're facing in Europe is urgent and dangerous. And the stakes for Ukraine and for every U.N. member state could not be higher. Russia's actions
strike at the very heart of the U.N. Charter. This is as clear and consequential a threat to peace and security as anyone can imagine.
In the wake of World War II, the Council was formed to address precisely the kind of threat that Ukraine now faces. As Article 39 says, the Security
Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace. Thus, our charge is not only to address conflicts after they occur, but also to
prevent them from happening in the first place. This is why today's meeting is so crucial.
Russia's aggression today not only threaten Ukraine, it also threatens Europe.
[10:25:05]
THOMAS-GREENFIELD: It threatens the international order this body is charged with upholding. An order that if it stands for anything, stands for
the principle that one country cannot simply redraw another country's borders by force, or make another country's people live under a government
they did not choose. We continue to hope Russia chooses the path of diplomacy over the path of conflict in Ukraine. But we cannot just wait and
see.
It is crucial that this council address the risk that their aggressive and destabilizing behavior poses across the globe. First, let's be clear about
the facts. Russia has assembled a massive military force of more than 100,000 troops along the Ukraine's -- along Ukraine's border. These are
combat forces and Special Forces prepared to conduct offensive actions into Ukraine. This is the largest -- this is the largest, hear me clearly,
mobilization of troops in Europe in decades.
And as we speak, Russia is sending even more forces and arms to join them. Russia has already used more than 2000 rail cars to move troops and
weaponry from across Russia to the Ukrainian border. Russia has also moved nearly 5000 troops into Belarus with short-range ballistic missiles,
Special Forces and anti-aircraft batteries. We've seen evidence that Russia intends to expand that presence to more than 30,000 troops near the
Belarus-Ukraine border.
Less than two hours north of Kiev by early February. In addition to military activity, we've also seen a dramatic spike in cyber attacks on
Ukraine in recent weeks. Russian military and intelligence services are spreading disinformation through state-owned media and proxy sites. And
they are attempting without any factual basis to paint Ukraine and Western countries as the aggressors to fabricate a pretext for attack.
Russia's military buildup on the border has been paired with extensive new demands and aggressive rhetoric. This is an escalation and a pattern of
aggression that we've seen from Russia again and again. In 2014, Russia illegally invaded and seized Crimea. In 2008, Russia invaded Georgia.
Russian troops are currently refusing to depart Moldova despite the wishes of the Moldovan people and their democratically-elected government.
And in the Donbass region of Ukraine, Russian-backed separatists continued to foment and ignore violence toward the Ukrainian people. Recently, Russia
has threatened to take military action should its demands not be met. If Russia further invades Ukraine, none of us will be able to say we didn't
see it coming, and the consequences will be horrific. Which is why this meeting is so important today.
Already Russians -- Russia's war in eastern Ukraine has killed more than 14,000 Ukrainians. Nearly three million Ukrainians, half of whom are
elderly people and children need food, shelter and life-saving assistance. Devastating as the situation is, it would pale in comparison to the
humanitarian impact of the full-scale land invasion Russia is currently planning in Ukraine.
Over the years, Russian leaders have claimed that Ukraine is not a real country.
And question its right to self-determination. So let's be clear. Ukraine is a U.N. member state that recently celebrated three decades of independence.
It has a proud people and a rich culture. Ukraine is a sovereign country and a sovereign people entitled to determine their own future without the
threat of force. This is not just the conviction that Ukrainians hold. It is a right, enshrined by the U.N. Charter.
A right that Russia and every other member of this institution has freely committed to upholding. Our international order is not perfect. But it is
grounded in respect for people and countries to govern themselves, to defend themselves and to associate with whom they choose.
[10:30:02]
THOMAS-GREENFIELD: All countries have a stake in defending and preserving these principles and nothing could be more fundamental. What would it mean
for the world if former empires had licensed to start reclaiming territory by force. This would set us down a dangerous path. Russia could, of course,
choose a different path.
The path of diplomacy. In recent weeks, the United States along with our European allies and partners, and other nations around the globe, concerned
by Russia's threat to Ukraine have continued to do everything we can to resolve this crisis peacefully.
In all of these talks, our messages have been clear and consistent. We seek the path of peace, we seek the path of dialogue. We do not want
confrontation. But we will be decisive, swift and united should Russia further invade Ukraine. We continue to believe there is a diplomatic path
out of the crisis caused by Russia's unprovoked military buildup. We're working to pursue diplomacy in every possible venue.
But we also know that diplomacy will not succeed in an atmosphere of threat, and military escalation. That is why we have brought this situation
before the Security Council today. The United States has been clear. If this is truly about Russia's security concerns in Europe, we're offering
them an opportunity to address these concerns at the negotiating table. The test of Russia's good faith in the coming days and weeks is whether they
will come to that table and stay at that table until we reach an understanding. If they refuse to do so the world will know --
ANDERSON: The British Prime Minister speaking in the House of Commons. Let's listen in.
BORIS JOHNSON, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: -- and all the people who have contributed to this report, which I've placed in the library of this house,
and which the government has published in full today for everyone to read. I will address its findings in this statement. But firstly, I want to say
sorry, and I'm sorry for the things we simply didn't get right. And also sorry for the way that this matter has been handled.
And it's no use saying that this or that was within the rules, and is no use saying that people were working hard. This pandemic was hard for
everyone. We asked people across this country to make the most extraordinary sacrifices, not to meet loved ones, not to visit relatives
before they died. And I understand the anger that people feel. But Mr. Speaker, it isn't enough to say sorry. This is a moment when let's look at
ourselves in the mirror and we must learn.
And while the Metropolitan Police must yet complete their investigation. And that means there are no details of specific events in Sue Gray's
report. I of course, accept Sue Gray's general findings in full. And above all her recommendation that we must learn from these events and act now.
With respect to the events or the police investigation, she says and I quote, "No conclusions should be drawn or inferences made from this other
than it is now for the police to consider the relevant material in relation to those incidents."
But more broadly, she finds that there is significant learning to be drawn from these events, which must be addressed immediately across government.
This does not need to wait for the police investigations to be concluded. That is why we are making changes now to the way Downing Street and the
Cabinet Office run so that we can get on with the job, that job that I was elected to do, Mr. Speaker and the job that this government was elected to
do.
Firstly, it is time to sort out what Sue Gray rightly calls the fragmented and complicated leadership structures of Downing Street, which she says
have not evolved sufficiently to meet the demands of the expansion of Number 10. And we will do that, including by creating an office of the
Prime Minister with a permanent secretary lead number 10.
Second, Mr. Speaker, it is clear from Sue Gray's report that it is time not just to review the civil service and Special Advisor codes of conduct
wherever necessary to ensure that they take account of Sue Gray's recommendations but also to make sure that those codes are properly
enforced.
[10:35:05]
JOHNSON: And third, I will be saying more in the coming days about the steps we will take to improve the Number 10 operation and the work of the
Cabinet Office to strengthen cabinet government and to improve the vital connection between Number 10 and Parliament. Mr. Speaker, I get it, and I
will fix it. And I want to say -- and I want to say to the people of this country, I know what the issue is.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, yes, yes. It's whether this government can be trusted to deliver. And I say, Mr. Speaker, yes, we can be trusted. Yes, we can be
trusted to deliver. We said that we would get Brexit done, Mr. Speaker. And we did. And we're setting up free ports around the whole United Kingdom.
I've been to one of them today which is creating tens of thousands of new jobs, Mr. Speaker. We said we would get this country through COVID and we
did.
We delivered the fastest vaccine rollout in Europe and the fastest booster program of any major economy so that we've been able to restore people's
freedoms faster than any comparable economy. And at the same time, we've been cutting crime by 14 percent, building 14 new hospitals and rolling out
gigabit broadband, Mr. Speaker and delivering all the promises of our 2019 agenda so that we have the fastest economic growth of the G7.
We have shown that we have done things that people thought were impossible, Mr. Speaker. And that we can deliver for the rich people. Mr. Speaker, I
just -- I remind the benches opposite. The reason we're coming out of COVID so fast is at least partly because we doubled the speed of the booster
rollout.
And I can tell the house and this country that we are going to bring the same energy and commitment to getting on with the job to delivering for the
British people and to our mission to unite and level up across this country, Mr. Speaker, and I commend this statement to the house.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I now call Keir Starmer, the leader of the opposition.
KEIR STARMER, BRITISH LABOUR PARTY LEADER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to thank Sue Gray for the diligence and professionalism with which she's
carried out her work. It's no fault of hers, that she's only been able to produce an update today, not the full report. The Prime Minister repeatedly
assured the house that the guidance was followed and the rules were followed.
But we now know that 12 cases have reached the threshold for criminal investigation which I remind the House means that there is evidence of
serious and flagrant breaches of lockdown, including the party on the 20th of May 2020, which we know the Prime Minister attended, and the party on
the 13th of November 2020 in the Prime Minister's flat. There can be no doubt that the Prime Minister himself is now subject to criminal
investigation.
The Prime Minister must keep his promise to publish Sue Gray's report in full when it is available. But it is already clear that the report
discloses the most damning conclusion possible. Over the last two years, the British public have been asked to make the most heart-wrenching
sacrifices, a collective trauma endured by all, enjoyed by non. Funerals have been missed. Dying relatives unvisited. Every family has been marked
by what we've been through.
And revelations about the promise behavior have forced us all to rethink and relive those darkest moments. Many have been overcome by rage, by
grief, and even guilt. Guilt that because they stuck to the law, they did not see their parents one last time. Guilt that because they didn't bend
the rules their children went months without seeing friends. Guilt that because they did as they were asked, they didn't go and visit lonely
relatives.
But people shouldn't feel guilty. They should feel pride in themselves, in their country, because by abiding by those rules they've saved the lives of
people they will probably never meet. They have shown the deep public spirit and the love and respect for others that has always characterized
this nation at its best.
[10:40:02]
STARMER: Our national story about COVID is one of the people that stood up when they were tested. But that will be forever tainted by the behavior of
this Conservative Prime Minister. By routinely breaking the rules he set, the Prime Minister took us all for falls, he held people sacrificing contempt, he showed himself unfit for
office. His desperate denials since he was exposed to only made matters worse, rather than come clean every step of the way, he's insulted the
public's intelligence.
And now he's finally fallen back on his usual excuse. It's everybody's fault but his. They go, he stays. Even now he's hiding behind a police
investigation into criminality, into his home and his office. Mr. Speaker, he gleefully treats what should be a mark of shame as a welcome shield. But
Prime Minister, the British public aren't fools. They never believed a word of it. They think the Prime Minister should do the decent thing and resign.
Of course he won't. Because he is a man without shame. And justice is done throughout his life. He's damaged everyone and everything around him along
the way. His colleagues have spent weeks defending the indefensible. Touring the T.V. studios parroting his absurd denials to grading themselves
and their offices. Preying upon bond of trust between the government hold.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The member of South ruble is my neighbor. I expect better from my neighbors. Keir Starmer.
STARMER: Fraying the pond of trust between the government and the public eroding our democracy and the rule of law. Margaret Thatcher once said, the
first duty of government is to uphold the law. If it tries to bob and weave and duck around that duty when it's inconvenient, then so will govern. Mr.
Speaker, to govern this country is an honor, not a birthright. It's an act of service to the British people, not the keys to a court to parade to your
friends.
It requires honesty, integrity, a moral authority. I can't tell you how many times people have said to me that this Prime Minister's lack of
integrity is somehow priced in. But his behavior and character don't matter. I have never accepted that. And I never will accept that. Whatever
your politics, whichever party you vote for honesty and decency matters. our great democracy depends on it.
And cherishing and nurturing for just democracy is what it means to be patriotic. There are members opposite who know that. And they know the
Prime Minister is incapable of it. The question they must now ask themselves is what are they going to do about it? They can heap their
reputations, the reputation of their party, the reputation of this country on the bonfire, that is his leadership.
Or they can spare the country from a prime minister totally unworthy of his responsibility.
It is their duty to do so. They know better than anyone how unsuitable he is for high office. Many of them knew in their hearts that we would
inevitably come to this one day. And they know that as night follows day continuing his leadership will mean further misconduct, cover up and deceit.
It is only they that can end this fast. The eyes of the country are a problem. They will be judged by the decisions they take now.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Prime Minister.
JOHNSON: Well, Mr. Speaker, there's a reason why he said absolutely nothing about the report that was presented by this government and needed to put in
the library the house earlier on. That is because Mr. Speaker, the report does absolutely nothing to substantiate the tissue of nonsense he has just
spoken. Absolutely nothing. Absolutely nothing. Instead, Mr. Speaker, this Leader of the Opposition, a former Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr.
Speaker (INAUDIBLE) he spent most of his time prosecuting journalists and failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile as far as I can make that, Mr. Speaker.
He, Mr. Speaker, chose to use the -- chose to use this moment, he used this moment, Mr.
Speaker continually to prejudge a police inquiry. That's what he chose to do. He's reached his conclusions about it.
[10:45:08]
JOHNSON: I'm not going to reach any conclusions, and he would be entirely an entirely wrong to do so. And I direct him again, Mr. Speaker to what Sue
Gray says in her -- in her report about the conclusions that can be drawn from her inquiry about what the police may or may not do. Now, Mr. Speaker,
I have complete confidence in the police. And I hope that they will -- they will be allowed simply to get on with their job.
And I don't propose to offer any more commentary about it. And I don't believe that he should, either. And I must say to him, that what I think
the -- what I think the country with greatest respect to the benches opposite, what I think the country wants us all in this house to focus on
is the issues that matter to them and getting on -- getting on, Mr. Speaker, we're taking this country forward.
And Mr. Speaker, today, we have delivered yet more Brexit freedoms with a new free port in Tilbury, as I said, when he voted 48 times to take this
country back into the -- to the E.U. And Mr. Speaker, we have the most open society, most open economy. Mr. Speaker, this I think what people want us
to focus on. We are the most open society, most open economy in Europe because of the vaccine rollout, because of the booster rollout.
And never forget the speaker that he voted -- he voted to keep us in the, which would make that impossible. And today, Mr. Speaker, we are standing
together with our NATO allies against the potential aggression of Vladimir Putin when he wanted not so long ago to install a prime minister as prime
minister, a Labour leader who would actually have abolished NATO, Mr. Speaker.
That's what he believes in, those are his priorities. Well, I can say to him, he can continue with his political opportunism, we are going to get on
and I am going to get on with the job.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Quiet. Theresa May.
THERESA MAY, FORMER PRIME MINISTER OF THE UNITED KINGDOM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The COVID regulations impose significant restrictions on the
freedoms of members of the public. They had a right to expect their Prime Minister to have read the rules to understand the meaning of the rules, and
indeed those around them to have done -- around him to have done so too and to set an example in following those rules.
What the Gray report does show is that number 10 Downing Street was not observing the regulations they had imposed on members of the public. So
either my right honorable friend had not read the rules or didn't understand what they meant and others around him, or they didn't think the
rules applied to Number 10 which was it?
JOHNSON: (INAUDIBLE) my right honorable friend.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a very important question. I want to hear the answer even (INAUDIBLE) Prime Minister.
JOHNSON: No, Mr. Speaker. That is not what the Gray report says (INAUDIBLE) what the report says. That if she -- I suggest that she waits to see the
conclusion of the inquiry.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I now come to the leader of the SNP, Ian Blackford.
IAN BLACKFORD, LEADER OF THE SCOTTISH NATIONAL PARTY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can I say it's a pleasure to follow the former prime minister and
perhaps her behavior in office like many that went before them was a bit dignity, about the importance of the office, of respect, of truthfulness
and the prime minister be well-advised to focus on those that have not dishonored the office like he has done.
Mr. Speaker, we stand here today faced with the systematic decimation of public trust in government, and the institution of the state, and at its
heart, a prime minister, a prime minister being investigated by the police. So here we have it. The long-awaited Sue Gray report, what a farce. It was
carefully engineered to be a fact-finding exercise with no conclusions. No, we find it's a fact-finding exercise with no facts.
So let's talk facts. The Prime Minister has told the House that all guidance was completely followed. There was no party. COVID rules were
followed that night. I believed it was a work event. Nobody. Nobody believed him then. And nobody, nobody believes you're no prime minister.
That is the crux, no ifs, no buts. He has willfully, willfully misled Parliament. It's bad in --
[10:50:00]
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Order. Inadvertent misled host will be accepted. Misled the host is (INAUDIBLE) withdrawal inadvertent.
BLACKFORD: The Prime Minister inadvertently told the House in the year to December that no parties have taken place, and then had to admit that they
had. It's bad enough, Mr. Speaker, that the Prime Minister's personal integrity is in the ditch. But this marquee business is tainting everything
around it. It's his own intention to submit a motion instructing the Prime Minister to publish the Gray report in full.
Well, the Prime Minister, have been an instruction by this house to publish as required. Mr. Speaker, and minced allegations of blackmail by Tory
whips. The members opposite have been defending the indefensible. Wait for the report we were told. Well, here it is. And it tells us very little
except it does state that there were failures of leadership and judgment by different parts of Number 10.
It states that some events should not have been allowed to take place. That is the Prime Minister's responsibility. If there is any honor, any honor in
public life, then he would resign. Where is this -- and he laughs. And the Prime Minister laughs. We ought to remind ourselves in this House. And
150,000 plus of our citizens have lost their lives, family members that couldn't be with them. And that is a sight that people will remember.
Our Prime Minister laughing at our public. I extend the hand the friendship, to all those that have sacrificed. I certainly do not extend
the hand of friendship to the Prime Minister, who is no friend of mine. Where is the shame? Where is the dignity? Meanwhile, the police
investigation that I bought at on every moment the Prime Minister stays trust in government and the rule of law is ebbing away.
The litany of real breaking, the culture of contempt, the utter disdain for the anguish felt by the public who have sacrificed so much. What the public
see is a man who has debased the office of Prime Minister. Shrink responsibility, dogged accountability and blamed his staff at every turn,
presided over sleazy and corruption, attentive the very institutions of the state. In and short Mr. Speaker, this is a man -- well, they can laugh.
They can laugh.
But the public know, the public know this is a man they can no longer trust. He has been investigated by the police. He must lead the House, he
must know resign.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We love to withdraw that last comment.
BLACKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I gave the evidence of the 8th of December.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Order. You're going to have to withdraw misled.
BLACKFORD: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has misled the House.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Unless you withdraw I love to stop and that stop good. Just withdraw the words.
BLACKFORD: I am standing up for my constituents that know that this prime minister has lied and misled to House.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Give me the paper. Give me the paper. Inadvertently misled. I'll give you one more chance. Leader of the SNP, I don't want to
control you, I'm going to give you this chance. Please.
BLACKFORD: (INAUDIBLE) that man has misled the House.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) I'm sorry, it's come to this. And I'm sorry that leader of the party has not got the decency, just withdraw those words
in order that this debate can be represented by all political leaders. Would you like to inadvertently?
BLACKFORD: Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister has inadvertently misled the House, then I will state that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. We're going to leave it at that. Prime Minister.
JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, I'm grateful to the right honorable gentleman withdrawing what he just said because he was wrong then and he -- I'm
afraid he's wrong in his analysis. And I apologize as I've said for all the suffering that people have had throughout this pandemic and for the anger
that people feel about what has taken place in Number 10 Downing Street. But I've got -- I've got to tell the right honorable gentleman that for
much of what he said his best course is simply to wait for the for the inquiry to be completed.
[10:55:01]
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can I just say I take it. The honorable member has withdrawn it. The right honorable member.
BLACKFORD: The Prime Minister may have inadvertently misled the House.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Order. To help me, to help the House, you withdraw your earlier comment and replace it with inadvertently.
BLACKFORD: It's not my fault if the Prime Minister can't be trusted to tell the truth.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Under the power given to me by Standing Order number 43, I owe to the honorable member to withdraw immediately from the House. The
House. I say sorry. We don't need to bother. All right. Let's just move on. Andrew Mitchell.
ANDREW MITCHELL, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR SUTTON COLDFIELD: Does my right honorable friend recalled that ever since he joined the party's candidates
last 30 years ago, until we got him into number 10 he has enjoyed my full- throated support. But I'm deeply concerned by these events and very concerned indeed, by some of the things he has said from that despatch box
and has said to the British public and our constituents.
When he kindly invited me to see him 10 days ago, I told him that I thought he should think very carefully about what was now in the best interests of
our country, and the Conservative Party. And I have to tell him, he no longer enjoys my support.
JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, I must tell -- I respectfully, my right honorable friend, great, though, the admiration is that I have of him, I simply think
that he's mistaken in his views. And I urge him to reconsider upon full consideration of the -- of the inquiry.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Prime Minister told us and I'm quoting him now have repeatedly been assured since these
allegations emerged, that there was no party and that no COVID rules were broken. We now know that 12 of the 16 parties are subject to a police
investigation. And that took the remaining four, the Sue Gray report says that she's seen a serious failure to observe the high standards at Number
10.
She's seen failures of leadership, failures of judgment. And the Prime Minister thinks this is fine. So just how bad things have to be before he
takes personal responsibility does what everybody in this country wants him to do and resign.
JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, what we are doing is taking the action that I described, to set up a Prime Minister's department to improve the operation
of number 10. And we will be taking further steps Mr. Speaker in the days ahead.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- Speaker. The inquiry has found there have been serious failings and has suggested there be changes in the way that number
10 is run. And there's a real opportunity now to take forward this new office of the Prime Minister and ensure further improvements are made so
that we can carry on delivering because what the parties opposite hate is the fact that this government will carry on delivering on the things that
matter most to people, while also making sure that the government's within Number 10 is improved.
JOHNSON: I thank my right honorable friend very, very much. I think he's completely right. I do think that the opposition, of course, wants to keep
the -- their focus trained on this. That's their -- that's their decision. I think, Mr. Speaker, I think Mr. Speaker, what the people this country
want us to do is to get on with a job that they want us to do. And that is to serve them, Mr. Speaker and to stop talking frankly about ourselves.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Speaker, there is no word in the English language for a parent who's lost a child. No equivalent of widow or orphan for that
particular horror. It's a loss that is literally beyond words. A loss that hundreds and thousands of parents for tragically experienced during this
pandemic. Many had to bury their children alone. Many couldn't be there with them at the end.
Meanwhile, Number 10 parted. Does the Prime Minister understand? Does he care about the enormous hurt his actions have caused to bereaved families
across our country? Will he finally accept that the only decent thing that he can do now is to resign?
JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, I do care deeply about the hurt that is felt across the country about the suggestion that things were going on in Number 10
that we're in contravention of the -- of the COVID rules. And I understand how deeply people feel about this and how angry that they are.
END
