A typically excellent survey by @cath_haddon of the limitations on the Gray inquiry and what happens next. instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/downing-s…
The interesting question is what happens politically if she says that the PM's behaviour raises questions outside the scope of her inquiry and recommends/suggests that he refers himself to Lord Geidt. As I read it, that recommendation/suggestion would be in scope.
(And in any event, the facts may well make it obvious that there are serious questions under the Code - as matters stand, it’s hard to see how there aren’t.)
As Cath says, the idea that we should patiently wait while Lord Geidt conducts the somewhat peculiar exercise of reporting to Johnson on whether Johnson has misled Parliament or behaved in a way that didn’t uphold high standards of propriety is one that may be hard to sell.
As Cath says, the system is dysfunctional. It needs a serious look.
But for now a quite realistic danger to guard against is attempts to use the fact that Gray can’t reach conclusions on Johnson’s conduct to suggest that she has concluded that his conduct was OK.
Quite how plausible those attempts are will depend on her drafting. Big call.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
