Is Boris Johnson’s Chris Pincher story falling apart?

What did Boris Johnson know about Chris Pincher before appointing him as deputy chief whip? That question has been haunting No. 10 ever since it emerged that Pincher allegedly groped two men at the Carlton Club last week – with previous allegations about Pincher’s behaviour coming to light in recent days.

So far the government line has been shaky to say the least. On Friday a government spokesperson said that the Prime Minister had been unaware of any specific allegations against Pincher before appointing him. That position shifted early this week, with the government then saying that Boris Johnson had been aware of media reports about Pincher, but they were ‘allegations that were either resolved or did not progress to a formal complaint.’

Now even that position appears to be falling apart. This morning the former Foreign Office chief mandarin, Lord McDonald of Salford, has publicly released a letter to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, alleging that formal complaints about Pincher’s behaviour were made in the summer of 2019.

McDonald alleges that a group of officials complained to him about Pincher’s behaviour when he was a minister of state in the Foreign Office. McDonald says that this was treated as an official complaint, which was upheld after investigators looked into the allegations. Pincher reportedly apologised for his behaviour at the time and promised not to repeat the behaviour again.

More worryingly for Boris Johnson, McDonald alleges that the PM was briefed in person about the investigation and the outcome of it. In other words, Boris would have known about Pincher’s behaviour and the formal allegations against him before appointing him to the whip’s office in 2022.

This morning I have written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards - because No 10 keep changing their story and are still not telling the truth. pic.twitter.com/vln9FU4V50

— Simon McDonald (@SimonMcDonaldUK) July 5, 2022

McDonald argues that he has been forced to act out of a sense of duty to Pincher’s alleged victims, and to prevent the confidentiality process three years ago being used to protect him now.

If the paper trail backs up his version of events this could be very damaging for No. 10. As James writes, Pincher was at the heart of the government’s operations in the last few months. It is becoming increasingly difficult to believe that No. 10 and Boris Johnson did not know about the allegations against him before appointing him to the whip’s office. And while the scandal rumbles on, the stench of sleaze wafting around the Conservative party is only going to become harder and harder to dispel.