Quote Originally Posted by Claude Blue View Post
Starmer couldn't ask that question as it's akin to accusing Johnson of lying which is not permissible in the House.

He correctly plays the long game, waiting until today to call on Johnson to resign. If he'd made frequent earlier calls, which would have fallen on deaf ears, the impact would have been negated.
I could be totally wrong here but does asking him if he lied to The House constitute him calling him a liar (I'm aware that's not the done thing though I think it's one of those stupid rules)? He's not stating that Johnson lied, he's asking him 'if' he lied whereby Johnson implicates himself or makes things worse or both? Isn't this the Erskine May bible thing?