Angry MPs have begun the process of issuing a formal summons to Dominic Cummings demanding that Vote Leave’s campaign director give evidence to a select committee inquiring into whether “fake news” planted on Facebook swung the result of the EU referendum campaign.



Dominic Cummings is the true cowardly face of the Brexiters | Nick Cohen Read more

The digital, culture, media and sport select committee resolved to seek an order from the House of Commons that would in theory force Cummings to give evidence on Vote Leave’s use of the digital marketing firm Aggregate IQ during the campaign in 2016.

Damian Collins, the Conservative chair of the committee, said it was necessary for Cummings to appear “so that he can clarify evidence received by the committee about digital advertising during the EU referendum campaign”. He said the committee had made “repeated, reasonable requests for him to appear, but so far he has refused to do this”.

Cummings has said he consulted the Electoral Commission, which has completed its inquiries into Vote Leave’s spending. He has also accused the MPs of grandstanding. He previously indicated he would give evidence in July but the MPs said they did not want to wait that long.

In an email sent to Collins, Cummings wrote: “Sending a summons is the behaviour of people looking for PR, not people looking to get to the bottom of this affair.

“A summons will have zero positive impact on my decision and is likely only to mean I withdraw my offer of friendly cooperation, given you will have shown greater interest in grandstanding than truth-seeking, which is one of the curses of the committee system.”

A report released by MPs in tandem with the announcement of the summons says the Electoral Commission has “no objection to us taking evidence from Mr Cummings”.

The report says there is a “strong public interest” in Cummings giving evidence because the committee has heard evidence that “raised serious questions about the use of personal data in communications and election campaigns”.

In particular, it notes there were allegations that Vote Leave colluded with another leave campaign, BeLeave, donating £675,000 to the smaller campaign at a time late in the referendum campaign when Vote Leave had already spent close to its £7m legal limit. Both campaigns spent heavily on Facebook advertising via AIQ, a digital marketing specialist.

The committee also released increasingly acrimonious email correspondence between Collins and Cummings, in which the latter repeatedly refused to appear on dates suggested by the MP.



“I will not participate in your theatre,” Cummings wrote on 11 May after the initial threat of a summons had been aired. “As you know, you have no power to compel my attendance and your threats are empty. I will judge on whether to speak to other committees depending on whether they behave reasonably or grandstand.”

Collins replied on the same day, saying: “I wanted to see if we could reach an agreement on your appearing to give evidence, but your reply made it clear to us that was unlikely.”

In the report, the MPs conclude that by then Cummings had no intention of giving evidence to them in July as he had originally suggested.

The select committee system normally relies on witnesses agreeing to attend when asked, but on occasion a summons has been issued to compel somebody to give evidence. In 2016 the business committee summoned Mike Ashley, the Sports Direct boss, to appear, and after a four-month stand off the billionaire agreed to do so.

The Commons has historic powers to jail or fine people who do not comply with its wishes, but these are thought to be in abeyance. The only punishment used in living memory has been to summon individuals to the bar of the house to be criticised in person.

The committee said if Cummings did not comply with a summons to agree a date on which he would appear before the committee, the matter would be referred to the committee of privileges for a recommendation as to what action should be taken against him.