Thread by @AdamWagner1

I have commented in this story. From what I have been told - social quiz, alcohol being drunk, lots of people together at the office (teams of 6, up to 24 in one room) - it's a clear breach of the govt's guidance and a potential breach of the law, including by the PM

https://twitter.com/MirrorPolitics/status/1469788795813998595

The image of the PM is of him together with two other people taking part (in fact, hosting) a social quiz at a time when gatherings of more than 1 person indoors were banned unless "reasonably necessary for work" or some other exception and I can't see any other that could apply

I'm dubious there is a get out for people in No. 10 through the "crown property" exception (which @LevinsLaw suggests, convincingly, applies to properly not people) or crown immunity, which I doubt applies to breaches of clear govt guidance and regulations

This appears to have been organised as a Christmas party. This is what the government guidance on the day (15.12.20) said - couldn't be clearer web.archive.org/web/2020121515…

As I have said in the past couple of weeks, I feel this is more important in the political than the legal arena. I don't know if there will be prosecutions but I cannot see how any minister or civil servant could have seen this and other parties as anything but legally reckless

And then of course there are the various accounts given of these events by those in charge in the past couple of weeks which are... dubious.

My more detailed thoughts mirror.co.uk/news/politics/…

Put this all another way: if, at the time, the PM had asked government lawyers for advice of whether to do this, they would almost certainly have said “no”

Put it another way. If a business had asked me to advise them in Dec 2020 on whether to run a boozy evening quiz with groups of 6+ together in the office with the boss running things on zoom I would have given them some quite robust advice on why that would be a bad idea