Thread by @ShepherdWales

Did #SueGray gather the evidence and report the facts of gatherings in Downing Street or did she set the narrative and set the wheels in motion to oust a democratically elected PM? 🧵👇

Was she motivated by her politics or did she simply report the facts?

There were parties - no one is denying that but was her first report prejudicial and was it even necessary?

Imo there are two main aspects of her first report that I find troubling

(FTR the second report I have no issue with- the damage was already done imo by the first)

1. Timings - as I have set out in a previous thread

Why did she publish that first report?

What motivated her?

Previous 🧵👇

https://twitter.com/ShepherdWales/status/1631598689650130946

But there is another aspect that I find troubling

Let’s look at the report:

#SueGray says she thought about whether to publish or not but decided the huge public interest needed a response:

Did it?

Is it normal to make comment when police investigation is on going?

Is it fair?

Especially when the stakes are as high as ousting a democratically elected PM ?

The first #SueGray report

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…

At the Police’s direction she was unable to give specifics&reported only on gatherings NOT being investigated by police

BUT

those events were not being investigated because they did NOT break rules as judged by the @metpoliceuk

So, again, was it fair to comment at that time?

The report speaks at length about the culture within No10, specifically alcohol and infers that this happened because #BorisJohnson was PM and allowed it.

Did it?

Let’s take a look…

#SueGray herself, pre pandemic enjoying karaoke at a boozy Whitehall bash

‘Alcohol suitcase also used under Cameron and May’

Why didn’t @BorisJohnson stop it the moment we locked down? I hear you cry…

Simple:

1. It’s the civil service that has the culture of booze

#SueGray didn’t mention that or the history of Wine Time Fridays (that she used in her pub in NI) suggesting it was a long standing thing in her walks of life

2. When we locked down Boris promptly caught covid, went into isolation for 10 days, got admitted to hospital

Then went to chequers for about a month.

Had the birth of his and Carries first child and then returned to work in end April/May 2020

In short: he wasn’t there

Fact is the culture didn’t stop because it had gone on forever and the civil service bosses kept it going even in Boris’ absence and didn’t have an issue with it

No top civil servant to my knowledge lost their job over #partygate

The head of ethics partied

The head of covid rules partied

The head of civil service partied

These are likely the same people who ‘assured’ @BorisJohnson that no rules were broken…

Why didn’t #SueGray put any of this context into her first (or final) report?

That report set the narrative of the weeks that followed which culminated in the initial(and only)FPN and subsequent referral to the #PrivilegesCommittee

Important to note that referral to PC was
PRIOR to the completion of @metpoliceuk

Newly appointed 2019 @Conservatives MPs may not have known that the culture amongst civil servants in Downing Street/Whitehall is and has been boozy forever

It’s up to you to ponder these thoughts and draw your own conclusions but if I was a @conservative MP who was swayed to refer @BorisJohnson to the #PrivilegesCommittee by that initial #SueGray report plus one cake FPN I’d be asking myself: have I been fair to @BorisJohnson

Here the thing:

The culture wasn’t @borisjohnsons

It was civil service culture that #SueGray partook in

The initial report pushed new MPs &public to believe it was down to @BorisJohnson that wasn’t born out in the FPNs OR the final report

There lies the issue of #SueGrayGate