A SCOTTISH MP has called for an explanation into how the apparent findings of the inquiry into Downing Street parties found their way into a newspaper.
Wendy Chamberlain raised concerns in the Commons today about a report in The Times that Ms Gray's investigation would not conclude Boris Johnson had breached the ministerial code, nor would it find sufficient evidence of criminality to refer the issue to the police.
The newspaper also reported that Ms Gray was considering censuring Mr Johnson for a lack of judgement, as well as being critical of the culture at Downing Street, but the decision on whether the Prime Minister broke the ministerial code would not be within her remit.
The revelations have prompted deep concern among MPs, who have questioned how the contents of the report have been leaked prior to it being published.
One Conservative MP told The Herald the leak was a "clear effort by No.10 to pre-empt the investigation, and spin it in a way that makes Boris look positive."
Downing Street, and the Prime Minister, have repeatedly said the full report will be made available as soon as possible, with speculation that it could come as early as the end of next week.
Ms Chamberlain, the Liberal Democrat MP for North East Fife, raised a point of order with the Commons speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle this morning about the leak.
She said: "The story in one newspaper this morning appears to be a leak of the outcomes of Sue Gray's inquiry into those parties.
"On Wednesday, the Prime Minister promised on the publication of this report into the Downing Street parties he would make a statement to this House.
"On important policy announcements, you have previously made clear that the government should announce them to this House first, so that we can fulfill our job representing our constituents, who will of course want to question the Prime Minister over these findings.
"So for an issue of this importance, Mr. Speaker, I wonder what guidance you would have to ensure that government ministers and officials do not leak the outcomes of this report in advance, especially as these attempts to do so look like they're exonerating the Prime Minister before we have contemplated that report."
Common speaker Sir Lindsay said that the failure to properly publish the report in the Commons, and make it available to MPs before it is released in the media, would be a "great discourtesy" to parliament.
He said: "It will be entirely inappropriate and discourteous to this House for any findings of the inquiry to be released to the media before being announced to this House.
"I cannot be clearer on this matter.
"I expect the government to announce the findings of the inquiry to this House first, and I will treat any failure to do so as a great discourtesy to this house."
The government has previously been chastised for releasing information via the media before allowing it to be scrutinised by MPs, including huge sections of the Budget in October and coronavirus policy.
According to The Times report, Ms Gray is considering censuring Mr Johnson for his lack of judgment in attending the garden party on May 20, 2020, despite his claims that he believed it to be a work event.
She will also criticise blurred lines at No 10 between working and socialising.
It is reported that the senior civil servant has consulted an external QC to establish whether lockdown rules were breached and has also taken advice from government lawyers on employment law. She is likely to recommend action against officials and special advisers.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel