How long has Sue Gray been cosy with Keir? Nadine Dorries says 'can't rely on' ... trends now

Conservative MPs continued to question Sir Keir Starmer's appointment of Partygate enquiry boss Sue Gray as his new chief of staff last night, as long-time Boris Johnson allies asked how long the two had been discussing the job.

One of the former Prime Minister's most loyal supporters, Nadine Dorries, said last night her evidence into the Partygate scandal 'cannot be relied upon' until MPs are given more information.

Tories have been left fuming at the announcement after a report released by the Commons privileges committee on Friday into Partygate cited Ms Gray or the findings of her investigation 26 times. 

Mr Johnson's allies have rallied behind him by questioning how the process – which could ultimately lead to him facing losing his seat as an MP – can still be credible. 

They say it is 'surreal' that her report will form a key plank of the committee's probe into whether he lied to MPs over lockdown-breaking gatherings. 

They claimed it showed Ms Gray's Partygate probe was a 'Left-wing stitch-up' all along.

Former culture secretary under Mr Johnson Nadine Dorries said: 'Sue Gray's evidence cannot be relied upon in any meaningful way until we know how long Sue Gray has had a personal relationship with Keir Starmer and for how long they have been discussing Sue going to work for him as his most trusted and important adviser.'  

Tory MP Peter Bone said: 'The privileges committee has today admitted its key witness is none other than Sue Gray. 

'How can she possibly be called before the committee to answer all the points that it makes about her evidence – mentioning her dozens of times? This is a farce.' 

Boris Johnson himself also came out fighting yesterday after the committee of MPs investigating Partygate claimed No 10 lockdown breaches would have been 'obvious'.

It appeared to condemn Mr Johnson before he had given evidence, suggesting that 'breaches of [lockdown] guidance would have been obvious to him at the time he was at the gatherings'.

The former PM insisted he had been 'vindicated' and there was 'no evidence' he had lied to Parliament.

The report suggested there was 'evidence that the House of Commons may have been misled' by Mr Johnson for telling it that 'all guidance was followed completely' during the gatherings.

But in his first major intervention since the committee launched its probe, the ex-PM insisted yesterday's report contained 'no evidence whatsoever' that he lied to the Commons.

He added: 'I believed that what we were doing was within the rules and that's why I said what I said to Parliament. And I think what's so interesting about the report today, is that after ten months of effort and sifting through all the innumerable WhatsApps and messages, they found absolutely no evidence to suggest otherwise.

'The committee has produced a report which I believe totally vindicates me because there is no evidence whatsoever that when I stood up in Parliament I said anything I did not believe and therefore there is no contempt.'

He went on to say it was 'surreal to discover that the committee proposes to rely on evidence culled and orchestrated by Sue Gray, who has just been appointed chief of staff to the Leader of the Labour Party'.

Taking aim at Ms Gray's report, he told Sky News: 'It's a peculiarity that the person who conducted the inquiry into what went on in No 10 and the Cabinet Office – who was presented to me as a person of complete political impartiality with absolutely no political axe to grind whatever – has just been appointed the chief of staff of the leader of the Labour Party.

'I mean I make no comment about it, except to say that I'm sure that people may want to draw their own conclusions about the confidence they can place in her inquiry. 

'If you'd told me all the stuff I now know, I think I might have cross-examined her more closely about her independence and I might have invited her to reflect on whether she was really the right person to do it.'

The committee's report included previously unseen photographs of Downing Street gatherings, as well as messages between No 10's then-communications director Jack Doyle and officials in January last year, said to show they were 'struggling' to justify how events were within the rules.

The former PM will give evidence to the committee in the week beginning March 20.

Former business secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg told Channel 4 News: 'I'm surprised that the privileges committee wishes to judge the matter before it's seen by the former prime minister. That seems an odd way to behave.'

Former levelling up secretary Simon Clarke added: 'This whole affair raises really serious questions. The impartiality of the civil service is of the utmost importance for any functioning government.'

Ms Gray is facing questions about whether she broke civil service rules by not immediately declaring the approach she received from Labour – said to be 'several months ago' – or her acceptance of the job before seeking approval from the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments. 

Sources have suggested the body, which vets job moves by ministers and senior civil servants, will recommend a short stint of gardening leave before she can join Labour, despite concerns that she could hand sensitive privileged information to the party. 

A spokesman for the privileges committee said: 'The committee's report is not based on the Sue Gray report. 

'The committee's report is based on evidence in the form of material supplied by the Government to the committee in November, including communications such as WhatsApps, emails and photographs from the official Downing Street photographer [and] evidence from

read more from dailymail.....