Sir Keir Starmer and Sue Gray 'broke at least one of four anti-sleaze rules', ... trends now
Sir Keir Starmer was accused today of playing ‘fast and loose’ with anti-sleaze rules over his controversial job offer to the senior civil servant who led the Partygate investigation.
In a fiery Commons debate, ministers said at least one of four transparency rules was apparently broken during ‘covert’ talks between Labour and Sue Gray about making her Sir Keir’s chief of staff.
Furious Tory MPs branded the fiasco a ‘grubby scandal’ which has cast a ‘dark stain on democracy’.
Others said ‘immense damage’ had been inflicted on the civil service’s reputation for impartiality and urged Labour to ‘come clean’ by publishing details of its conversations with Ms Gray.
Sir Keir was also challenged to ‘come out of hiding’ as he failed to attend the debate, with the party last night still refusing to disclose any details as the political storm over the appointment grew.
The Labour leader has come under fire after offering the position of his chief of staff to civil servant Sue Gray (pictured), who wrote a damning report into Boris Johnson's Government's partygate antics last year
Earlier, in a car crash moment during an LBC interview, the Labour leader squirmed as he refused nine times to say when Ms Gray was first approached about the job.
Ms Gray, who conducted the Partygate probe which contributed to Boris Johnson’s downfall, dramatically quit her senior civil service role on Thursday to become Sir Keir’s chief of staff.
Allies of Mr Johnson claim the move shows her report into Downing Street gatherings during the Covid-19 pandemic was a Labour ‘stitch-up’.
They say it also undermines the Commons Privileges Committee investigation into whether the former prime minister misled the Commons over what he knew about lockdown breeches.
Opening yesterday’s debate, Cabinet Office minister Jeremy Quin set out four rules which may have been breached.
One required Ms Gray to seek approval from the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA) watchdog before the job offer was announced. But Mr Quin said this was apparently yet to be done.
He told MPs: ‘The rules state that approval must be obtained [from ACOBA] prior to a job offer being announced.
‘The Cabinet Office has not as yet been informed that the relevant notification to ACOBA has been made.’
Three other rules may also have been breached, he added, including declaring on an ‘on-going basis’ any ‘outside interests which may give rise to an actual or perceived conflict of interest’.
Contact between civil servants and leading members of the Opposition should be ‘cleared with ministers’ and, fourthly, senior officials should ‘act in a way that reserves and retains confidence of ministers’.
Mr Quin said refusal to disclose details about any conversations or meetings meant all four rules may have been broken.
He told the Commons: ‘The party opposite talks about rules, they talk about transparency, they talk about standards in public. Given all the constant talk, it’s
