WITH Sue Gray’s eagerly-anticipated Partygate report not yet published, TCW Defending Freedom has obtained a leaked draft of her initial findings. It makes for uncomfortable reading …
I have been tasked with reviewing several alleged gatherings both within 10 Downing Street and in the gardens of same address.
Furthermore, I was asked to determine whether Covid legislation that was in force at the time, relating to social gatherings and so on, had been broken. My remit has been severely restricted by the ‘terms of reference’ that I have had to follow, and this report will reflect that.
Both my team and I have undertaken exhaustive interviews with both Mr and Mrs xxxxxxxx as well as Mr xxxxxxxx. Aside from these persons, the inquiry has taken numerous statements from Downing Street staff, ministers, aides, private secretaries and serving Metropolitan Police officers.
I will address three events that have already been the subject of media scrutiny. The first relates to a get-together in the gardens of No 10 in the summer of 2021. It would appear from evidence submitted that both Mr and Mrs xxxxxxx were present at a function, alongside Ms xxxxx, Miss xxxxxxxxx, Mr xxxxxx, Mx xxxxxx and Myr xxxxxx and several No 10 staff.
Whilst xxxxxxxx have maintained that they were there simply for xxxxx, I am minded that this is not a sufficient defence. The investigation revealed that there was a large quantity of xxxxx consumed alongside some salted xxxx and cheesy xxxxxxx.
It has been uncovered that whilst this get-together was going on, Mr xxxxxx organised a three-legged sack xxxx which quite clearly was in breach of the social distancing rules that were in place at the time. It is the finding of my investigation that there were multiple offences committed on this occasion and that the excuses offered are not valid.
It was brought to my attention that there was a subsequent event which was characterised in the press as a ‘bring your own booze party’.
It has proven difficult to judge what, if any, contravention of legislation has occurred. At first glance, it might look to be an open and shut case, given the known particulars. A casual observer might, quite naturally, think that people xxxxxx and xxxxxxx whilst forming a long snake like xxxxxxxxxx xxxx is evidence of a party-like occasion.
The fact that Mr xxxxxx was dressed as a xxxxxxx and that Ms xxxxxx played the xxxxxxxx, are rightly worrying, as was the elephant’s xxxxxx that made an appearance at some stage. However, I am happy to accept that this was in fact merely an extension of an after-work symposium and that no offences were committed.
The third scenario concerned Mr xxxxxxxxxx’s birthday. I am relaying primarily on testimony from police officers and secretarial staff for both first-hand and anecdotal evidence.
On the 5th of xxxx, it is alleged that there was an informal gathering in the Cabinet Oiice room to celebrate the xxxxxxxx of XXXXXXXXXX.
A glitter xxxxx was erected on the ceiling and Mr xxxxxx set up a twin turntable disc and strobe-effect lighting rig alongside some unfeasibly large Xxxxxx xxxxxx.
Mr xxxxxxxxxx changed into a T-shirt emblazoned with the logo ‘Grandmaster’ xxxxxx, and played at full volume a selection of music from xxxxxxx’s greatest hits and a compilation album, Now That’s What I Call Lockdown: Volume3.
A hastily-constructed bar served up a seemingly unstoppable range of cocktails including Monkey xxxxx, Sex on the xxxxx, Hanky xxxxx and hot buttered xxxx.
At some point, a large cake was wheeled into the room and whilst the assembled throng gave a spirited rendition of Happy xxxxxxxxx, a sequinned and full xxxxxxx xxxxxxx sprung up from inside the cake and delighted onlookers by producing a slippery xxxxxx from her handbag.
Given the nature of this revelry, it is difficult not to reach the quite natural conclusion that this too was simply a work-related meeting held on work premises.
