Sue Gray should not work for Keir Starmer until next year, says ex-watchdog

The civil servant who oversaw the Partygate inquiry should not be allowed to work for Labour until next year, a former commissioner for public appointments has said.

The Sue Gray report into gatherings at Downing Street during the Covid pandemic helped seal Boris Johnson’s fate and eventually saw him resign as prime minister.

So the news earlier this year that she was leaving her civil service role to work as Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer’s chief of staff prompted outrage among allies of the former prime minister.

A Cabinet Office probe into Ms Gray’s role in government in the months leading up to her resignation followed, the results of which are expected to be announced on Tuesday.

The findings are expected to feed into a ruling on how long Ms Gray should wait before joining Labour, by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba).

Peter Riddell, an ex-commissioner for public appointments, said that should be next year.

He told Times Radio that period of time would be “reasonable”.

He said: “I think a substantial period is reasonable, mainly as an act of reassurance ... to ministers that their senior civil servants aren’t going to just be here today, gone tomorrow.”

He added: “I think a period possibly lasting to the end of the year would be reasonable.”

He also suggested that Ms Gray was a “victim” because her talks with Labour were leaked before she resigned.

Asked about a possible delay in Ms Gray starting work for him, during a campaign visit to Blackpool, Sir Keir said: “Sue Gray has a formidable reputation and there is obviously a process that is being gone through.”

It follows a report in the Mail On Sunday that a Cabinet Office investigation into Ms Gray’s departure from her position as second permanent secretary in the Cabinet Office could conclude that her talks with Labour breached the Civil Service Code.

Separately, The Times reported that it had been told by Whitehall sources that cabinet secretary Simon Case had been “instrumental” in recommending that Ms Gray should be barred from taking the senior Labour role until March.

Labour has insisted that Ms Gray was approached last autumn, long after she had completed her Partygate report in May last year.

The long-awaited inquiry into the No 10 parties concluded “too little thought” was given by Boris Johnson’s No 10 about “the risks they presented to public health and how they might appear to the public”.

“There were failures of leadership and judgment by different parts of No 10 and the Cabinet Office at different times,” Ms Gray wrote.

Mr Johnson was ousted from office by his own MPs later that summer.

But supporters of Mr Johnson suggested he was the victim of a stitch-up when it emerged Ms Gray was leaving to work for Labour.

Tuesday’s findings are expected to be released in a written ministerial statement.

Mr Riddell also called for a “squeaky clean” process to appoint the next BBC chair, after Richard Sharp resigned last week following a damning report into his part in a £800,000 loan guarantee for Mr Johnson while in No 10.

Mr Riddell said: “Should the processes be changed? Obviously, those closely involved and maybe a Commons select committee will want to look at it, and probably the [Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport] select committee want to have examined some of it, that’s fine ... For most people, it’s OK, the story largely over. But we’ve still got to work out a basis for choosing a new chair of the BBC, which people say, that’s fine and reasonable.”

“The key this time is it is seen to be squeaky clean. There’s no what we call pre-briefing, which happened last time when Richard Sharp was mentioned. What the government should do was to keep it out of it and not talk about names and ensure that it’s all above board.”