When parliament’s privileges committee published a report last Friday claiming Boris Johnson may have misled the Commons on four occasions over partygate, the former prime minister came out fighting.
Claiming he had been “vindicated” by the report, he then turned his fire on Sue Gray, the senior civil servant who carried out her own investigation into the lockdown-busting gatherings in Number 10 when he was PM.
Gray has been in the news again in recent days after it emerged she has agreed to become Keir Starmer’s new chief of staff.
“It is surreal to discover that the [privileges] 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,” said Johnson.
Taking his lead, Johnson’s supporters - who still firmly believe that he should never have been forced to quit No 10 in the first place - are now calling into question the circumstances surrounding the entire partygate affair.
They include Nadine Dorries, Johnson’s most steadfast ally, who said Sue Gray’s report - which blamed “senior leadership” in government for the lockdown rule-breaking - was now tainted by her decision to work for Labour.
The former culture secretary told Radio Four: “It’s now quite obvious, as a personal friend of Keir Starmer’s, as someone who has been in discussion ... about taking the role as his chief of staff with the primary objective of bringing down the Tory government, what was her motivation in writing that report?”
This marked a major reversal from Dorries, who said last year: “Sue Gray in independent, is known to be independent, as are all civil servants.”
Her comments echoed those of Jacob Rees-Mogg, another Johnson supporter, who told GB News: “So much for an impartial civil service, the Gray report now looks like a left wing stitch up against a Tory prime minister.”
Red Wall MP Brendan Clarke-Smith, another vocal Johnson supporter, said the impartiality of the entire civil service was now up for debate.
He told Sky News: “If you take partygate out of it just for a moment, there’s a really serious question here about the impartiality of our civil service, with some quite important things that the government are working on, really.”
Peterborough MP Paul Bristow wrongly claimed the privileges committee was “relying on evidence” for its report on Sue Gray’s partygate findings.
“If it wasn’t so serious, it would be laughable,” he said.
Mark Jenkinson, another Johnson supporter, explored Sue Gray’s family ties for evidence of pro-Labour bias.
Meanwhile, former Tory Party chairman Sir Jake Berry said the whole affair showed Starmer was “a man of the establishment”.
The Boris Johnson ally and vocal critic of Rishi Sunak said: “The people who I represent in Lancashire want a disrupter who cares about the things that matter for them, not a SW1 civil service type of government.”
Not every Conservative has attacked Sue Gray’s appointment, however.
In a letter to The Times, former minister Lord Maude defended her “integrity” and said she would do a good job for Labour.
He said: “Our civil servants should have brains, knowledge, judgment and strength of character to give robust advice to ministers.
“Gray has all these qualities in abundance; Starmer is fortunate to have secured her services.”
A former Tory cabinet minister also pointed out to HuffPost UK on Thursday night: “The conspiracy theorists like Jacob Rees-Mogg will see this as evidence that Boris was framed, but that is obviously nonsense.
“He actually survived partygate but was brought down by the Chris Pincher stuff, which was entirely of his own doing.”