caltonjock

Beergate and Jo Farrell

30 April 2021: Pandemic levels had fallen, and stringent COVID-19 lockdown regulations, first introduced in March 2020, had been eased to “step two” rules. Indoor socialising was still banned, with exceptions for events “reasonably necessary” for work purposes, and where “the gathering is reasonably necessary for campaigning in an election”. The government had also issued guidance, for election campaigning said “You should not meet with other campaigners indoors.” Restaurants were only permitted to serve food outdoors for groups of up to six people or up to two households, and indoor service was not allowed.

30 April 2021: Shortly before the Hartlepool by-election and local elections Labour Party leader Keir Starmer and Deputy Leader Angela Rayner together with 15 other Party supporters used the offices of MP Mary Foy for a meeting. Around 10 pm, a passerby filmed a 34-second video through the office window shortly after 10 pm which showed Starmer and some of the group, drinking beer and eating. The video was passed to the “Reclaim” Party leader Laurence Fox who uploaded it to his Twitter account.

1 May 2021: The Sun used a picture from the video, showing Starmer with a beer, in a brief story it put online later that day which included the statement that “people would be asking questions about Starmer’s involvement, and Labour’s rebuttal that it was a permissible work event, and the pictures from the video were out of context.

2 May 2021: the “Sun on Sunday” published the story on page 2 of its print edition, a placement usually used for political stories that are not expected to be widely read and in a further development confirmation of the accuracy of Labour’s rebuttal was provided in documents and a time-stamped video sent to “The Guardian” which showed Starmer actively engaged with other participants, between 10:41 and 11:19 pm discussing and editing a video to be used in an International Workers’ Day message. An aide who had been with Starmer then sent the final edit at 1:56 am, possibly after returning to their hotel. The Sun dropped the story.

January 2022: In his response to Partygate allegations Prime Minister Boris Johnson referred to the Durham event in his less than sincere apology to Parliament for attending a “socially distanced drinks” gathering, saying he had believed it was a work event. Starmer said Johnson had breached the Ministerial Code by misleading Parliament, and asked him to resign. The Tories called Starmer a hypocrite, alleging that he had similarly breached lockdown rules.

7 February 2022: Durham Constabulary cleared Starmer over the allegation saying they had reviewed the video and did not believe an offence had been established, so would take no further action.

12 April 2022: Johnson was given a fixed penalty notice (FPN) for breaching COVID-19 regulations. Starmer again said Johnson should resign. In response, the Tories demanded a formal investigation of the 30 April 2021, events in Durham.

22 April 2022: Tory MP Richard Holden wrote to Durham Constabulary saying “In light of the tests applied by Metropolitan Police for the level of a Covid regulations brief, I believe there is a strong public interest in Durham Constabulary reviewing its decision not to investigate the Starmer incident further.”

27 April 2022: Holden tweeted “Durham Police leave the door open to re-examining as Durham Deputy Chief Constable to ‘make enquiries’ with investigation team against Starmer”, with a copy of the police letter stating “I will make inquiries with the investigation team and will update you at the point at which I have been able to conclude those inquiries.” Labour said Holden had wrongly characterised the letter, the police stated “As a courtesy, we have replied to Mr Holden to confirm we have received that letter and will consider its contents before responding in due course.”

4 May 2022: Starmer was interviewed on Good Morning Britain by Richard Madeley and Susanna Reid. He said: ” a takeaway was ordered, after the participants and myself had finished doing “pieces to camera”, “clearing documents” and “preparing for the next day” of campaigning. Restaurants and pubs were closed, and takeaways were really the only way we could eat. We picked up plates of food from the kitchen got on with the work”. It would be quite wrong to describe anything that happened as socialising. “The Times” reported later that it had been told by Labour sources that Starmer had the beer at 10 pm because of a delay due to the takeaway being delivered an hour late.

5 May 2022: The day of the 2022 United Kingdom local elections, Starmer said he had not had any contact from Durham Constabulary.

6 May 2022: Durham police stated that “following the receipt of significant new information over recent days”, an investigation “into potential breaches of Covid-19 regulations relating to this gathering” was being conducted. Durham police did not indicate how this compared to the stringent thresholds the Met had set for opening investigations into allegations. The Guardian said that “the news is deeply uncomfortable for the Labour Party leader, who had called for Boris Johnson to resign when he was investigated for a breach of the law”. In a media interview, Starmer said, “We were working in the office, we stopped for something to eat. No party, no breach of the rules,” and, “The police have got their job to do, we should let them get on it. But I’m confident that no rules were broken.”

7 May 2022: Diane Abbott, Shadow Home Secretary under the previous Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, expressed her view that Starmer should “consider his position” if he were to receive an FPN from the police, but did not believe that he would get one.

9 May 2022: Starmer announced that he would resign as leader of the opposition if he were to receive an FPN for a breach of COVID-19 regulations. Rayner also said that she would resign if she were to receive an FPN. Starmer stated his intent to demonstrate “different principles to the prime minister” (who had already been given an FPN for a breach at Downing Street), and said, “The idea that I would casually break the rules is wrong. I don’t think those who are accusing me of it believe it themselves … They are trying to say all politicians are the same. If the police decide to issue me with an FPN, I would of course do the right thing and step down, The British public deserve politicians who think the rules apply to them.” Replying to a media question about the possibility that the police might say there could have been a breach of rules but not issue an FPN, he said, “The penalty for a Covid breach is a fixed-penalty notice. That’s a matter of law. And I’ve set out what my position is about that.”

10 May 2022: A Government source suggested Durham Constabulary could be under “undue pressure” to clear Starmer or refrain from fining him noting that the media editorial comment said, “Superficially of course, he appears to be doing the decent thing, though frankly, he didn’t have much choice.” Starmer supporters were of the view that Durham police would be reluctant to give him an FPN because they concluded that in May 2021 Dominic Cummings had committed a minor breach of lockdown rules at Barnard Castle but that no action had been taken against him. The Durham police would be aware of political fallout if they appeared to be treating Starmer more leniently than the Met had treated Johnson. Policing minister Kit Malthouse said Durham police would “operate professionally to the high standards we expect of them, irrespective of any alleged pressure.”

14 May 2022: At a Darlington Borough Council meeting, a Councillor referred to the Metropolitan Police. and said: ” That force has issued more than 100 fines in its investigation into possible lockdown-breaking parties in Downing Street and across Whitehall following the “partygate” scandal. Whereas Durham Police previously stated it would not give retrospective fixed penalties for breaching Covid restrictions at the time of Dominic Cummings’ infamous trip to Barnard Castle as it would be unfair to treat him differently. Is it a fixed policy for Durham police that they will not issue retrospective fixed penalties or will they review this, and who will decide this and how will they account for this decision?”

Nigel Bryson, The Deputy police crime commissioner of Durham responded: “I expect the Keir Starmer “beer gate” investigation will lead to discussions over police policy. But it is the Chief Constable’s operational responsibility. I believe the investigation will be reopened based on new evidence relating to a high-profile politician from the Labour Party. We’ll have to wait until they’ve done their investigation. Once the investigation is concluded and the results are public, then it can be an issue of whether we think there was an inconsistency of policy or an inconsistency of approach.”

A second Councillor referred to Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Joy Allen’s known friendship and her membership of the Labour Party and asked how the PCC would hold Chief Constable and the force to account regarding the investigation into Keir Starmer. She said: “My concern is… if you’re of the same party as the person that your force is investigating, you are undoubtedly compromised and cannot be effective in that role and hold the police accountable for their investigation.”

Nigel Bryson responded: “The commissioner cannot direct operations of the police because the Chief Constable is responsible for the operational side of policing and until we get some kind of result we’re not in a position, whoever it is, to be able to pre-judge. If we intervene, that will be seen as political interference with the process. So we have to go through the process and then see what the investigation comes out with. It’s not up to the Commissioner to interfere with the investigation. Whenever the investigation comes out, we will be looking at whether their approach across the board has been consistent, whether there needs to be any change in policy. But we can’t get there until that investigation is completed. I understand what it looks like… but that’s the system. We’re all, I think, waiting for the results of that investigation. And then we’ll see what we need to do.”

31 May 2022: Starmer and Rayner received police questionnaires which they returned to Durham police on 17 June.

17 June 2022: Police and Crime Commissioner Joy Allen has extended Durham Constabulary’s Chief Constable Jo Farrell’s contract by three years. The Chief Constable’s current contract was due to expire on June 9, 2024, but has since been extended until June 9, 2027. Commissioner Joy Allen said: “I extended the contract to ensure continuity of leadership in what is a challenging period for policing. Jo has been an inspirational leader of Durham Constabulary since taking up the role in 2019 during which time the force has faced several challenges, including policing the Pandemic and the changing face of criminality. I’m delighted that she has agreed to this contract extension. It removes uncertainty, brings continuity of leadership in times of challenge and change and enables future planning to be undertaken with confidence. Jo is quite frankly an inspirational Chief Constable, respected throughout the force, my own office, our many partners and indeed across the whole force area. Since my election, she has demonstrated exceptional leadership abilities, evidenced by the positive outcome of the recent inspection by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS); progress of the new investigative hub which will give improved investigative performance and long-term estate resilience, and ongoing practical demonstration of the Force’s values. Her commitment to the delivery of my Police and Crime Plan will bring sustainable benefits to communities across the area, already we are witnessing service improvements and greater visibility. I am delighted that she has agreed to this contract extension which is good news for the entire workforce and the wider community.”

Jo Farrell added: “It is a privilege to serve as Chief Constable of Durham and I would like to thank the PCC for the opportunity to continue the work which we have started and see through those changes which will make County Durham and Darlington a safer place for all.”

When she was promoted to the role of Chief Constable in June 2019, Jo Farrell became the first woman to hold the post in the force’s 180-year history. Within months she was faced with steering the force’s response to the unprecedented challenge of policing the pandemic and protecting the public through the most testing of times.

7 July 2022: Boris Johnson announced his resignation.

8 July 2022: Starmer and Rayner were cleared. Durham Police issued a statement: “Following the emergence of significant new information, an investigation was launched by Durham constabulary into a gathering at the Miners’ Hall, in Redhills, Durham on 30 April 2021. That investigation has now concluded and all attendees to the meeting have been cleared of any wrongdoing. The finding was that: ” due to the application of an approved exception, the meeting was considered to be categorised as reasonably necessary work.”

8 July 2022: Concerns surface that Starmer’s connections to Labour’s Police and Crime Commissioner for Durham influenced the decision not to issue an FPN.

13 July 2022: Skwawkbox’s questions to Durham police go unanswered after sources close to the matter provide new information

Keir Starmer and his supporters have used the decision of Durham Constabulary not to fine him over his ‘beergate’ gathering to claim that there was never any question that he had done anything illegal – and his allies have attacked reports on Skwawkbox and in other media that he had received a fine. However, information provided by sources close to events in Durham indicates that the police investigators recommended fines for Starmer’s ‘dinner’, as his agenda for the day described it – but that fines were withdrawn after the force’s leadership was pressured. Skwawkbox reported last week that Starmer had received a fine and that the Labour leader had twice failed to deny that one had been issued. According to sources in Durham, the force’s investigation concluded that the law had been broken and that fixed penalty notices should be handed out. However, senior figures then withdrew the fines.

Skwawkbox sent the following questions to Durham Constabulary’s press office:

Who was the investigating officer?
The investigation report recommended fines, according to sources – who made the decision not to impose them?
Why is the force insisting on an FOI request to release the investigation report, rather than release it on request for transparency?
The Met handles all issues relating to the ‘work’ of the opposition leader. Why did Durham retain this decision if it didn’t think it was a social event?
Starmer’s own office’s agenda for the day included ‘dinner’ in Durham, not a working snack. Why was this disregarded?
Why wasn’t the CPS brought in to decide when the Durham force accepted the event was a breach, before applying an exemption?
Who made the decision not to involve the CPS?
Were any face-to-face interviews conducted?
Why were people asked to be witnesses?

In response, the force simply re-sent its original 8 July statement that it had decided not to fine Starmer and others. Skwawkbox pointed out that its questions all arose after the issuance of that statement and asked for a substantive response. No reply had been received by the time of publication some eight hours after the deadline, leaving questions about the process and who was involved in the decision-making unanswered.

During an earlier telephone call, the force responded to Skwawkbox’s request for a copy of the investigation report by saying that it would have to be done via a Freedom of Investigation Act request (FOIA) – confirming in the process that a report exists. Public bodies have obligations under the FOIA – but are not required to receive one to disclose information to journalists for the sake of transparency. FOIA requests can take many months to complete if the responding organisation disputes its obligation to disclose and the requester is forced to appeal to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).

According to parliamentary figures spoken to by Skwawkbox, the Metropolitan Police handle any investigations relating to the leader of the opposition at work, requiring the matter to be handed to the Met as soon as Durham Constabulary began to consider categorising Starmer’s ‘dinner’ – as described in the agenda for the day that his office sent to attendees, contrary to later claims that the get-together was just grabbing food and drinks as part of a meeting – as a work event.

Some three weeks before the force published its decision, Durham’s Labour Police and Crime Commissioner gave Durham’s Chief Constable a contract extension worth some £550,000, despite criticism of the force’s performance.

It should not be lost to readers that any investigation of the leader of the opposition should have been conducted by the Metropolitan Police in the first instance, not the Durham Chief Constable. This is particularly relevant since Starmer was accompanied by 2 armed police officers and 2 close protection officers throughout his stay in Durham and it would be for them to report any incident to their supervising officer at the Metropolitan Police

Keir Starmer was asked on two separate occasions to comment on reports that he had received a fine which was withdrawn and did not deny it.