It’s not the version of the report Sue Gray had intended to publish, but her 12-page “update” on more than a dozen Downing Street parties could be described as a damning masterpiece of succinct understatement.
Written in the first person against a backdrop of intense anticipation, its language is in line with the work of a veteran civil servant with significant experience examining ethics breaches at government’s highest level.
At points, Gray’s frustration at being asked by Scotland Yard to hold back on what are thought to be the most damning details is apparent. “Unfortunately, this necessarily means that I am extremely limited in what I can say about those events and it is not possible at present to provide a meaningful report,” she writes.
Saying she considered whether it would be better to pause her investigation, Gray adds: “Given the widespread public interest in, and concern about, these matters, and to avoid further delay, I am providing an update on the investigation.”
The use of the word “update” is seen as a signal by Gray that she does not consider this the final word and expects to submit a full report after police investigations are complete.
The Downing Street parties report was expected to be similar to two other investigations into ministers. In 2020 the standards chief Sir Alex Allan examined bullying allegations against Priti Patel, and three years earlier Gray examined allegations against Damien Green.
The earlier Gray report led to Green’s sacking as first secretary of state after he admitted lying about pornographic images on his House of Commons computer.
While the then cabinet secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood, was unable to reach a definitive conclusion on separate allegations made by the writer and Tory activist Kate Maltby that Green had behaved improperly towards her, Gray’s finding that Maltby’s account was “plausible” was also highly significant.
The word “plausible”, –which Gray is said to have insisted be included in her 2017 report, does not appear in her parties report, but she still manages to convey a damning verdict on some of the behaviour she investigated.
“Against the backdrop of the pandemic, when the government was asking citizens to accept far-reaching restrictions on their lives, some of the behaviour surrounding these gatherings is difficult to justify,” she writes.
As for the report on Patel, it was its author, Allan, who ended up resigning as Johnson’s ethics adviser after the prime minister refused to sack his home secretary despite the report finding evidence that she had bullied civil servants.
Gray is unlikely to be going anywhere, even after taking on the altogether more difficult task of investigating not just her boss, the prime minister, but also Simon Case, the head of the civil service, who stepped down from leading the investigation.
Those familiar with Gray are convinced she will not have been daunted. A succession of profiles has seldom failed to mention her time in the 1980s as a “no nonsense” landlady running a pub with her husband outside Newry during the Troubles.
The stint was a career break from the civil service, which Gray had joined in the 1970s, before she was lured back to London to work at the Cabinet Office under Gordon Brown and Tony Blair. Higher-profile roles followed under David Cameron, before she was appointed as the director general of the propriety and ethics team in 2012.
In Monday’s report, Gray makes her feelings clear about her role in the civil service when she talks in her conclusion about the “whole of the country” rising to the challenge of the pandemic. “Ministers, special advisers and the civil service, of which I am proud to be a part, were a key and dedicated part of that national effort,” she writes.
