I highly doubt Keir Starmer broke any lockdown laws.
The law on April 30, 2020, under “Step 2” allowed any indoor gathering which was reasonably necessary for work purposes.
We now know that the dinner with Maria Foy MP was part of the Labour Party leader’s scheduled trip to Durham, days before the key local election in the constituency.
It was scheduled from 8:40pm to 10pm and took place in the Labour Party’s political office at Miners Hall.
This gathering therefore appears to have been part of the Labour leader’s work programme.
Nobody has suggested this was a party or a social gathering.
Labour Leader Keir Starmer was pictured having a beer and a curry with colleagues during last year's Hartlepool by-election
Labour referenced lockdown rules and social distancing requirements in the schedule so appear to have decided this was reasonable in the circumstances.
I struggle to see how Durham police could decide that, in fact, they have a better understanding of the political necessity of the Leader of the Opposition’s schedule right before the local election.
Equally, they could not review the Prime Minister’s diary and decide that he should not have had lunch whilst meeting Conservative activists.
Not only could they not – they should not without a very good reason indeed, as it is interfering with the political process.
This is some distance away from the gatherings at Downing Street which the Metropolitan Police are investigating.
Never miss the top politics stories again
From coronavirus to Brexit, our daily politics newsletter is there to guide you these turbulent times.
The newsletter is sent out twice daily with the latest UK & world politics news, along with leading opinion and analysis.
You can sign up here.
Each of the 12 had a social purpose, and nobody in the government has claimed otherwise.
They included leaving parties, a birthday party, Christmas parties, a “bring your own booze” drinks party and a party in the PM’s flat.
Another important question is why Durham Constabulary have reopened the investigation when they said, in 2020, that in line with their ‘general approach throughout the pandemic’.
They would not take retrospective action in respect of the Barnard Castle incident since this would “amount to treating [Dominic] Cummings differently from other members of the public”.
Unless there is some smoking gun evidence which the public is not privy to,
I would question why the Labour Leader appears to be being treated differently to other members of the public.”