‘One rule for
POLICE GAVE EARLY LOOK AT MEDIA STATEMENT
ALMOST 500 complaints were made to Durham Constabulary over the Dominic Cummings scandal, The Chronicle can reveal.
The findings come after it emerged that the force gave the PM’s former top advisor early access to the media statement that revealed he may have flouted his own Government’s lockdown rules.
The release, which stated his infamous trip to Barnard Castle had possibly been a “minor” breach of Covid-19 regulations, was sent to Mr Cummings an hour before being made public.
Now The Chronicle can reveal that the force – which already has a taxpayer-funded legal department – sought private legal help to advise
Chief Constable Jo Farrell in relation to drafting that statement.
They are among the revelations to emerge from a series of Freedom of Information requests to the force, which help paint a picture of what unfolded behind the scenes.
Durham Constabulary said the statement was sent to Mr Cummings in advance as a “courtesy”. A Durham MP
feels the disclosures will only reinforce some people’s feelings that there is “one rule for the Government and its friends, and another for the rest of us”.
“Although Mr Cummings is no longer in post, the anger that people feel about his actions has not subsided, and the suggestion that the Government had advance sight of the police statement on his actions will do little to assuage this,” said Labour’s Mary Foy.
“It would be helpful in ensuring continued trust in the Government and the police if the reason for the Government having advance sight of this statement could be clarified, along with the decision to use an external legal team to check this statement.”
The Chronicle asked the force why outside legal help was sought, and if there was a cost to the taxpayer. The force stated it would need another Freedom of Information request.
Public data, published routinely on the force’s website, reveals that in May – when the statement was released – Durham Constabulary spent at least £12,365 on external legal fees. The total sum could be greater as only amounts exceeding £500 are listed. While some of the firms the force spent money with are listed, the names of almost half of those used that month are redacted.
We also asked the force if there had been any pressure from Downing Street to see the release ahead of publication, or if others accused of an offence had previously received the same “courtesy” of seeing a press release about them prior to publication.
The force didn’t address the second point but in a short statement added: “This was one-way traffic and was done purely out of courtesy.”
The saga unfolded after it emerged Mr Cummings drove 260 miles from London to his parents’ farm in Durham in March to self-isolate, despite Government-imposed travel restrictions.
In that subsequent press statement given to Mr Cummings in advance, the force said it would take no further action against him. The 391-word statement confirmed that if there had been a breach, it was so minor it would – at most – warrant a few words of advice.
However, the scandal sparked widespread public fury and has been described as a moment when public support for lockdown measures in Britain started to wane. A separate Freedom of Information request has shown the scale of public anger over the saga.
The request revealed there have been at least 474 formal complaints made by the public to Durham Constabulary, although that figure may be higher as the number only goes up to June.
The Chronicle did seek a more up-todate figure but again, the force directed us to the Freedom of Information route.
“There is no doubt that the Prime Minister has expended an enormous amount of political capital on protecting an unelected advisor, but the real damage has been done in how, by visiting Durham at the height of the first Covid-19 lockdown, Dominic Cummings completely undermined vital public health messaging,” added Durham City MP Mary Foy.
She said damage was compounded by the revelation unauthorised development had taken place at his property in Durham, and outstanding council tax in the region of £50,000 was not to be collected by the Valuation Office Agency. “This simply reinforced the idea that it was one rule for them, and another for the rest of us,” she added.