Backlash over Sue Gray adviser who accused Tories of ‘serving up bile’
QC’s role in Partygate probe attacked as ‘totally inappropriate’
‘It risks report being considered tainted’
THERE was growing anger last night after it was revealed that a barrister advising Partygate investigator Sue Gray wrote antiTory posts online.
Daniel Stilitz QC, believed to be a Labour member, accused the Conservative Party of ‘serving up bile’.
Yet despite his strong views, he was handed a high-profile role advising senior civil servant Mrs Gray on her much-anticipated report into alleged lockdownbreaking gatherings at Downing Street.
Her report could shape Boris Johnson’s future in office, with some officials reportedly believing her findings could be so damning he has no choice but to resign.
Yesterday Mr Stilitz’s role advising her was described as ‘totally inappropriate’.
Among his Twitter posts, the Remainsupporting barrister, of 11KBW chambers in London, said Labour MPs backing the Brexit deal were ‘mugs’.
He also retweeted a post describing Mr Johnson as ‘our reckless dangerous PM’ and in 2018 he accused the Government of being in ‘a terminal mess’.
In another post, from 2016, he wrote: ‘Why not join Labour? Now seems as good a time as any.’ And commenting on Brexit in 2019, he said ‘most people don’t want Brexit’ and claimed: ‘The future of the UK is collateral damage in this mad Tory fight to the death.’ Dozens of tweets, retweets and comments posted on Twitter by Mr Stilitz were discovered by the Conservative Post website and later posted on the Guido Fawkes political blog.
They showed his ‘deep disdain’ for Brexit, the Prime Minister and the Conservative Party, according to the website.
It said: ‘These are just a sprinkling of the QC’s past tweets on the popular social media platform but point to a very clear indication as to his feelings about the Prime Minister and his getting Brexit done. One might ask is this QC holding an almighty grudge?’
Among his remarks online, Mr Stilitz wrote in December 2019 – after Jeremy Corbyn lost the general election that year – that he had rejoined Labour and would be looking for a new leader with the ‘ability to win’.
The barrister, whose Twitter account was deleted after his posts were revealed on Thursday, has not responded to requests for comment.
But Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen said: ‘Stilitz was clearly a totally inappropriate appointment and it risks what should have been the “independent and impartial” Sue Gray report being considered tainted before its release to the public.’
Political journalist Michael Crick tweeted: ‘Very foolish of Sue Gray if true, especially when her son is a leading Labour activist.’ Mrs Gray’s son Liam is chairman of the Labour Party Irish Society.
London-born Mr Stilitz, 53, was educated at William Ellis School in Hampstead and graduated from New College, Oxford, with a degree in politics, philosophy and economics in 1990.
He had two sons and a daughter with his first wife and lived in a £2million townhouse on the same Islington street as Mr Corbyn. He remarried in 2019. Mr Stilitz, who lists his interests in Who’s Who as photography, music and reading, was called to the Bar in 1992 and made a Queen’s Counsel in 2010.
In a wide-ranging career encompassing employment, public, commercial and sports law, he has represented government departments, City giants such as Goldman Sachs bank and sports stars including former Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho.
The Cabinet Office, which will deliver Mrs Gray’s report, said: ‘As Sue Gray’s update on the investigation made clear, independent advice was provided by the Treasury Solicitor and Daniel Stilitz QC on the process of the investigation.
‘The judgments in both the update and the final report are hers alone, to establish the facts under the published terms of reference of the inquiry.
‘The terms of reference and Daniel Stilitz QC were in place before Sue Gray was appointed to lead the investigation.
‘Daniel Stilitz has extensive experience of government work, having been instructed by numerous government departments across a wide range of significant cases. As with all members of the Bar, his personal views are his own and have no bearing on the professional advice that he provides as an independently regulated barrister.
‘He is bound by the Code of Conduct which sets out that all barristers maintain their independence and act in the best interests of their client.’