
No10 Refuses to Rule Out PM’s Resignation Over Possible Lockdown Breach Scandal
2
In a recent press briefing at the No10 lobby, Starmer’s spokesman refused to comment when pressed by journalists about the controversy surrounding his meeting with his voice coach in person at Labor HQ on Christmas Eve 2020. This meeting, which took place amid strict Tier 4 restrictions in London, has raised fresh questions over whether Starmer adhered to the legally binding measures imposed at that time, rather than following mere guidance.
Despite repeated inquiries from the media, Downing Street maintained a resolute silence on the matter. When asked whether Starmer had always complied with lockdown rules during his time in opposition, a spokesperson curtly stated that “he wouldn’t get involved in matters relating to his time in opposition”, reported by Guido Fawkes.
This refusal to engage on the issue has only intensified scrutiny, especially given Starmer’s previous pledge during the “Beergate” controversy that he would resign if found to have broken lockdown rules.
The situation has now escalated as No10 officials have begun passing on all questions regarding the incident to Labour political spokespeople. According to insiders, civil servants are exercising extreme caution after lessons learned from previous scandals such as partygate. This careful handling is reportedly placing significant strain on Labour spinners and ministers, who are now expected to account for the details of Starmer’s actions during his time in opposition.
Adding to the growing pressure is an apparent inconsistency in Downing Street’s stance. While officials have been quick to issue statements on matters related to Starmer’s use of Lord Alli’s penthouse in 2022 – when Guido revealed that Starmer had filmed a ‘work from home’ video there – insisting that Starmer had “not broken any rules” by using the property, they remain tight-lipped about this new allegation. The rapid and forthright response in the previous case contrasts sharply with the current silence, prompting further criticism from political commentators who accuse the administration of selective transparency.
This developing story has ignited considerable debate in political circles about accountability and consistency in government communications. With increasing pressure mounting on Downing Street to provide clear answers, the handling of Starmer’s past actions remains a contentious issue.
As the investigation continues, many in the opposition and media are calling for a more forthright approach, insisting that the public deserves to know whether the Prime Minister’s conduct during the lockdown meets the strict standards expected by both voters and international observers.