Waheed Ali

Gabriel and Patrick broke the scoop which sparked the first political crisis of Keir Starmer’s administration - and a national conversation about the relationship between money and politics.

This was the story that Lord Alli, the prime minister’s biggest personal donor and the man who lavishly paid for his suits and spectacles, had an access-all-areas security pass to No10. In their report, Gabriel and Patrick revealed that Alli, who had become a “trusted voice on sensitive matters, including ministerial appointments”, had not only been given access, but had used it to host a reception in the Downing Street garden attended by other millionaire who had bankrolled the election campaign. Equally inexplicable was No10’s response: there was none. This, it transpired, was because practically nobody understood how the unheard of arrangement had been brokered, or when it started and ended.

The revelation, instantly christened the passes for glasses affair, had instant impact, dominating the front pages of every national newspaper and broadcast news. It was quickly followed by the Sunday Times' story that Starmer had not declared that Alli had funded his wife Victoria’s clothes, as well as his, to the tune of several thousand pounds - reinforcing how extraordinary it was that such a person should have been granted ready access to the heart of government.

Yet the impact went deeper still. Before long, Gabriel and Patrick's reporting had exposed a gulf between the public and political class as to what is acceptable - one which the prime minister, who had vowed to “clean up” politics, and a striking number of his cabinet colleagues failed at first to appreciate. It also persuaded the government to change the rules on ministerial gifts and hospitality; forced the PM, deputy PM and the chancellor to commit to change their own conduct; and led Starmer to repay thousands in donations he knew he could no longer justify.

The reporting, executed without fear or favour, ended up overshadowing Labour’s first conference in government in 2009. When Alli was doorstepped in the venue, he did not even seek to explain the arrangement.

The government’s inability to respond showed the bulletproofness of the scoop - but also a dysfunction at the heart of No10. Starmer resolved them by reluctantly reorganising his Downing St operation. Even then, it was only the budget, after a months-long drip drip of allegations touching on clothes, suits, glasses, birthday parties, concert tickets and luxury penthouses, that the PM managed to draw a line under the matter.

Few would have foreseen the so-called donor-gate/freebie-gate/passes-for-glasses scandal so hot on the heels of the election. Yet that is precisely why the story had such impact inside Westminster and further afield: it defied expectations, changed perceptions, and serves as an example of the impact that only journalism can deliver.