Claim: Reform UK “Jumped the Gun” in Publishing the Rupert Lowe KC Report
Summary of the Claim
After the findings of an investigation by barrister Jacqueline Perry KC into bullying and harassment allegations against Rupert Lowe were made public, Lowe and his supporters claimed that Reform UK had “jumped the gun” by publishing the report earlier than agreed. They argued that the party broke an understanding about the timing of publication and that the report was released without the KC’s consent.
This fact-check examines whether Reform UK did publish the report earlier than the agreed deadline, what the KC herself said about the timing, and how the party justified its decision.
Where the Claim Came From
The phrase “jumped the gun” originates directly from an email written by Jacqueline Perry KC, who carried out the investigation into allegations of bullying and harassment involving two women who worked in Lowe’s offices. In that email, quoted by The Independent, Perry wrote that she was “surprised and disconcerted that the gun had been jumped” when Reform UK published her report earlier than the date she had indicated to Lowe’s legal team.
Rupert Lowe then used this email to argue that Reform and Nigel Farage had broken an agreement about when the report should be released and that the process was unfairly managed.
Verdict: ⚠️ Misleading
There is clear evidence that the KC believed the report had been published earlier than she expected and that she used the phrase “the gun had been jumped.” However, the fuller context shows that she had also told Reform UK that, in view of Lowe’s public comments and lack of engagement, she would leave the timing of publication to the party. The claim that Reform UK unambiguously broke an agreement and acted without any basis is therefore incomplete and somewhat misleading.
Evidence and Analysis
1. What the KC actually said about timing
In an email to Lowe’s lawyer, Perry apologised for the way the report’s publication was handled. She stated that she had indicated a deadline of Wednesday 26 March and that the report “had been released entirely without my input.” She added that she was “surprised and disconcerted that the gun had been jumped” and that this appeared to renege on what she had previously made clear about timing.
Taken alone, this strongly supports the claim that publication was earlier than she expected and that she viewed it as a breach of an understanding.
2. The second email and the party’s justification
Reform UK provided a different part of the correspondence to the same Independent report. In a separate email sent before publication, Perry wrote that, although she had said she would wait until Wednesday 26 March, in view of Lowe’s public pronouncements she would “leave this decision to the party.”
This means that, while she had initially set a clear date, she later signalled to the party that she would defer to its judgment on when to release the report. Reform argued that, given Lowe’s public attacks on the process and refusal to engage, the original deadline no longer applied in the same way.
3. Lowe’s use of the KC’s email
Lowe cited Perry’s first email as evidence that Reform UK had broken an agreement and mishandled the investigation. He argued that the report was meant to be an internal document and that publishing it early, and naming staff, was unfair and “outrageous.”
However, his public claims tended to highlight only the parts of the correspondence that supported his case and did not give equal weight to the later email where Perry left the publication decision to Reform UK.
4. How media described the situation
Coverage in outlets such as The Telegraph and The Independent described a “furious row” over the publication and reported that the KC said Reform had “jumped the gun.” At the same time, these reports included the party’s response, which stressed that Lowe had refused to engage with the investigation and that his lawyers had indicated they would not be responding by the deadline.
The reporting presents a messy, contested situation rather than a simple breach by one side.
5. Why the claim is not simply true or false
If the claim is phrased narrowly as “the KC said Reform ‘jumped the gun’,” it is accurate. She did use that phrase. If the claim is broadened to imply that Reform UK definitively broke a fixed agreement and acted without any basis or consent from the KC, that goes beyond what the full correspondence shows.
The reality is more nuanced. The KC was unhappy with the way the report was released and felt an understanding had been breached, while also having told the party that, because of Lowe’s public stance, the timing decision would be left to them.
Conclusion
The phrase “jumped the gun” comes directly from Jacqueline Perry KC, and there is evidence that she was unhappy about the timing and manner of publication of her report into Rupert Lowe. In that sense, the claim has a real basis.
However, using this phrase to suggest that Reform UK blatantly broke a clear and unqualified agreement oversimplifies the situation. The correspondence shows that the KC both set a deadline and later told the party she would leave the timing to them after Lowe refused to engage and made public statements about the case.
For that reason, the claim that Reform UK “jumped the gun” is rated ⚠️ Misleading when it is presented as proof of a straightforward procedural wrongdoing, without the wider context.
Sources
• The Independent – “Reform published my Lowe report too early, claims KC”
• The Telegraph – “Reform ‘jumped the gun’ with my Rupert Lowe report, says KC”
• PoliticsUK – “Review of Rupert Lowe investigation makes criticisms of Reform UK”
• Nation.Cymru – “KC questions Reform UK’s ‘influence’ on Rupert Lowe investigation”