5 process, essentially at the point at which the Metropolitan Police said they would be investigating those same events. This necessarily li mited what we were able to establish about those gatherings as it would not have been appropriate to continue with our investigation once the police investigation had commenced . The Metropolitan Police investigation had primacy. I have taken the view that it would not be necessary, appropriate or proportionate to undertake any further investigation work following the conclusion of the work of the Metropolitan Police. 17. At their request, I provided the Metropolitan Police with the material compiled in the course of my investigation relevant to the dates they were investigating. However, to be clear the police investigation was entirely separate from the process I conduct ed. Naming 18. This brings me to the question of names. This has not been easy. It is well established convention that the names of senior civil servants are not routinely withheld in Government disclosures. I have broadly followed this convention here, bu t given the unique circumstances of this investigation I have decided that naming should be only for the most high - ranking individuals who knew about and/or attended an event, as well as those senior civil servants or special advisers who were significant to the organisation of such gatherings, given their wider responsibility for the leadership and culture of the Departments , subject to some limited exceptions based on personal circumstances. I have determined that the public interest in reporting adequate ly on the events withing the scope of my investigation in accordance with my terms of reference justifies naming senior individuals involved to this limited extent. 19. It does not follow that any of those I have referred to in this report, named or otherwise have received a n FPN, or that any inference or assumption can be made about the outcome of the police investigation in any individual case. As I have set out above, I have not been informed by the Metropolitan Police of these matters. Photo graphs 20. My team and I have been provided with photographs of some of the events that took place, some official and others taken on personal devices. I have considered whether any of these should be published. I concluded that the official photographs shou ld be within scope for disclosure only where they are particularly pertinent in helping to understand the nature and purpose of a gathering. I have attached these to this report. I have limited identification of individuals in the photographs to Ministers and the Cabinet Secretary.