Rare sighting of a Whitehall mandarin shape shifter
Honestly, you really couldn’t make it up: Ms Gray is in the papers, again, albeit not in the top spot as the daily collection of the print press front pages shows: “Newspaper headlines: ‘Lockdown at Palace’ and ‘AI claims first scalp’” (link). That ‘first AI scalp’ isn’t about death and destruction, it only refers to the leading article in the FT, on how ‘stock in the educational sector’ tumbled.
And so to Ms Gray. I won’t apologise for getting my claws into this issue again because it’s like getting freebies in two of my ‘favourite’ subjects: the Westminster propaganda press and the hypocrisy of Whitehall mandarins. They’re not even trying to veil their spin on this issue.
Remain Central is doing their desperate best to pin the blame on Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, giving space to remarks by the civil serpents’ trade union boss. The DT on the other hand is happily bringing Starmer into the mix.
One point both papers cannot hide is that Ms Gray, this exemplary, unbiased serpent tasked with investigating Johnson’s Partygate ‘ethics’, has shown by her behaviour that she regards herself as ‘above the rulz’ by refusing to cooperate with the Cabinet Office’s inquiry into her appointment by Mr Starmer as one of his chief aides while she was still in the civil service.
This goes to the heart of the much vaunted political impartiality of the civil service. ‘The DT reports (all emphases are mine):
“Sue Gray has refused to co-operate with a Whitehall inquiry into whether she broke any rules by agreeing to take a job with Sir Keir Starmer, Oliver Dowden said on Tuesday. The Deputy Prime Minister told MPs that the former civil servant had ignored requests to reveal details of any meetings she may have held with the Labour leader before she was offered the position as his chief of staff.” (paywalled link)
The report of this inquiry is going to be submitted to Acoba anyway. Thus her reasons for refusing to participate, lovingly given by The Times, are breathtaking:
“[Ms] Gray repeatedly questioned the standing of the committee and the rules it was following during an exchange of letters with the Cabinet Office. Gray has already submitted details of her departure, including the dates that she held talks with Labour, to Acoba. “Rather than take part in a political gimmick, Sue Gray has fully respected the Acoba process,” the source said. A friend of Gray said: “She is not happy with the process. She decided that because she didn’t receive assurances about how evidence provided was treated she wouldn’t co-operate with the Cabinet Office inquiry but is making a submission to Acoba.” (link, paywalled)
What a wonderful weaselling-out! As mandarin she ought to know full well how ‘evidence’ given to a Cabient Office inquiry is being treated, she ought not to need ‘reassurances’. And has she or hasn’t she ‘submitted details’ to Acoba or not? Who knows!
To me, Ms Gray’s behaviour shows that there must be an atmosphere of constant mistrust in Whitehall ,caused by incessant leaks and secret briefings against this or that person. I wonder if she’s the ‘source’ of the anti-Case briefings …
Of course Remain Central also quotes the serpents’ trade union boss, Mr Penman, who obviously fully supports Ms Gray’s refusal and said:
“The real deal here is Acoba, that’s who should really be looking at this. They should be free to do this without others trying to influence them. It’s a novel appointment, I think everyone recognises that . . . but [Acoba] should be looking at it based on evidence and free from political interference.” (link, paywalled)
See how this works? Anything, any inquiry undertaken by the current government is ‘political interference’. Ms Gray’s submission is of course non-political because she’s now a Labour appointee, ok yah? It gets even more sinister:
“Penman said that Gray “has a right not to take part in an investigation that’s being conducted under I think rather less clear processes. Ultimately she is going through the Acoba process.” He said that “briefing over the weekend” showed that “someone in government was obviously trying to push a line” that Gray had broken the civil service code.” (link, paywalled)
So a clearly politically biassed serpent has ‘a right’ not to participate in a government enquiry whenever they declare a ‘process is less clear’? Hm. I can imagine the howls of outrage had a certain former PM used this weaselling-out of being ‘inquired into’.
These people hope to pull the wool over our eyes by making Ms Gray into a downtrodden victim of ‘political interference’ while providing us involuntarily with yet another example for ‘it’s alright when we do it’, as instrument to get rid of a former minister, under shouts of ‘power abuse’, while obfuscating one’s own blatant abuses.
There’s another attempt at muddying the waters found in yon Times piece. Some ‘expert’ pointed out that this code doesn’t really ban ‘any contact’ of mandarins with the political opposition, saying that it covered
“[…] policy, government operations and is mostly about government information. […] A very strict application of this would cover everything, but in practice no government has enforced that as regards personal contact. The question is whether opening discussions about a job is personal or official contact.” (link, paywalled)
Ah yes: talks are fine, and talking about jobs is of course just personal, nothing to see here, no inquiry needed, no conduct code breached. Labour’s claim that Ms Grays was too ‘junior’ to come under any restrictions sounds hollow:
“It is understood she never sought official permission to speak to the Opposition about the job, even though the civil service code is clear that she should have done.” (paywalled link)
This looks like creating a nice precedent for eating one’s cake and keeping it: ‘talks’, i.e. leaks and gossips, are fine! Who can determines after the fact, if a ‘tall’ was a bit of permitted gossip or about getting a job.
The report of the cabinet offices’ inquiry will go to Acoba anyway, so don’t ask if Ms Gray has something to hide or if Whitehall is trying to protect her. After all, it’s about the propriety of Ms Gray taking up her Labour job immediately after she resigned. ’Conservative’ sources told the DT:
“Having refused to disclose her conversations and affiliations throughout the time that she was investigating events in No10, she now refuses to comply with official government procedures for all departing senior civil servants. This is the person who has styled herself as the crusader for probity and standards in public life. There must now be a full inquiry into this matter and the extent to which it prejudiced her work during the so-called ‘partygate’ investigation.” (paywalled link)
Ah – but she’s speshull, she’s Labour! The ball is firmly in Mr Starmer’s court now. He surely has got nothing to hide either and can point out why he and Ms Gray are innocent of any misdeeds, correct?
Meanwhile, I simply cannot understand why Mr Case is a baddie, according to Remain Central, reporting that ‘a source’ accused Mr Case of ‘forcing ministers’
“[…] to weaken a highly critical statement on the departure of Sue Gray from the civil service to become Sir Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, […] Simon Case intervened yesterday to block plans to accuse Gray of breaching the civil service code in a statement before the local elections. He is said to have got “cold feet” about allowing publication of details of an interim report accusing Gray of failing to act with honesty, integrity and impartiality.” (link, paywalled)
Isn’t this intervention – if it took place – a shining example of being unbiased, of not politicising this report? Is this ‘source’ cross because this intervention ‘helps’ Labour? Or is it yet another item in Remain Central’s campaign to get rid of Case?
I leave you with an article in ‘SpikedOnline’ published yesterday. Mr Graham Stringer, one of the very few Labour MPs I respect, warns his colleagues that ‘celebrating’ Mr Raab’s defenestration was wrong because it demonstrates that Whitehall has become too powerful, asking if they understand that the same can and will happen to a Labour government. It’s worth reading in full.
That’s all I have for today. Meanwhile – beware of the Russians! They might hack yon Eurovision thingie, sez The Times. I wish they would! Have a good day.
Dear fellow commenters I need help, I need to know if I am going `mental`
You see I was sitting in the waiting room of my local siurgery this morning.
Quite a long wait, so not having brought a book or even a newspaper, I fell to reading the posters advertising all sorts of subsiduary services, how to take part in the mother and baby group and so on
But one poster with the face of a man on it really caught my eye, I thought it was going to offer official help for all those who are alleged to have suffered mental irregularities due to Covid lockdowns , where by government and NHS decree many of us had been incarcerated without being able even to be in touching contact with members of our on family or even attend their funerals
So as I say, one poster caught my eye.
Beside the man`s face , were large lettered words printed in descending order as follows:-
CONFUSED (note no ?????)
UNHAPPY
WORRIED
SCARED
ANGRY
LINCOLNSHIRE MAN
is your smile hiding something (still no ???? – have they been done away with now?)
GET FREE SUPPORT
at the bottom of the page was no telephone number but the following
http://a betterway.site
(bet they pinched that from “Betterware”, now they are reputed to be giving up)
Call text meet dm – one to ones
(you can see I had a long wait copying that lot down – but I did get to see a real nurse – without an appointment)
What on earth is a “dm” – sounds like “deadly missile” to me???? (yes that`s to prove it still works on my steam driven lap top)
Anyway back to the poster and setting aside, the implied or even patent misogyny.
I consider I have every reason to claim I am confused by government edicts,
cancellations of democracy, nudge units, health passports , failure to acknowledge the dangers of Covid vaccinations and the fact they were experimentally introduced when “other remedies ” were available. etc.
Along with the fact that the authorities are forcing the issue on GW by callng it a “crisis” and the planet can be saved by 2050 when everybody either knows or suspects that India and China etc the major polluters, are still continuing to burn millions of tons of coal and have no intention of meeting that date and that`s not taking into account the scam that man is not the major contributor to GW, that we are just coming to the end of an ice age and the seas are not rising exponentially as claimed and anyway figures for “exceptional weather events” being n the increase when they are not and figure “fiddling” is the norm.
So yes I am Confused, Unhappy and Worried.
But I`m downright “SCARED” by the triumvirate of the would be “Rulers” – The WEF, The UN and the WHO
intent on a policy of population reduction (not hesitating to use a form of Genocide) and enslavement of all but some of the “Elite” by the introduction of digital currency – in the full control of governments – possibly modelled in “Chinese Style”
Since starting this diatribe I have since learned that it is possibly government inspired , apparently “trying to do something” for young men dying by their own hand as well as the problem that has already been highlighted in young women.
So yes I can see their “nanny ” intentions regarding that problem of the young taking their own lives, unfortunately it seems to me so weak and timid that really they are just “Ticking boxes” rather than “attacking” a problem.
– much of what I believe Stout Yeoman has been outlining of Civil Serpents and others being so overwhelmed with legislation and such a vast increase in population in such a short period that they end up “chasing their tails” or even worse “hunting with the huntsman and running with the hounds” – was it Viv who said “having their cake and eating it”?
Anyway whatever this poster`s parentage, I still believe it covers “MY CASE” and I am entitled to be bl**dy ANGRY
It wouldn`t surprise me if many of you might have misread this poster and concluded you were ANGRY too!
Feel free to spread this ANGER far and wide – particularly as it has authoritative support (some say)
It’s all very well for Stringer to call for “radical reform’ of the civil service but, as with other voices saying the same thing, what to do exactly and how is missing. Consider the Home Office. The Labour Home Secretary David Blanket (2001) described the Home Office as a “shambles” and John Reid, in 2006, said it was “not fit for purpose”. Successive Home Secretaries have grappled with the Home Office but they are fighting with an octopus. Whatever they do nothing seems to get better, but it is not the fault of the civil service in quite the way politicians and media suggest.
Over 5000 people work in the Home Office organised into departments run by 75 directors – the over £100K salary bands – and its workload is governed by events which are out of its control. In 1996, the backlog of asylum claims was so large storage units had to be rented. In 2023, the demands of its ‘customers’ have increased almost exponentially as has the work of MI5 which the Home Office oversees. In the context of these immediate and growing demands no Home Secretary can do anything “radical” with the department. The department of Justice, a hived off part of the Home Office, is in a similar state of meltdown. The Home Office and Justice Department, whose inefficiencies already impact our lives, cannot be scaled back – yet. The influx of new laws, statutory instruments, and subsidiary regulations are a permanent rain on departments and must stop first.
The Home Office is a bureaucratically overloaded department. The 2018 NHS charging regulations, a minor part of its work in conjunction with the Dept of Health, are 137 pages of rules such as
“Certain categories of overseas visitors who are receiving a course of free treatment
on the basis that they are exempt from charge cannot be charged for the remainder
of that course of treatment if their exempt status changes to chargeable part-way
through the course of treatment. This exemption is sometimes referred to as the
“easement clause” (regulation 3(5)). The easement clause does not apply to those
who are exempt under:
• regulation 10 or 11 (surcharge and transitional arrangements),
• regulation 25(3) (children born to them in the UK),
22
• regulation 14 (reciprocal healthcare agreements).”
which staff must implement – regulation after regulation, page after page, and actually tome after tome – and should they overlook or misapply a rule then their department may end up in court (along with their career).
At root is the uncontrolled, historically unprecedented, rapid expansion of the population and so welfare state which has stressed most departments and the country is drowning in ever expanding rules and regulations. As with chain reaction in nuclear fission there comes a point of critical mass when control is lost.
Radical reform is indeed needed, but of the environment in which the civil service operates. We need a true, deregulatory government first. a reduction in the size of the state, and economic growth to reduce the welfare bill. The civil service can then be halved in size when political control of it becomes more viable.
It is easy to blame fifth column mandarins – of which there will be a good few – but that is an oversimplification and we must not let politicians deflect blame which is justly theirs. As with most things, the rot traces back to Tony Blair and an unprecedented 3000 new laws and regulations which stance was continued by Cameron. May then imposed the impossible net zero and further stressed the civil service. The mandarins are beleaguered, defensive and mostly impotent in the face of rapid social and political change to which they must respond and cannot control. Attacking ministers is all they are left with. Perhaps, it is a cry of pain, a plea for help.
Thanks, SY – this is really putting everything into context and explains quite a bit of the malaise we’re in – a malaise indeed created by that unspeakable TB.
Have mass migration become such big government business that the courtly, i.e. us ordinary plebs, are simply an adjunct to yon masses, administered and supported by the HO, the DoJ and DHSC? Perhaps a good image is that of a tick, drinking the blood of its victim while infecting it with horrid diseases.
As for this ‘cry of pain, a plea for help’: well, I dunno. it looks to me as if the ‘chiefs’, i.e. those senior serpents, simply aren’t doing their job but are drunk on their own ‘power’, displayed in the corridors of westminster and of course on the Islington dinner circuit.
The mandarins are snobs convinced of their own superiority and as out of touch as politicians, their position secure as a most privileged group. No doubt they are not the neutral servants they once were (sort of perhaps), but I think there is more to this than meets the eye. If Barbara Castle and Tony Been can have problems with their civil servants – both record that they did in their diaries – then we are merely seeing a historic trend intensify. The seeds of this were sown some time ago. In so saying, I do not excuse the current crop of mandarins – far from it for they exemplify all the vices of Goodwin’s ‘new elite’.
And this pile of shyte, namely the Conservative Party, Labour Liberal Democrats and Greens desperately want our vote on Thursday. Well, they can all go where the sun don’t shine as far as I am concerned. They are all as bad as each other and none of the mainstream political parties will ever get my vote again. Sick to death of the lot of them and all their hangers on, Sue Gray whoever she is included. Civil Servants like police officers whilst in service are supposed to be politically impartial, well it obviously didn’t apply to her and she was somewhere near the top so no such thing as setting an example to all those below her. We need a mass clear out of the House of Commons and it appears the top echelons of the Civil Service as well.
Every single bit of electioneering material that has come through my letter box from whatever party has been slipped into the green recycling box largely without being read. I dare say most of the thousands of UKIP and Independent leaflets that I posted through letter boxes over a 11 year period probably ended up in a recycling box without being read, so now I will do what they did to me. I had a Green Party activist knocking on my door who saw a litter picker in my umbrella stand and thought I should vote for them on that basis because they as a party litter pick the town where I live once a month. I was proud to inform her that I was once a UKIP member, activist and election candidate myself at one time, and that yes I did have a litter picker in my umbrella not because I was a budding Green Party voter, but because I had genuine concern for our countryside and litter picked the countryside twice a week for a well known national Conservation body.
On Thursday I shall do my bit and attend the polling station in possession of my driving licence to prove who I am, and will spoil the ballot paper with a few choice words. There is no real choice where I live, there being only the New Green Party (formerly known as the Conservative Party) and the Green Party. Four years ago when I last stood for election to the Borough Council in my particular ward as a UKIP candidate, there were candidates for Labour and the Liberal Democrats but they have climbed into bed with the Green Party in some sort of electoral pact. So at long last we know where their respective political loyalties now lie. I mean why would the Liberal Democrats agree to climb into bed with the Green Party, as they are on the far left in the political landscape, probably more left wing in nature than Labour would have been under Jeremy Corbyn. And it begs the question why would the supposedly more moderate Labour Party under the leadership if Kier Starmer want to climb into bed with a far left candidate. It makes no sense to me, so I sincerely hope that the amount of spoilt ballot papers this election exceeds the number of votes that each candidate accrues. Wouldn’t that send a message to our so called political masters.
And where are our supposed political saviours under Richard Tice, you know the man who has promised us 650 candidates will stand in the next general election. Reform UK are nowhere to be seen, I mean literally nowhere, not a candidate in sight. Totally and utterly bloody useless is my take on it. I wish now I had stood as a UKIP candidate myself as at least there would have been a choice between Green and Green in my ward.
Nobody will read the missive on your spoiled ballot paper. It will just go onto a pile with all the others.
HA…….another nonsensical post Harry. You’ve obviously never stood as an election candidate and it shows, not even for your beloved Conservative Party/ConSocialist Party/New Green Party. Well, having stood five times for election let me tell you, that all spoilt ballot papers are shown to the candidates by the Returning Officer during the count and before the result is announced. Put that in your proverbial pipe and smoke it. You don’t have a damn clue about anything which matters, and that shows as well. However you’re good for a laugh just like Boris, if nothing else. Love-a-Duck…
It is worth mentioning that spoilt ballot papers are counted. A large spoiled count could be significant as it records more than a low turn out. It is more than apathy. It is active disdain.
THANK YOU STOUT YEOMAN at 1.37 pm. That is precisely the point we need to make. In spite of whatever Harry Again Armitage has said.
Colin. ReformUK are a huge disappointment, I grant you that. And they do little to dispel the allegation by many that they are just ‘controlled opposition’ Don’t know what Farage and Tice are up to but I still don’t trust them one iota even though I joined them ( but retain my membership of Heritage and UKIP). Reform Derby have the right idea – they are registered as a political party in their own right and if Farage and Tice do the dirty they carry on doing their own thing, serving the people of Derby. Let’s hope more groups of ReformUK do the same for their constituencies.
We have a candidate for 2024 GE in our constituency and I will both vote for them and help them if they want me to help. I say ‘if they want help’ because already I find that ex Kippers are kept at arms length. What alternative is there except as you will rightly do for the local election – turn up and spoil your ballot paper.
Jake……its obvious that those councilors who formed Reform Derby had zero confidence in Tice and Reform UK, otherwise they would have remained within their fold. One or two of them were in fact elected UKIP councilors rather than Reform UK. Reform UK do not exist outside of Tice’ office as there is no local party infrastructure, and all this talk of putting up 650 candidates at a general election is pie in the sky talk. Any fool with a smidgen of political sense between their two ears will tell you that in order to get a candidate elected, one has to have quite a large team to do the donkey work on the streets and at the doorstep. When Tice stood in Bexley and Sidcup me and another former Kipper phoned their office several times to offer our assistance in that by election, and got no reply, nor were or calls returned. Not even to say get stuffed. That sums Reform UK up for me. Put simply, they are not worth bothering with. I wouldn’t waste my time, energy, shoe leather or money on them.
colin H at 10.13am. Here all that elrctioneering paper material goes in the brown bin. Otherwise I totally agree with you. Being 78yrs old and disabled in many ways I have voted by post. Offered Lab, Con, LibDem, or Green, I put 2 diagonal lines through and wrote betbeen them ‘None of these’!
It has been a big job At Reform UK vetting and interviewing candidates, we in North Devon now have our candidate and statistically stand a good chance of ousting the Conservatives as Saxby is not popular.
There was no time or enough people to put up anybody for the council elections. However, every step is progress.
Well Michael, as I have said several times on this site it is all very well having a Reform UK candidate to vote for whether it be a Borough/District Council or a Parliamentary candidate, but if there is no local party infrastructure present to provide the donkeywork on the street in terms of delivering leaflets to all residential addresses, canvassing at the doorstep, manning polling stations around the clock on polling day, and knocking up those who have pledged to vote for your party but haven’t bothered to do so, then it is going to be a huge waste of time and a lot of lost deposits insofar as parliamentary elections are concerned. That is one of the fundamental problems with Reform UK in that there is no local party infrastructure because their leadership seem to think it can all be done online, on social media or centrally from their offices. How do I know all this, well, I have been a constituency campaign organiser and election candidate with Reform UK. It was hard enough with UKIP, but at least with that party it had an established local party infrastructure in the form of local branch associations, and my local branch at one time had 170 members, of which only 22 were hard core activists. The reality is that the average voter will not vote for a party unless someone from that party and preferably the candidate knocks on their door to capture their vote, but try telling the leadership of Reform UK that. It goes in one ear and smartly out of the other. Anyway good luck to your candidate in North Devon. I hope he/she will be supported by dedicated activists willing to wear out shoe leather on a daily basis, but somehow I doubt it. I am seriously thinking of standing as the parliamentary candidate in my local constituency for the UK Independence Party at the next general election. Its the only viable option as far as I can see……
This article published on the Daily Sceptic lends even more value to Viv’s insights on machinations of Whitehall.
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/05/02/should-whitehall-be-treated-like-just-another-workplace/#comments