Don't Vote Labour Again (Part 9)

Sue Gray; Civil Service appointments

Sue Gray

The circumstances in which Sue Gray was hired as Keir Starmer's Chief of Staff in 2023 were murky to say the least. She was a senior civil servant who had been in charge of the 'party-gate' investigations, and (reportedly) involved in the probe into whether Boris Johnson had misled Parliament. Wouldn't you know it, but not long after Johnson was found culpable by both inquiries, she was offered a plum job with Labour. Her son Liam Conlon became a Labour Parliamentary candidate, and when elected he got £10,000 in Lord Alli money to tide him over. It must have been a series of complete coincidences.

Once in government, Gray was granted a salary of £170,000. She was to be paid by public money, not from the Labour Party coffers. Her salary was larger than that of the Prime Minister himself (£167,000). Other recent Chiefs of Staff did not manage this. Adjusted for inflation, Alastair Campbell and Jonathan Powell got £179,000 each while PM Blair accepted £196,000 (he was officially entitled to £275,000). Nick Timothy and Fiona Hall got £188,000 each while May got £193,000. Dominic Cummings received up to £179,000 while Johnson got £204,000.

This detail of course made the headlines, causing consternation. Apparently Labour figures had realised this would look bad and tried to head it off at the pass. Gray was asked to accept slightly less than Starmer, it is said, but she plain refused.

She didn't earn her money. Starmer's rocky start was marked by riots across the country, the disastrous PR from cutting the heating allowance and letting out prisoners, and the scandal over gifts and donations. On the latter point, it was alleged Alli’s security pass had been authorised by Gray. The common denominator in all of these issues was poor communication and party discipline, both aspects within Gray's remit. Worse than this, Gray apparently tried to ice out her rival Morgan McSweeney, the other key advisor in Labour who now has her job.

Worse still, in an act of heresy she supposedly influenced Starmer to ignore the instructions of Tony Blair. Within days they decided not to go with Tone's beloved digital ID, and then they refused to commit to massive AI development (which he was also pushing). Blair would not have been happy about this, especially as Starmer was making such a hash of everything else. Some claim Gray was defenestrated by the shadowy machinations of the scorned ex-leader.

Many Starmtroopers were celebrating the resignation of the Head of the Civil Service, Simon Case. They considered him an ally of the Conservatives, despite behaviour pointing to the contrary. He left the post on health grounds. In what now seems like a deliciously ironic moment, one of Jess Phillip's employees Tweeted out: "In a quiet office, Sue Gray pours herself a whiskey and looks out over St James' Park. A smile plays over her lips". Mere days after this cringey prose, Gray herself resigned on October 6th. One gets the feeling it was not exactly voluntary.

The same Starmtroopers who had defended Starmer's dodgy-looking appointment of Gray were now saying what a masterful substitution (demotion) he'd made. It was not of course an act of weakness or desperation, casting his first 100 days in a poor light... No doubt if his new set-up fails to work, and he has to U-turn again, he will continue to be masterful.   

Hilariously, it has now emerged there has been no 'substitution' at all. At first it was announced Gray had been given some made-up new job in charge of overseeing devolution, dubbed  ‘Envoy to the Nations and Regions’. Bizarrely there was an inaugural event of the 'Council of the Nations and Regions' in Scotland on October 10th, but Gray was not present. Starmer of course would not comment on this fact. There was talk that Gray was demanding too much money, and there was no more official information as to what the role was, or when it would start. On the 12th of November, No 10 confirmed the job offer had been withdrawn because Gray had “now decided not to take it up”. That’s likely code for ‘we got rid of her’. It is a great shame Starmer appears to have realised, in a rare moment of wisdom, how toxic she was.

Perhaps Gray is not so upset about the situation, given that she will likely get a generous severance package from her short stint, and probably has a good pension lined up. There is even talk that she will be put into the Lords. Guido Fawkes reported (take with a pinch of salt) that she has been 'heard boasting' about it.

From Labour's point of view it's for the best Gray is no longer Chief of Staff, because she had - as she said in her resignation letter - become a distraction. In an interview two days before she quit, Boris Johnson invoked her several times, reigniting negative discussion about Gray. If she'd have continued, everything she did would continue to remind us of her suspicious appointment, and she was rubbing people up the wrong way inside and outside of Labour.

Gray-fans painted the whole situation as a right-wing media witch hunt. They refused to accept there had been any wrongdoing at all, that it was all a 'conspiracy theory'. They also refused to acknowledge - or perhaps they were unable to see - that internal Labour power-struggles had a hand in pushing her out. Our old friend 'misogyny' was also to blame, of course. It's always someone else's fault.

The Sue Gray appointment saga

• Story broke on Sky on March 2nd 2023

• The next day Gray confirmed she'd accepted the job offer and resigned

• According to Sky News she was first approached in October 2022

• In the ACOBA report, released June 30th 2023, she admitted this but claimed the formal offer was only made on March 2nd

• Even if only approached, that is arguably still a breach of the rules, because civil servants are supposed to report a political job offer immediately

• Gray wouldn't comment or cooperate with the initial Cabinet Office inquiry into the offer

• That inquiry, leaked on June 17th, found she had breached the rules

• However, the ACOBA report found she hadn't and she took up the role on the day it was released

• Interviewed not long after March 2nd, Jonathan Ashworth said Gray was "always going to be on the list" of candidates for the role

• Starmer was shifty and highly evasive when questioned, repeating over and over that "nothing improper" had happened

• As far as we know, Gray was not contacted before her investigation into 'party-gate' was published on May 25th 2022

• She was however briefed on the probe into Johnson, published June 15th 2022, and reportedly liaised with Harriet Harman, who headed the investigation

• Labour claimed that Gray was not in the Cabinet Office at the time and had nothing to do with it

• Gray had an external legal advisor on the 'party-gate' probe who was a prolific critic of the Tories and Brexit

Civil Service appointments

Labour haven't only been recruiting civil servants as party activists, but also party activists as civil servants. The first of these was Ian Corfield. He was appointed by Rachel Reeves as a Treasury director, with a salary of at least £100,000. He'd donated £20,000 to Labour politicians since 2014 (cashback!), and had been a business advisor to Labour for seven months. The watchdog overseeing appointments had reportedly not been informed of his prolific donations, but it also said the job was 'temporary', and on that basis exceptions applied to the normal rules. Whether rules were broken or not, in the face of the negative publicity, Corfield resigned from the role and took up a voluntary position instead.

Next up was Emily Middleton. She was hired as a director general in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. Middleton had been a partner of 'Public Digital', who paid £65,000 for her to work in Peter Kyles's office when the irritating remainer was a shadow minister. Before that she worked for Labour Together, the pro-Starmer think-tank with its fingerprints all over Sir Keir's government. The organisation feeds staff into the offices of ministers and MPs, its equivalent of a financial donation.

Jess Sargeant was made deputy director of the Cabinet Office's 'Propriety & Constitution Group'. She was another of those sent by Labour Together to work for shadow ministers. Mitchell Burns-Jackson was Sue Gray's diary secretary up until the General Election. Gray then made him her executive assistant - a Civil Service role. What he does now Gray's been given the heave ho, I don't know.

Louise Tinsley, another of Reeves' people, got the role of 'Director of Special Advisers and Chancellor Engagement'. She worked with Reeves at the Bank of England, and then for her while she was in opposition (between 2010 and 2015). When questioned, the Treasury wouldn't say if the job was openly advertised for, which it should have been. Reeves also hired Oliver Newton as 'Head of Business Engagement' in the Treasury. He worked in Reeve's office as a 'business relations advisor'.

Next up we have Rayner's cronies. Haydon Etherington worked for the Deputy Leader as a policy advisor, and in the Department of Housing she now controls, he was made a 'senior policy adviser' - this time on the public dime. Ben Wood was a political advisor to our Ange, having worked for the Labour Party from 2018-2024 and been their candidate in the 2021 North Shropshire by-election. He also now works in the Department of Housing, as does Rose Grayston, another Labour Together staff member, now tasked as an 'expert advisor'.

Bridget Phillipson got one of her employees of three years, Tom Crick, installed as a 'senior advisor' in the Education Ministry. Wes Streeting's press officer of four months was appointed 'Media Relations Officer' in the Department of Health. When asked if the job was given without interview, the ministry did not deny this. Starmer's diary manager (a Civil Service position) is Annie-Rose Peterman, who had previously worked for Starmer and Emily Thornberry.

All of these appointments were made within a month of Labour being in office. There are sure to have been more since, and there may have been collusion going back years. As with the gifts and donations saga, it should be pointed out this kind of thing happens all the time, and the Tories have been no exception. But again, Starmer was professing to be a different breed, to be whiter than white, transparent and dedicated to 'public service'. That is why these cosy little arrangements rankle so much more when the Labour Party makes them. Support the Labour locomotive, it seems, and you will be hitched up to the gravy train. Neither do these arrangements dispel the perception that the Civil Service is biased to the centre left. How could it not be when the transition between the ruling centre-left party and the 'impartial' bureaucracy is so seamless?

All rights reserved, Ed Pond, 2024