Labour cronyism row
Discussion
theguardian said:
Labour donor quits Treasury role amid ‘cronyism’ claims
Ian Corfield resigns as official to Rachel Reeves as ministers deny giving preferential treatment to funders.
A Labour donor has stepped down from his role as a civil servant at the Treasury, while the party comes under fire for granting a No 10 pass to another, as ministers deny they are giving preferential treatment to their funders.
Ian Corfield resigns as official to Rachel Reeves as ministers deny giving preferential treatment to funders.
A Labour donor has stepped down from his role as a civil servant at the Treasury, while the party comes under fire for granting a No 10 pass to another, as ministers deny they are giving preferential treatment to their funders.
thetimes said:
No 10 pass for Labour donor who gave £500,000
Sir Keir Starmer’s biggest personal donor has a security pass to Downing Street.
It gives Lord Alli, a millionaire TV mogul and former investment banker who led Labour’s fundraising for the general election, unrestricted access to No 10. He organised a post-election reception in the Downing Street garden with others who helped to bankroll its campaign.
It is rare for anyone not formally employed as a political adviser or civil servant to be given a Downing Street pass, or to host events on the premises. The move has raised eyebrows among colleagues amid scrutiny of the party’s relationship with donors.
Sir Keir Starmer’s biggest personal donor has a security pass to Downing Street.
It gives Lord Alli, a millionaire TV mogul and former investment banker who led Labour’s fundraising for the general election, unrestricted access to No 10. He organised a post-election reception in the Downing Street garden with others who helped to bankroll its campaign.
It is rare for anyone not formally employed as a political adviser or civil servant to be given a Downing Street pass, or to host events on the premises. The move has raised eyebrows among colleagues amid scrutiny of the party’s relationship with donors.
telegraph said:
Labour cronyism row deepens as second top civil service job questioned
Emily Middleton’s appointment to a director general role came after her firm donated £67,000 to Labour Party.
A cronyism row engulfing Labour has deepened after a businesswoman whose firm donated £67,000 to the party was handed a top civil service job.
Emily Middleton’s appointment to a director general role came after her firm donated £67,000 to Labour Party.
A cronyism row engulfing Labour has deepened after a businesswoman whose firm donated £67,000 to the party was handed a top civil service job.
civilserviceworld said:
Cabinet Office hire prompts more questions over civil service appointments
Appointment of former Labour Together staffer to Cabinet Office constitution group attracts more criticism in ongoing cronyism row
Criticism of the government’s handling of senior civil service appointments has intensified after it emerged that a former staffer at a Labour-affiliated think tank has been appointed to the Cabinet Office’s ethics group.
Jess Sargeant, who previously worked at Labour Together, has taken up a role in the department’s Propriety and Constitution Group.
Sargeant has spent the last year as director of constitutional change at the think tank, which is closely linked to the Labour Party and backed Keir Starmer in the general election. It is understood that she was hired through the "exception" process, meaning her job was not advertised externally.
Appointment of former Labour Together staffer to Cabinet Office constitution group attracts more criticism in ongoing cronyism row
Criticism of the government’s handling of senior civil service appointments has intensified after it emerged that a former staffer at a Labour-affiliated think tank has been appointed to the Cabinet Office’s ethics group.
Jess Sargeant, who previously worked at Labour Together, has taken up a role in the department’s Propriety and Constitution Group.
Sargeant has spent the last year as director of constitutional change at the think tank, which is closely linked to the Labour Party and backed Keir Starmer in the general election. It is understood that she was hired through the "exception" process, meaning her job was not advertised externally.
dailymail said:
Cronyism row grows as two more Labour aides land jobs in civil service at the centre of Whitehall
Two Labour Party staffers have been given Civil Service jobs in Downing Street, prompting yet more allegations of cronyism.
Mitchell Burns-Jackson, who previously worked for both Sir Keir Starmer and his Chief of Staff Sue Gray, has been given a key role inside No 10 as Ms Gray's executive assistant.
Annie-Rose Peterman, who worked for Sir Keir and Emily Thornberry in opposition, has also reportedly replaced a civil servant as the Prime Minister's diary manager.
I would have thought Labour would to be whiter than white so they couldn't be compared to the Conservatives.Two Labour Party staffers have been given Civil Service jobs in Downing Street, prompting yet more allegations of cronyism.
Mitchell Burns-Jackson, who previously worked for both Sir Keir Starmer and his Chief of Staff Sue Gray, has been given a key role inside No 10 as Ms Gray's executive assistant.
Annie-Rose Peterman, who worked for Sir Keir and Emily Thornberry in opposition, has also reportedly replaced a civil servant as the Prime Minister's diary manager.
Edited by TonyToniTone on Sunday 25th August 14:04
TonyToniTone said:
Any thoughts on cronyism?
Yes. It's dodgy, and hopefully Labour will be subject to the same level of scrutiny as any other Political Party.ETA I fully agree that jobs being given to donors is dodgy. I have to admit it seems fairly reasonable/understandable to give jobs to people who share the same political views as you. I mean, if you want a certain Policy to be implemented are you going to appoint
(a) Somebody who is 100% on board with that Policy
(b) Somebody who doesnt particularly care about the Policy
(c) Somebody who actively opposes the Policy.
I'm a big fan of kebabs. I don't think PETA will be appointing me to a job anytime soon.
Edited by Countdown on Sunday 25th August 13:35
Countdown said:
TonyToniTone said:
Any thoughts on cronyism?
Yes. It's dodgy, and hopefully Labour will be subject to the same level of scrutiny as any other Political Party.ETA I fully agree that jobs being given to donors is dodgy. I have to admit it seems fairly reasonable/understandable to give jobs to people who share the same political views as you. I mean, if you want a certain Policy to be implemented are you going to appoint
(a) Somebody who is 100% on board with that Policy
(b) Somebody who doesnt particularly care about the Policy
(c) Somebody who actively opposes the Policy.
I'm a big fan of kebabs. I don't think PETA will be appointing me to a job anytime soon.
Edited by Countdown on Sunday 25th August 13:35
Vanden Saab said:
Not a single white Knight in here yet calling it filthy...quelle surprise. No doubt somehow it will be 'different"
It's not different, it's pretty normal. The last government appointed a number of its donors to public jobs, including the chair of the BBC, and there will also have been a bunch of these exception process appointments that nobody heard about. It's not a new thing and it's closely related to the SpAd model, basically being attached to the Civil Service without being a full civil servant - you can't apply for other internal CS jobs.In this case, the ones I can see the detail for look like reasonable appointments, but it's not obvious why they couldn't have done normal recruitment processes for them unless there's some actual urgency. If they've done these on the basis that the process exists and they have other things to worry about then they need to realise that they're going to be held to a higher standard than the last lot.
Countdown said:
Yes. It's dodgy, and hopefully Labour will be subject to the same level of scrutiny as any other Political Party.
ETA I fully agree that jobs being given to donors is dodgy. I have to admit it seems fairly reasonable/understandable to give jobs to people who share the same political views as you. I mean, if you want a certain Policy to be implemented are you going to appoint
(a) Somebody who is 100% on board with that Policy
(b) Somebody who doesnt particularly care about the Policy
(c) Somebody who actively opposes the Policy.
I'm a big fan of kebabs. I don't think PETA will be appointing me to a job anytime soon.
I am sure you could find somebody suitably qualified that would fall under category (a) who has not made a donation.ETA I fully agree that jobs being given to donors is dodgy. I have to admit it seems fairly reasonable/understandable to give jobs to people who share the same political views as you. I mean, if you want a certain Policy to be implemented are you going to appoint
(a) Somebody who is 100% on board with that Policy
(b) Somebody who doesnt particularly care about the Policy
(c) Somebody who actively opposes the Policy.
I'm a big fan of kebabs. I don't think PETA will be appointing me to a job anytime soon.
Edited by Countdown on Sunday 25th August 13:35
Keir Starmer pledges to clean up politics and crack down on cronyism.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/02/l...
The Labour leader is expected to say: “Trust in politics is now so low, so degraded, that nobody believes anyone can make a difference any more.
“After the sex scandals, the expenses scandals, the waste scandals, the contracts for friends – even in a crisis like the pandemic – people think we’re all just in it for ourselves.”
He will add: “To change Britain, we must change ourselves – we need to clean up politics. No more VIP fast lanes, no more kickbacks for colleagues, no more revolving doors between government and the companies they regulate.
“I will restore standards in public life with a total crackdown on cronyism.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/02/l...
The Labour leader is expected to say: “Trust in politics is now so low, so degraded, that nobody believes anyone can make a difference any more.
“After the sex scandals, the expenses scandals, the waste scandals, the contracts for friends – even in a crisis like the pandemic – people think we’re all just in it for ourselves.”
He will add: “To change Britain, we must change ourselves – we need to clean up politics. No more VIP fast lanes, no more kickbacks for colleagues, no more revolving doors between government and the companies they regulate.
“I will restore standards in public life with a total crackdown on cronyism.”
Randy Winkman said:
Yertis said:
Vanden Saab said:
Not a single white Knight in here yet calling it filthy...quelle surprise. No doubt somehow it will be 'different"
This thread will no doubt be declared ‘grubby’. 
As an aside how do you and your colleagues feel about Labour doners getting Plum civil service jobs they may have worked towards for years?
turbobloke said:
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Dear oh dear rent free in a few heads I see.
Told you chaps you need to pace yourselves.
The only thing we need to pace ourselves for is the catalogue of costly calamity in remaining Labour years.Told you chaps you need to pace yourselves.
We've had 14 years of the Conservatives f
king everything up. Everthing has been made worse by them. Yet you still pop up trying to pretend they are the best thing sliced bread.How much does the Kremlin pay you for your treachery
?Part of the issue is that Sue Gray has apparently been blocking the appointment of certain SPADs. The reason is not clear.
However it's alleged that the result of this is that if a minister really wants a particular person to advise then the only way they can then get them into their department is to appoint them into a civil service position proper as opposed to them being a SPAD. The claim is that this then risks the politicisation of the CS and hence no longer impartial. Personally not sure it is/was that impartial beforehand.
However it's alleged that the result of this is that if a minister really wants a particular person to advise then the only way they can then get them into their department is to appoint them into a civil service position proper as opposed to them being a SPAD. The claim is that this then risks the politicisation of the CS and hence no longer impartial. Personally not sure it is/was that impartial beforehand.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff