Civil Service Commission ‘Largely Satisfied’ Following Review into Appointment Procedures

An examination into appointments for government positions has concluded that it is “largely satisfied” with the existing procedures. The Civil Service Commission initiated this investigation in August after Conservative politicians alleged that appointments made by the new Labour government demonstrated a “culture of cronyism.” The review focused on “exception” appointments, which involve bypassing the standard civil service recruitment regulations. It determined that fewer exceptions were made in the months following the general election “than is typical in a similar length of time.” The report also indicated that “some departments appeared to lack central tracking systems” for appointments and identified two “technical” breaches of recruitment principles related to record-keeping issues. Subsequent to the general election in July, the Labour government made several appointments that attracted attention. Ian Corfield, a former banker who had donated £20,000 to Labour, received a temporary Treasury role to assist in organizing an investment summit in October. Jess Sargeant, who had previously worked for the think tank Labour Together, became the deputy director in the Cabinet Office’s Propriety and Constitution Group. Between November 2023 and September 2024, Labour Together provided a donation-in-kind to Cabinet Office minister Nick Thomas-Symonds. Emily Middleton was appointed a director general in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), where Peter Kyle serves as secretary of state. She was formerly a partner at the consultancy firm Public Digital, which covered the cost of her secondment to Kyle’s office while in opposition—a donation-in-kind exceeding £65,000. She was also seconded to Labour Together. In August, Conservative shadow minister John Glen called for “full transparency,” adding: “Keir Starmer can no longer try to brush this under the carpet.” In the same month, the Civil Service Commission—the body responsible for regulating civil service appointments—announced it would launch a review “given interest in a number of recent civil service appointments by exception.” Gisela Stuart, a former Labour MP who has since been appointed as an independent peer to the House of Lords, leads the commission. According to civil service regulations, ‘exception’ appointments can be made under specific circumstances, such as for temporary roles, positions requiring “highly specialist skills,” or to address urgent short-term needs. The commission must approve exception appointments at the most senior grade, but departments have discretion in recruitment below this level. The commission’s report found that in 2023/24, 6,977 exception appointments were made out of a total of 98,328 appointments. This represented a 25% decrease from the previous year, when 9,362 appointments were made by exception. Between July and August 2024, departments approved 550 appointments by exception. The report stated that this figure was “considerably lower than might have been expected based on data from previous years.” Cabinet Office minister Pat McFadden commented that the report was “worth reading.” However, Henry Newman, a former adviser to Conservative ministers who now writes about Whitehall, described the review as “always going to be something of a whitewash.” In a social media post, he deemed the reduction in appointment numbers “irrelevant” and reiterated his concerns that individuals linked to party donations had been given government jobs. The commission’s report affirmed that there was “no bar on individuals who have previously worked for political parties or made political donations becoming civil servants.” It further noted that departments were responsible for addressing “any potential propriety matters.” Newman argued that “clarity” was still needed regarding whether the civil service was aware of certain donations before appointing Sargeant, Middleton, and Corfield. When questioned in September, Chancellor Rachel Reeves stated that a donation from Corfield had been declared “over a year ago,” adding: “We answered all the questions in the right way that the civil service asked when we made that appointment.” A Labour source stated: “This report destroys the Tory Party’s desperate smear campaign and exposes their rank hypocrisy after they made more than four times as many civil service appointments a month without competition.” In its summary, the commission expressed being “largely satisfied with processes in place within departments to apply, consider and approve exception requests.” It observed: “Occasionally, appointments were not fully justified according to the terms of the Commission’s recruitment principles or appeared to lack justification for their length. “Some departments appeared to lack central tracking systems.” The review put forth several recommendations, including advising all departments to produce exception approval forms explaining why it would not be appropriate to conduct a fair and open recruitment process. It also suggested that “robust challenge processes” should be established to ensure that exceptions were “strictly applied.” Copyright 2024 BBC. All rights reserved. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.