Tories and Lib Dems provide 'jobs for the boys'
The news that a photographer Andy Parsons, who once worked for the Conservatives, has been put on the civil service payroll, seems to fit a pattern of behaviour over the last few months. Not just by the Conservatives, but the Liberal Democrats too.
This would be a serious issue at the best of times, but is especially so at a time when nearly all parts of the civil service are having to make huge cuts.
In addition to Mr Parsons there are two other Conservative cases:
Nicky Woodhouse, a Conservative film-maker who was responsible for the internet propaganda service Web-Cameron, and who started work this Monday making films for the government.
And Rishi Saha, who worked as head of new media for the Conservatives during the election campaign, and is now deputy director of communications in the Cabinet Office (and effectively head of digital communications, in charge of the websites run by the Cabinet Office and Number 10).
And for the Liberal Democrats, Tim Snowball, who worked as campaign tour organiser for Nick Clegg during the general election, is now a private secretary in Clegg's office. Clegg first met Snowball when he was at Sheffield University in his constituency.
Another Lib Dem to have landed a job in the Cabinet Office is Zena Elmarouki, who worked as Nick Clegg's deputy speech-writer when he was a plain party leader. She seems to be doing pretty much the same job for him now - but as a civil servant.
All of these people are on short term contracts of a year or two. If they were to be given permanent jobs then the selection process would be a lot more stringent, and the post would have to be advertised with proper selection competition.
The Cabinet Office insists making temporary short-term appointments is perfectly normal procedure, and often followed in business and the voluntary sector.
In the past political parties would have retained some of their staff simply by transferring them from the party payroll to the government payroll and appointing them as special advisers.
That's more difficult now, however, as the government has committed itself in the Coalition Agreement to "put a limit on the number on Special Advisers" [sic]. That "limit" was never specified, though the number of special advisers has fallen from 78 under Labour to 68 today (plus one other part-time).
Another problem which both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will have had is the disappearance of Short Money, the state funds which they got in opposition. Both parties had to make redundancies, but may have cushioned the effect by getting their people jobs in government.
I'm sure there must be other examples of party political staff suddenly getting civil service jobs in recent months.
If so, perhaps readers would be kind enough to let me know.
David Cameron's spokeswoman told me tonight that this was "perfectly normal", and that when Labour was in power they, too, frequently employed former party staff on civil service contracts.
"These people have to abide by the Civil Service Code. They can't be political. They can't be partisan. They cannot act politically. They are legitimately employed and went through the proper process."
Perhaps somebody can supply me with some examples from the Labour years.
Comment number 1.
At 3rd Nov 2010, Rolfe wrote:People will be thrown out onto the streets....will camerons film maker film that for us all to see!!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 3rd Nov 2010, Rolfe wrote:Michael is it true what Andrew Neil said the other day that he had it on good authority that the 10 million pounds fund top help the poor to migrate from the inner cities has actually come from a fund inteneded to help the homeless and now they don't have anything....can this be right?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 3rd Nov 2010, Les wrote:Almost as bad as the beeb!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 3rd Nov 2010, pacman1960 wrote:No sleepless nights over this for me. Maybe they should outline the full job description.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 3rd Nov 2010, glassfet wrote:"Perhaps somebody can supply me with some examples from the Labour years."
Have you forgotten The Smith Institute?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 3rd Nov 2010, jauntycyclist wrote:yes its funny for the bbc to talk about jobs for the boys.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 4th Nov 2010, JunkkMale wrote:Funny how bad PR men seem to be at PR.
'Perhaps somebody can supply me with some examples from the Labour years.'
What, the sole source of 'sources' dried up?
Meanwhile, any thoughts on this...
%C2%A0poppy-fascism-is-getting-out-of-hand/
...after this (from a while ago?):
/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2010/10/chancellors_office_make_poppy.html
Mr. Osborne vs. fellow objective 'news' purveyor. Tricky.
It's all getting a tad tribal to really seem 'genetically impartial' (h/t: Helen Boaden)
'...the internet propaganda service Web-Cameron..'
In 91Èȱ¬ parlance, 'some might argue' that, for the past 13 years, the uniquely funded 91Èȱ¬ was a single party-political propaganda service.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 4th Nov 2010, stanilic wrote:Patronage lies at the heart of the political process and the promotion to a sinecure lies at the heart of patronage.
Of course it is a job for the guys and gals: this is why they do it.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 4th Nov 2010, TheBlameGame wrote:'Perhaps somebody can supply me with some examples from the Labour years.'
Are you serious?
Whitehall and cronyism have become synonymous. In no small part thanks to New Labour, who embraced the tradition with a fervour enough to make a Tory blush.
And what were/are SPADs, if not 'jobs for boys'?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 4th Nov 2010, stevie wrote:wot a picture...wot a picture...wot a photograph....wot yer mean there's no film in the camera? Tory party innit? They never check!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)
Comment number 11.
At 4th Nov 2010, Eddie wrote:I wonder who paid for the non payroll photographer that took the thousands of "Crown Copyright" photos of Gordon Brown...
or Sarah Browns own photo collection on Flikr - all courtesy of Crown Copyright...
Will the 91Èȱ¬ be checking this out?
Perhaps taking somebody onto the payroll is actually cheaper than employing somebody freelance - it certainly is in the NHS!
In fact, this move may well be contributing to the 330 million savings that Cameron is going to make in the "communications" budget!
So if this move will save money - will the 91Èȱ¬ make that clear?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 11)
Comment number 12.
At 5th Nov 2010, JunkkMale wrote:'11. At 3:59pm on 04 Nov 2010, Eddie wrote:
Will the 91Èȱ¬ be checking this out?
Well not today, obviously.
And, as Bob Geldof has highlighted, it may be best if it stays that way if speed and accuracy are required.
Not sure the strike is quite highlighting what was intended.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 12)
Comment number 13.
At 9th Nov 2010, 5050noline wrote:Not a lot of sympathy for your partisan views today, Michael?
Do your own research on Liebour cronyism and jobs for the boys. It shouldn't take a man of your undoubted talents long to turn up a few right away? Or have you suffered a 'mindwipe' since the voters threw Liebour into the rubbbish bin?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 13)
Comment number 14.
At 13th Nov 2010, mac wrote:What a politician says before an election, and what he does afterwards has never changed.They are all born liars,which is why they become politicians,it suits their only talent.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 14)