Labour: Second dispute over public sector jobs due to party donations

The Government must address questions over the second appointment of a person to a senior civil service post in connection with previous donations to the Labour Party.

Emily Middleton has been appointed Director-General of the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), where Peter Kyle is Permanent Secretary.

She was previously a partner at consultancy Public Digital, which in turn funded her secondment to Mr Kyle’s office to the tune of over £65,000.

The Conservatives described the appointment of donors to top public service positions as a “growing scandal”.

A government spokesman said the appointment was made “in accordance with public service recruitment regulations.”

The Tories have asked the Government’s most senior official what was known about the donations when Ms Middleton took office and what role Mr Kyle played in the process.

Separately, Treasury Secretary Rachel Reeves is under pressure to say whether she was involved in the appointment of former banker and Labour donor Ian Corfield as Treasury’s director of investment.

In opposition, Labour repeatedly accused the Conservatives of “nepotism” when it came to appointing their political friends to public office.

Downing Street was also asked to comment on whether the Prime Minister had authorised Ms Middleton’s appointment and whether he was aware of her former employer’s donations to the Labour Party.

Accordingly Testimony by Cabinet Secretary Simon Case to the House of Lords Constitution Select Committee“The Prime Minister shall approve all appointments at the level of Director General and above.”

In a letter to Mr Case dated 26 July and posted on Friday on XAndrew Griffith, Conservative Shadow Minister for Science, raised the issue of public service impartiality.

He said Ms Middleton’s appointment appeared to set a “new and clear precedent: a minister directly appointing to a senior position in the civil service a person whose employer has recently made a significant political donation”.

Also on XJames Cleverly, a candidate for the Tory leadership, described Labour’s recruitment practices in the civil service as “very questionable”, alluding to Sue Gray, Sir Keir Starmer’s chief of staff.

“Funny how a senior civil servant goes to the Labour Party and then a lot of Labour people get public service jobs!” he wrote.

According to Ms Middleton’s LinkedIn profile, from January to July she was “on secondment to the Labour Party, advising on digital public service reform”.

Previously, she was seconded to Labour Together, a think tank close to Sir Keir.

Her new position at DSIT is that of Director General for Digital Centre Design.

Directors-general are among the highest ranks in the civil service, earning between £125,000 and £208,100 a year.

In the case of Ms Middleton and Mr Corfield, some Conservatives questioned whether the Civil Service Commission (CSC), which regulates appointments, knew about past donations to Labour figures.

However, the Commission told the BBC that it would not take this aspect into account.

“It is up to the (government) ministry to examine the ethical aspects of this matter,” a spokesman said.

Over the past 12 months, “exceptions” to the normal appointment process have been granted more than 100 times. They can be applied when the candidates are external or have political ties.

Under these circumstances, the CSC is focusing on “the business case,” the spokesman said.

They previously told the BBC: “All exceptional appointees are reminded of their duties under the Civil Service Act to act impartially, objectively, with integrity and honesty.”

There are no regulations that automatically prevent a person from being appointed to public office because of a political donation.

The recruitment principles state that the selection panel must be satisfied that the candidate “understands the requirement to act objectively and impartially… and must document how he has achieved this”.

According to the Ministerial CodeMinisters must “ensure that no conflict arises or can reasonably be assumed between their public duties and their private interests, financial or otherwise”.

“It is the personal responsibility of each Minister to decide whether and what action is necessary to avoid a conflict or the appearance of a conflict, taking into account the advice of his Permanent Secretary and the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Interests.”