Sir Cover-Up, Sir Craig and the Curious Case of His Memoirs

The rules for a former Special Adviser wanting to write a book on their time in government are very clear: Sir Jeremy Heywood must give his personal approval. As the Code of Conduct for SpAds states: “The permission of the Cabinet Secretary must be sought before publishing, or entering into a contractual commitment to publish such memoirs”. Sir Craig Oliver’s memoirs, then, must have secured Heywood’s approval before the book deal was signed. Yet a year-long Freedom of Information campaign raises questions as to whether the rules were followed…

Sir Craig’s book is full of privileged information. It discusses the contents of a phone call between David Cameron and Barack Obama (pages 62-63). It discusses the contents of various Cabinet meetings (pages 95-96, pages 376-379). It discusses the contents of a meeting between Obama and the Cabinet (pages 196-197). Now, it has consistently been government policy, championed by Heywood, not to release details of conversations between the PM and US Presidents, or to release details of Cabinet discussions. A co-conspirator tested this by sending a very specific FoI request seeking the exact same information published in Sir Craig’s book. The Cabinet Office refused to disclose it on grounds of “prejudicing relations between the UK and any other State” and protecting Cabinet privacy.

So the Cabinet Office is on record that releasing this specific information could prejudice relations with the US. Why, then, was Sir Craig allowed to publish it?

Guido’s co-conspirator has spent the last year trying to find out. On 3 November 2016, in response to another FoI request, the Cabinet Office said Sir Craig “followed the process for publishing personal memoirs as set out in the Code of Conduct for Special Advisers”. In other words, nothing to see here.

Yet eight months later, in response to an internal review of the FoI response, on 27 July 2017 the Cabinet Office was forced to admit it “does not hold any recorded information to show there was a discussion prior to Mr Oliver signing a contract with a publisher”.

Hang on a minute. If there is no record in the Cabinet Office of any discussion prior to Sir Craig signing his book deal, how can he have possibly “followed the process” which requires “the permission of the Cabinet Secretary” before “entering into a contractual commitment”Uh oh…

The Cabinet Office say Sir Craig did submit his manuscript before publication, meaning Heywood could have prevented the release of restricted information but chose not to do so. This all raises several questions. First, Sir Craig could be in big trouble if the rules on securing permission before signing a book deal were not followed, as the Cabinet Office appeared to admit. Indeed the government has seized the profits of books which breached the rules before – an outcome which definitely wouldn’t be hilarious. Secondly, if Heywood did sign the book off prior to publication, why did he sanction the release of privileged information that the Cabinet Office says “prejudices relations” between the UK and US? It is hard to see how Sir Craig and Sir Cover-Up can both have kept to the rules. This could unleash some demons…

Another Top Heywood Ally in Government

The decision to hand former BBC Trust chair Rona Fairhead a peerage and make her the new international trade minister has bewildered some and gone down badly with Brexiteers. It seems a bit random for Rona to get the gig given her past career highlight was being paid £10,000-a-day during the HSBC tax avoidance scandal. Doubly odd for Theresa May to appoint someone with close Cameroon links – Fairhead and her husband, ex-Tory councillor Tom, are very friendly with George Osborne, hardly a supporter of the government. Can the appointment perhaps be explained by Fairhead’s friendship with arch-Remainer Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood? Rona sat on the Cabinet Office board with Heywood and it was Heywood who interviewed her for the BBC job. Sir Jeremy is a big Rona fan, so you can understand why this decision is being treated with deep scepticism by Tory Brexiters. An appointment which speaks volumes for the elitist chumocracy revolving door that Theresa May claimed to oppose…

Heywood Breaching Cabinet Manual By Bypassing Ministers

Interesting story in Rachel Sylvester’s column today suggesting Number 10 is acting unconstitutionally by bypassing the Cabinet on Brexit. At present Brexit issues are being debated by Cabinet sub-committees and decided by Theresa May’s team, not Cabinet as a whole. Sylvester says “there has been no substantive Cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU… That is not only astonishing but outrageous” and “constitutionally questionable”. Gus O’Donnell’s Cabinet manual makes clear “issues of a constitutional nature”, “the most significant domestic policy issues”, “the most significant European or international business” must be agreed by the whole Cabinet. That isn’t happening at present…

What is Cabinet Secretary Jeremy Heywood up to? He has the responsibility to tell the Prime Minister that she has to make these decisions collectively, not with a smaller coterie of ministers and civil servants. He must know the status quo is in breach of the Cabinet manual, as Sylvester says it is constitutionally questionable. Heywood has a reputation for shirking tough advice – it was for example an abdication of duty that he did not insist to Cameron he had to make preparations for Brexit. Of course it suits Heywood to bypass Cabinet and give the civil service and Number 10 greater control of Brexit. The problem is this freezes out senior members of the Cabinet who should be integral to decision-making. Which means you end up with a situation like the Boris article…

Cabinet Brexit Split: Where They Stand

All explained here

Hammond, Heywood, Robbins Pushing For Weak “EEA Light” Deal

The £350 million row is (once again) distracting everyone from the real story. James Forsyth has written a bang on the money blog about the “biggest Cabinet Brexit split” – between “several of the most senior members of the Cabinet” who want an “EEA minus/light” deal, and Boris and Gove who want a CETA/Canada plus model. An EEA minus/light deal means the UK shadows EU regulations and ECJ judgements, tying the UK’s hands and not delivering the Brexit for which Britons voted. A Canada plus deals means the UK shadows some standards but mostly we would be able to forge our own way in the world. This is what is kicking off right now.

Guido understands Boris went bonkers last week when he found out Theresa May was heading towards the EEA light option at her Florence speech. Senior Tory Brexiters say the EEA light model is being pushed by Philip Hammond and Remainer civil servants in the Treasury, the permanently frustrating Cabinet Secretary Jeremy Heywood and Olly Robbins, the DExEU permanent secretary who it was announced this morning is off to Number 10. Dom Cummings, who Tim Shipman revealed yesterday was still in close contact with Boris and Gove, alleges David Davis is sympathetic to the EEA light option. Friends of DD deny that is the case. Boris and Gove are strongly opposed and insist it is the worst of all worlds.

As Open Europe’s Henry Newman, former SpAd to Gove, explains:

“Government needs to debate and decide what sort of country UK ought to be after Brexit: that’s the prior question rather than transition. The Treasury are pushing for us to be in an “EEA minus” arrangement – just outside of the Single Market but bound into a regulatory ERM. EEA minus would mean all the costs of Brexit and few opportunities. We need to be further along the spectrum from Norway/Swiss to Canada.”

EEA minus/light is essentially the Swiss model. When Switzerland sought to end freedom of movement they were threatened with being cut out of single market access and eventually had to climb down and relinquish control of borders. Theresa May should not be promising loads of money on Friday in exchange for a weak Swiss-type deal which does not deliver the Brexit people voted for. Guido believes May wants to do Brexit right, she has certainly shown no sign of wavering so far. She should remember that Boris and Gove won the referendum, not Hammond and Heywood…

Which Minister Authorised Heywood to Attack Maude?

Cabinet Secretary Jeremy Heywood is very upset with Francis Maude for speaking the truth about the civil service. In a speech last night (which is well worth your time), Maude warned that Whitehall is “deeply flawed”, not up to scratch to make a success of Brexit, guilty of promoting sub-par employees, covering up failure and lying to ministers. Any Secretary of State who has ever tried to do anything approaching a radical reform will tell you the same. If a politician ever wants to do something which might improve the country, the civil service blob stands in their way.

Heywood has launched a personal attack on Maude in response: “It is a pity that Lord Maude has chosen to attack the organisation and its dedicated staff with a wholly inaccurate portrayal of what is widely regarded as one of the world’s most effective and efficient civil services”. This isn’t  a fair critique of the Maude speech – he went to great effort to stress he wasn’t attacking individuals. And the claim that it was an “inaccurate portrayal” is guff. It is very unusual for a civil servant to go on the record to the press attacking a politician like this. The civil service code clearly states mandarins must “ensure you have Ministerial authorisation for any contact with the media”. Which minister authorised Heywood’s attack on Maude? Or has he breached his own code?

Downing Street: Do As We Say, Not As We Do

Taxpayer-funded civil servants have been authorised by David Cameron to use public resources to campaign for Remain. Will advisers and officials working for ministers who back Leave have the same freedom? They have tonight been issued a strict ban on their activities by the Cabinet Secretary Jeremy Heywood.

Civil servants working in the departments of Grayling, Whitto, IDS etc have been barred from giving their ministers briefings supporting their position on the EU. They are banned from providing speech material, and will be denied access to government papers relating to the referendum. Special advisers working for Leave ministers are banned from supporting their boss’ position in office hours. They are also banned from using annual leave on campaign activity. Pro-Remain ministers are meanwhile allowed to use public resources to campaign.

Amusingly, Heywood writes that these restrictions mean:

“The principles of impartiality and the proper use of public resources continue to apply to all government communications activity, including activity related to the EU referendum.”

This is laughable – Downing Street civil servants like Chris Hopkins are authorised to use taxpayer-funded resources to campaign for Remain, yet civil servants and SpAds for Eurosceptic ministers who want to do the same thing for the Leave campaign are banned from doing so. This is the exact opposite of “the principles of impartiality and the proper use of public resources”. It’s “do as we say, not as we do…”



Tip offs: 0709 284 0531
team@Order-order.com

Quote of the Day

IDS responds to Juncker’s pints analogy earlier:

“Mr Juncker knows a little bit more about the bar than perhaps many of us do.”

Sponsors

Guidogram: Sign up

Subscribe to the most succinct 7 days a week daily email read by thousands of Westminster insiders.
Davis: Brake Leaked His Own Letter Davis: Brake Leaked His Own Letter
Brake Misleads Bercow About Guido Story Brake Misleads Bercow About Guido Story
Labour Charge Electric Campaign Vehicle in Parliament Labour Charge Electric Campaign Vehicle in Parliament
Mr Rayner’s Alternative to Badger Cull Mr Rayner’s Alternative to Badger Cull
Sir Cover-Up, Sir Craig and the Curious Case of His Memoirs Sir Cover-Up, Sir Craig and the Curious Case of His Memoirs
Alun Cairns’ Tippy-Toes Pose Alun Cairns’ Tippy-Toes Pose
Pidcock Publicly Owned Pidcock Publicly Owned
Young Labour: Leave NATO, Abolish the City and Reject Two-State Solution Young Labour: Leave NATO, Abolish the City and Reject Two-State Solution
Salmond and Tasmina’s Boozy City Break Salmond and Tasmina’s Boozy City Break
Sunday Show Highlights Sunday Show Highlights
Tory MP’s Two Nicknames for Hammond Tory MP’s Two Nicknames for Hammond
Sadiq: “I’m an Uber Man” Sadiq: “I’m an Uber Man”
Tom Brake’s Epic Legatum Whinge Tom Brake’s Epic Legatum Whinge
Juncker: Thanks For Saving Us in The War, Now You Must Pay Juncker: Thanks For Saving Us in The War, Now You Must Pay
Tom Brake’s Epic Legatum Whinge Backfires Tom Brake’s Epic Legatum Whinge Backfires
Starmer Admits Public Clueless as to Labour’s Brexit Policy Starmer Admits Public Clueless as to Labour’s Brexit Policy
Melania Sports Sam Cam’s Cefinn Melania Sports Sam Cam’s Cefinn
Mounting Buzzfeed Losses as Staff Salaries Average £60,000 Mounting Buzzfeed Losses as Staff Salaries Average £60,000
Vince Welcomes LibDems’ Harvey Weinstein Back Into Fold Vince Welcomes LibDems’ Harvey Weinstein Back Into Fold
74% Say No Deal Better Than A Bad Deal 74% Say No Deal Better Than A Bad Deal