Why we are all still waiting for Sue Gray

Ministers insist privately Gray has broken the code, while Starmer is adamant she has not

Yet again, we are still waiting for Sue Gray. This time, for the Cabinet Office’s verdict on whether she broke the civil service code on contacts with the opposition by talking to Keir Starmer about becoming his chief of staff.

Why are we waiting? Because the Tories, while accusing Labour of a move that would politicise the civil service, are themselves playing a crude political game over Gray’s decision.

That’s the only possible explanation of the ham-fisted attempt by ministers to release a statement claiming Gray had broken the Whitehall code by holding talks with Starmer – in the hope of embarrassing him on the eve of tomorrow’s local elections. Normally, sensitive party political announcements are not made during pre-election periods under purdah rules that bind every government.

In the event, the statement didn’t materialise after a blazing row in which ministers were blocked by Simon Case, the cabinet secretary. Despite the advance briefing, only a bland form of words was issued last night, saying that Gray had not cooperated with the Cabinet Office’s inquiry.

Ministers insist privately that Gray has broken the code, while Starmer is adamant she has not. Although the rules say civil servants must disclose any contact with opposition parties to their minister, they are murky about whether this applies when a job is under discussion. Whitehall insiders tell me the rules appear to cover contacts in a civil service rather than private capacity, with the latter being governed by the official’s employment contract.

Civil servants have previously joined the opposition without provoking controversy: Ed Llewellyn and Jonathan Powell became chief of staff to David Cameron and Tony Blair respectively. How can anyone take up a new job without talking to their prospective employer? What if they did not secure or accept such a post? Informing ministers in another political party might jeopardise their careers for no reason.

It is true that Gray is not a typical civil servant. She was previously in charge of propriety and ethics at the Cabinet Office, and so knows where bodies are buried. But even Tories who have worked with her have great respect for her integrity. She was ordered to do the inquiry into Partygate and Boris Johnson’s allies have unsurprisingly seized on her proposed move to Labour to try to undermine her findings retrospectively. Never mind that Johnson welcomed her verdict at the time and she was accused of pulling her punches about him.

It’s not the first time the Tories have played politics with the civil service; they did so after Dominic Raab was forced to resign over bullying allegations.

Before the inquiry was published, Raab was given precious media airtime by Downing Street to weave the narrative he was brought down by civil servants with a political agenda.

Relations between ministers and officials are a mess, amid mutual distrust. Morale amongst officials is low, partly due to years of pay restraint. Case, as head of the civil service, has lost the confidence of many of those working under him after being accused of failing to stand up for them – probably one reason why he did stand up for Gray’s rights, even though he has a tense relationship with her.

Ministers gripe about poor performance and some reform is needed: there are too many generalists and not enough specialists as the system encourages civil servants to move to another post and it is easier to move poor performers on rather than weed them out.

But it’s ministers, rather than neutral officials, who have a political agenda here: the Tories are painting a caricature of a politically motivated civil service to prepare the ground for their controversial plan to bring in more political appointees.

Their manoeuvres on Gray are also designed to secure the longest possible cooling-off period before Gray can start working for Starmer. The advisory committee on business appointments (Acoba), which can recommend a cooling-off period of up to two years for politicians and civil servants taking outside jobs, will now decide when Gray can start and she is cooperating fully with its inquiry. The Tories hope to give Starmer a dilemma: if he ignored Acoba’s recommendation – as a succession of former Tory ministers have done – it would undermine his image as “Mr Rules”. However, Starmer will almost certainly disappoint them by accepting Acoba’s ruling.

Starmer has had no chief of staff for six months. He is going to be “waiting for Sue Gray” for much longer. He is standing by her, but some Labour insiders are now wondering whether the wait will be worth it.

A delay of at least a year looks likely, which would disrupt Labour’s election planning and its transition to government if it wins. Very convenient for the Tories.