Oral evidence: The work of the Cabinet Office, HC 118
Oral evidence, 26 April 2021.
Witnesses
Simon Case and Darren Tierney.
Chair
Good afternoon and welcome to this session of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee. I would like to introduce our two witnesses today, starting with the Cabinet Secretary.
Simon Case
Good afternoon, Chair. Simon Case, Cabinet Secretary.
Darren Tierney
Good afternoon. Darren Tierney, Director General for Propriety and Ethics in the Cabinet Office.
Chair
Thank you both for coming this afternoon. Mr Case, if I can begin with what has been covered substantially in the press this weekend and goes by the colloquialism of the “chatty rat leak”. A number of things have been said by the Prime Minister’s former senior adviser upon the nature of a leak inquiry. Essentially, is what Mr Cummings has said true?
Simon Case
Thank you very much. I hope that the Committee will understand that I am very constrained in what I can say, given the security classification of the exercise of this leak inquiry. What I can say is that the investigation is ongoing. This is a clear indication that all sources have not been identified. Given the time that has now passed, it is probable that the team will not successfully identify the source or sources but work is ongoing. These investigations are often complex and have many threads to them. Lines of inquiry develop and get resolved. Some run into the ground. Because of the significant public and parliamentary concern around this leak, with the PM’s permission, officials have been providing briefings on the investigation to the Speaker of the House on Privy Council terms. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Prime Minister has made clear that the Government will update Parliament.
Chair
Thank you. Can you give an indication of the timescale for the conclusion of this investigation?
Simon Case
I hope weeks rather than months.
Chair
Could I press you further? How many weeks rather than months are we looking at?
Simon Case
These investigations are complex and have different strands to pursue, but I hope it will not be long now before the House can hear of the conclusions. We are recognising legitimate public and parliamentary interest in this, but are trying to manage the issues around the security classifications of the context and the content. We have been updating the Speaker on Privy Council terms so that at least the parliamentary authority—the Speaker—is aware of progress.
Chair
Is an outcome actually desired?
Simon Case
Yes. You have to remember that this inquiry related to a matter of vital public concern. There was widespread anger, not only in government but beyond, about this leak that related to a vital part of our Covid response. From the outset, the Prime Minister, other Ministers, the teams and everybody were determined to try to find out who was responsible.
Chair
In the generality now, is it usual in the course of such an investigation to tell parties partway through that they are exonerated from an investigation?
Simon Case
Shall I spell out the broader process of how these inquiries are conducted?
Chair
Please do but, before doing that, could you answer that point? Is it usual to tell people partway through an investigation that they are not implicated any further?
Simon Case
For reasons that I hope you will understand, I cannot comment on individuals. Actually, public speculation risks being unfair to individuals and undermining the investigation. Providing updates as the investigation progresses is part of the normal process, which I am happy to set out.
Chair
Please do.
Simon Case
When a leak, or suspected leak, is identified, the Cabinet Secretary decides whether to initiate a leak inquiry, usually in discussion with the Prime Minister. Permanent Secretaries can also initiate leak inquiries in their own Departments should their information be released in an unauthorised way. Leak inquiries instigated by the Cabinet Secretary or involving more than one Department are referred to the Government Security Group in the Cabinet Office to investigate, using a full range of techniques. You will understand that I will not go into the exact techniques they use to prevent undermining future inquiries. Once that information is gathered, the Government Security Group produces an initial report for the Cabinet Secretary on what has been established and, if deemed necessary, this report is also shared with the Prime Minister. Going beyond that process, if there is reason to believe that the leaking of the information constitutes a crime—for example, under the Official Secrets Act or misconduct in public office—it is referred to the Metropolitan Police through a meeting known as the gateway process, which involves seniors in the Cabinet Office, the police and other relevant organisations, and looks at damage, evidence and so on. The threshold for police involvement is high.
Chair
Is it usual or indeed possible that investigations can be suspended without conclusion before they have gone the full course?
Simon Case
In theory, it would be possible, but I am not quite sure under what circumstances you would want to conclude an investigation before it had reached that initial stage. I am assuming that we are talking here about the initial review by the Government Security Group. I am not aware of circumstances in which that would happen.
Chair
To your knowledge, whether in your current post or those of your predecessors, has an investigation ever been stopped because the outcome of it would have been subsequently more embarrassing than the actual matter itself?
Simon Case
My knowledge is limited to my time, I am afraid. No, I am not aware of any instance.
Chair
Therefore, we can discount what appeared in the press this weekend?
Simon Case
In what sense?
Chair
A suggestion was made that an inquiry be suspended in case it brought forward an answer that was not particularly helpful.
Simon Case
I am not entirely sure what press report that is but, no, in relation to this particular leak or others, the Prime Minister has always been clear and very determined to see these inquiries complete.
Chair
Is that determination met with any timescale more timely than a matter of weeks, given that this leak occurred in October last year?
Simon Case
These investigations are complex. There are usually many threads to them, and there is usually a range of people to interview, data and so on. The team is made up of professionals who do this work and they move as fast as they can.
Chair
I do not doubt the professionalism of those conducting any investigation—far from it—but surely relatively few people would have known about this subject matter in October, so it is a rather small pool in which to fish.
Simon Case
Chair, I am not trying to frustrate you or other members of the Committee on this, but we are going here into the details of the investigation and who knew what. This is an area where I am constrained because, if I go further on this, it will start to reveal the details of the investigation, which could—
Chair
That is fine, but you said that updates are provided. To whom are those updates provided? Are they provided to the Prime Minister?
Simon Case
Yes.
Chair
To anybody else?
Simon Case
Via me, yes.
Mr Jones
Mr Case, you will appreciate that the questions we are asking you now are in the light of a blogpost published on Friday last week by Dominic Cummings, which I am sure you have read. Is that right?
Simon Case
Yes.
Mr Jones
In that blogpost, Mr Cummings refers to conversations that he had with you, apparently in circumstances where no one else was present. Do you accept the truth of what Mr Cummings says in that regard?
Simon Case
Again, I am genuinely not trying to frustrate the Committee, but I am constrained in what I can say because it is in the context of an ongoing investigation. I am apologetic. As I say, recognising legitimate parliamentary concern on this, we have gone down the exceptional route of providing briefings to the Speaker of the House on Privy Council terms so that, as far as we can, Parliament is being updated on the detail of the investigation.
Mr Jones
Did you authorise the Prime Minister’s then official spokesman to tell the media that your inquiry had shown that neither Mr Cummings nor the then Director of Communications were the “lockdown leakers”?
Simon Case
I am sympathetic to the Committee and I am not trying to frustrate, but this is drawing me into details of an ongoing investigation, which, for the reasons I have set out, I cannot go into in this setting, which is why we have taken the exceptional step of updating the Speaker of the House on Privy Council terms to make sure that at least the parliamentary authority is aware of the content and detail of the investigation.
Mr Jones
You made the point earlier that you did not want to be unfair on anyone who was being investigated, but of course if you were to simply confirm what I just put to you, you could immediately exclude both Mr Cummings and the Director of Communications from the inquiry.
Simon Case
But, again, you are inviting me to comment on the detail of an ongoing investigation. As I have said, I am under constraints relating to classification and so on, so I am afraid I cannot go into these sorts of details. We have been updating the Speaker on the progress with this inquiry and, as soon as it is concluded, the Prime Minister has committed to setting out the conclusions for Parliament so that you will be able to see where we have reached.
Mr Jones
Did you give instructions to the official spokesman to confirm that neither Mr Cummings nor the Director of Communications were the leakers?
Simon Case
Again, I am afraid, Mr Jones, my answer is the same as before. I cannot go into these sorts of details relating to an ongoing inquiry. I apologise to the Committee. It is not out of rudeness or disrespect to the Committee, but there are constraints on what I can say in this forum, which is why we have taken the exceptional steps of keeping the Speaker updated on progress. As the Prime Minister has said, we will update Parliament on the conclusions as soon as they are available.
Chair
When was the Speaker last updated?
Simon Case
I believe it was a fortnight ago. I will come back to you if I have that wrong.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Do you think that the leaker has broken any laws? Are we discussing lawbreaking here, or are we discussing embarrassment?
Simon Case
This was looked at as part of the gateway process involving the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and so on, which concluded that this leak did not meet the thresholds for an offence under the Official Secrets Act or the offence of misconduct in public office.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
If it does not meet the offence criteria, and does not threaten national security or the Official Secrets Act, why are you unable to furnish us with some more detail on the questions that we have just asked you, particularly when we have asked whether you have said things to press officers for them to pass on publicly? Why are you unable to either confirm or deny that if these are not legal matters anymore?
Simon Case
Just because something is not a criminal offence does not mean there are not national security issues—or classified matters, rather, I should say very specifically—involved in relation to how that investigation is conducted. That is why I am unable to comment.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Are the national security services involved in this investigation?
Simon Case
As you know, we have a longstanding policy of neither confirming nor denying such things. I am sorry: I recognise the legitimate public and parliamentary interest in this, which is why we have been updating the Speaker and why the Prime Minister has committed to setting out the conclusions of the investigations as soon as we can.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Who has informed you that you cannot answer these questions?
Simon Case
This is in collaboration with the Government Security Group, which owns the processes.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Has the Government Security Group deemed that you are not allowed to answer any questions on any detail of this, or have certain parameters been set?
Simon Case
No, beyond the things I have said, I am afraid I am constrained. On the ongoing investigation, I am afraid I am limited to not much more than that. I have already said what I can say to the Committee.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Why are you unable to answer our questions about conversations you have had that were not about the investigation but were with people like the press spokesperson? I am not asking about the process of the investigation; I am not asking how the investigation happens. David Jones asked specific questions about conversations you had had with a public press officer.
Simon Case
Because those conversations are covered by the bounds of the investigation.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
I am not entirely convinced, but thank you very much.
Simon Case
I can only apologise to the Committee again for these constraints I am operating within, which is why, with the Prime Minister’s permission, we have been updating the Speaker on Privy Council terms.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
I do not want to put too much power in our Chair, but I wonder if there is a case to be updating our Chair on an in-camera basis. This is not a parliamentary procedure issue, per se; it is an internal scrutiny issue of the Cabinet Office. I mean no disrespect to the Speaker, but the Speaker is not in charge of scrutiny of the functioning of the Civil Service. This Committee is and our Chair is.
Simon Case
I am happy to pick that up with the Chair and the relevant authorities. That sounds like a potential way through. I understand and apologise for having to frustrate what are legitimate lines of inquiry.
John McDonnell
Mr Case, you can understand our frustration. It is five months since the beginning of this inquiry, so this hardly demonstrates some prioritisation of what should be, to you and others, a serious matter. At the same time as the inquiry drags on, No. 10 spokespeople are able to issue statements tarnishing the names of others who are subject to the inquiry themselves. I am incredulous that it has taken so long. You mentioned that the instigation of these inquiries is in the hands of the Prime Minister or a Permanent Secretary. Is there to be an inquiry into today’s leakage of the alleged statement by the Prime Minister about his preference for thousands of bodies being piled high in the streets rather than a lockdown?
Simon Case
I have not looked at this today. An investigation has not started. I will have to take that away, look into it and discuss with the Prime Minister whether we need to conduct an investigation into it.
John McDonnell
Will you have the authority to instigate that yourself?
Simon Case
Yes, but it would be very unusual to instigate a leak inquiry without first consulting the Prime Minister.
John McDonnell
Do you have the independence to do that after that consultation?
Simon Case
Yes, if necessary, but, in my experience, not ever needed.
John McDonnell
But that is for you to consider. Is it a responsibility that you will have after your conversations with the Prime Minister and you will consider it?
Simon Case
Yes.
Jackie Doyle-Price
I would like to try to help you out a bit here, Mr Case, because people watching these proceedings will not have much confidence in leak inquiries on the basis of what we are hearing. As you mentioned earlier, some of these leak inquiries will, inevitably, be complex. To be frank, if I was wanting to leak information and I was one of a limited number of people who had access to it, there are ways you could go to cover that up by going through your networks and contacts. I do not know if you have seen that Robert Peston has this lunchtime published the details of the texts that he received outlining this decision. It is very clear that it has become third party. When it comes to a leak of that kind, obviously you can look at the phones of the protagonists who were in the meeting, but what else do you do once you have drawn a blank at those? Of course, the fact that it is not on their phones does not mean that they are not guilty of the leak. In this Committee, we are concerned about this length of time. Why has there not been more progress? Is it not a priority?
Simon Case
I understand the point of the questioning. I can assure you and the Committee that at no point has this investigation been in any way deprioritised. It is in the hands of professional investigators who have a range of tools and techniques at their disposal. You will understand if I do not go into those in detail in open session because that would prejudice future inquiries. I can assure you that this has not been deprioritised in any way. As you picked up, these are incredibly complicated and complex inquiries, usually, with a range of threads to them. Lines of inquiries develop. Some get resolved; some take a long time and patient work to resolve. A lot of this is painstaking and patient work and it is done by professional investigators.
Jackie Doyle-Price
Recently, for example, Gavin Williamson was dismissed because he was highlighted as being responsible for a leak. That was a very quick investigation. If somebody is being malevolent and deliberately covers their tracks, clearly it is going to be more difficult to source. The fact that we are still this many months into it is not a good disincentive for bad behaviour, is it? If people can see that leaks are happening with no negative outcome for the people doing it, I struggle to see how we can maintain confidence in our existing governance structures. Setting aside the fact that professionals run the investigation, do we need to do more to make sure that people understand their obligations here? That is not just Ministers, but for everybody who works for them, which seems to be an ever-growing number of people outside the normal Civil Service corps.
Simon Case
That sense of frustration that we are unable to catch more people responsible for leaks is shared by a range of senior people, not only this Prime Minister, but other Prime Ministers whom I and my predecessors have known. Of course, under the initial stages of this, at the first level with the Government Security Group, all the processes are voluntary. We are able to place clear obligations on employees to co-operate with inquiries and, when they do not, which is rare, it would be a sign of something unusual. Outside that employment context, it is only once you reach the thresholds for the police to become involved that you have powers to compel. It is a matter for Parliament to decide what powers it is willing to give authorities in government to conduct inquiries. I know this has been looked at several times—
Jackie Doyle-Price
Or perhaps the Prime Minister could set some very clear rules about ministerial behaviour. The truth of the matter is that for the last decade, Ministers have been going to Cabinet meetings and then we have been getting a blow-by-blow account in the newspapers. Once you have that established behaviour going unchallenged, you are setting up a code of practice that enables people to say what they like to the press. Could I invite you to comment? Would you like to see greater discipline by the Cabinet about all collective meetings where decisions are taken? Perhaps that could go some way to starting to set new rules about how we govern our political culture.
Simon Case
I agree with you that the culture is absolutely vital. I can assure you that Cabinet Ministers and officials, permanent and temporary, are regularly reminded of their obligations. I am not sure they could be more clearly spelled out, and it includes often reminding people at the beginning of meetings. I agree with the underpinning point in your question. This has a great deal to do with the culture and valuing the integrity of Government processes is vital.
Mr Jones
Briefly, you said that the last discussion with the Speaker on Privy Council terms was about a fortnight ago. Is that right?
Simon Case
Yes, that is my understanding but, as I said, if that is not correct, I will come back.
Mr Jones
There has been a huge number of developments over the past two weeks, not least the publication by Dominic Cummings last Friday of his blog. Given that the communication with the Speaker appears to be the only extent to which Parliament is being kept informed of developments, do you not feel that there should be more regular discussions with the Speaker, certainly now that Mr Cummings has published this article?
Simon Case
I am happy to take that up with the Speaker, yes, and to provide a bang-up-to-date update.
Mr Jones
Can you remember a time when Downing Street has been more leaky?
Simon Case
That is quite a difficult comparison. If you go back through the ages and read diaries and historical memoirs, leaks of information are a longstanding frustration in government. One point that underpinned your question was Downing Street being leaky. Of course, it is not always proven or even believed that Downing Street is the source of leaks. That is one point underlying your question that I just pick up. As I said before—
Mr Jones
Do you dispute that? Has the leak not come from Downing Street?
Simon Case
You are inviting me back to comment on an ongoing investigation, which I am afraid I cannot do for the reasons set out. I can only apologise again for that, Chair.
Karin Smyth
Mr Case, you are the guardian of propriety, ethics and Civil Service conduct in your role. Is it acceptable that you come before this Committee to discuss these matters having been told that you cannot discuss them? You are essentially pleading the Fifth. Is that acceptable?
Simon Case
As I said, I can only apologise—
Karin Smyth
Thanks for your apology, but is it acceptable?
Simon Case
I am afraid it is necessary to protect the integrity of an ongoing investigation and the techniques involved.
Karin Smyth
You said your officers spoke with the Speaker two weeks ago. I would need to check exactly when you were coming before this Committee but, given the events of the last two weeks, why at no stage did you think it would be reasonable or acceptable to write to the Committee to set out what you were and were not prepared to talk to us about today?
Simon Case
I am not quite sure I understand the particular point about the last two weeks—
Karin Smyth
The point is that we gather to do work to scrutinise the Cabinet Office and your role. We have spent nearly 40 minutes going in a circle because you are not prepared to answer questions. You could have written to us previously to tell us that that was the case.
Simon Case
Again, accept my apologies for not making that clear in advance to the whole Committee.
Chair
Just to conclude on this, Mr Case, I inferred from one of your answers that you do not think the Official Secrets Act is up to scratch. Do we need a new one to bring it up to date?
Simon Case
This either is being consulted on or will be. Obviously it will come before Parliament. I am not sure; it might be in the next—
Chair
So it will be happening. I am aware of an even longer leak inquiry that began in August 2020 and has not yet concluded. I do not expect you to go into the specifics of any leak inquiries that were begun in August 2020, but will those that began in August be completed anytime soon?
Simon Case
I am afraid I am not sure which particular case you are talking about there.
Chair
Broadly. We are getting on for nine months or so. Is that not sufficient time for a leak inquiry?
Simon Case
It entirely depends on the circumstances of the investigation. Sometimes these things can take a long time indeed. When the professional investigators believe that there are no strands or lines of inquiry left, they will close an investigation. I am happy to look at the particular case if the Clerk could let me have more details.
Chair
Thank you. Moving on, Lord Heywood listed one of the key roles of the Cabinet Secretary as the “guardian of propriety and ethics, ministerial and Civil Service conduct”. How do you see your role in this respect?
Simon Case
There are two aspects to propriety and ethics in relation to the specific role of Cabinet Secretary. One is the overall structure, framework, the codes and so on, often in support of the Prime Minister, to make sure the integrity of the Government is adequate. Then, in extremis, the Cabinet Secretary would have a role in particular cases or casework that came up in relation to propriety and ethics. The point I would make—more importantly, it is made in all the codes and encapsulated in the Nolan principles—is that propriety and ethics is the responsibility of everybody in public service. Maintaining standards in public life is as much about culture as it is rules and regulations. Observing the spirit of those rules is the job of all senior leaders. Interestingly, you picked up Lord Heywood’s quote. I have the pleasure of talking quite regularly to my predecessors in this role. They consistently say that their most difficult moments in their job were in their propriety and ethics work. This is a constant feature of Cabinet Secretaries’ lives.
Chair
Indeed. Your PhD supervisor, Lord Hennessy, described the role as “the greatest keeper of secrets”. With that in mind, what levers do you have as Cabinet Secretary to ensure that decisions on policy are made in a proper way?
Simon Case
There are probably three particular levers that the Cabinet Secretary has. The first is around the guidance and codes. The second is that the Civil Service in the round is there to support Ministers in decision taking to make sure it is properly done. The way civil servants support Ministers with their training, skills and so on is important to support proper decision making. Finally, the third is that the Cabinet Secretary is responsible for advising the Prime Minister on the collective system of government and the operation of Cabinet government, which is there to make sure that decisions are made properly.
Chair
Thank you. Mr Tierney, welcome to the Committee. You are in your early days in your post. We are grateful to have you with us this afternoon. Given the reports about the reasons that contributed, perhaps, to your predecessor’s departure from the role, how concerned are you about having to tell Ministers and indeed others, “No”?
Darren Tierney
Thank you, Chair. I am not concerned by that at all. It is worth saying that, in my experience as a private secretary and senior adviser to Ministers, the reality is that most Ministers come to officials seeking advice on propriety and ethics issues because they want to stay within the letter and spirit of the codes. I am expecting in this job the vast majority of the work to be incoming requests from Ministers for me and the team. Indeed, when I have spoken to my predecessors, they have confirmed that that is what happened with them. You should not see it as me sitting here waiting to say no to something. I see the role as more of an enabling function. I want to work with Ministers and Permanent Secretaries to help them to get the business of the Government done in the best way that we can.
Mr Jones
Mr Case, will the cost of refurbishing the Prime Minister’s flat at No. 10 Downing Street be paid for through private donations?
Simon Case
If it would be helpful, I am willing to set out for you the thinking on this so far. I will not go through how Downing Street works in detail, but it is relevant. There are working offices and state rooms, and then the residences. Refurbishment of the working rooms, state rooms and so on is funded through the normal Cabinet Office estates budget. For decades, there has been an annual allowance of up to £30,000 from the public purse to support the Prime Minister of the day in contributing to the costs of refurbishing the residence. Any costs beyond that are met by Prime Ministers privately. On the question of a trust, work has been going on for more than 12 months on this idea. It was begun under Darren’s and my predecessors. Chequers and Dorneywood are supported by trusts—one a trust and one a charitable trust—and I understand that equivalent buildings around the world like the White House are supported by trusts. No Downing Street trust currently exists. Work was begun last spring and Lord Brownlow agreed to be chair of a putative trust. There was work done to identify cross-party potential trustees. I became aware of this earlier this year, along with Alex Chisholm, the accounting officer for the Cabinet Office, although other officials had been working on it before. We have been looking in much more detail at how a trust could work, building on the models from elsewhere. It is safe to say that this is a genuinely complicated legal policy propriety issue, and there are questions for the Government and for the Charity Commission, which would regulate the operation of a charitable trust. There are two areas that I would pick out. First—
Chair
Forgive me for being rude, Mr Case, but in terms of answering Mr Jones’s question, it would be most helpful if you would do so. Thank you.
Simon Case
I was just going to come on to the donor. First, a charitable trust cannot cover private areas of Downing Street—it is clear that that cannot be done. Secondly—
Mr Jones
Forgive me for interrupting. You say that a charitable trust cannot cover private areas of Downing Street. We understand that, but there is no such trust in being yet, is there?
Simon Case
Correct. The trust is one of the things that is being explored.
Mr Jones
If you recall, my question essentially was: are any private donations are being used to pay the costs of refurbishing the Prime Minister’s flat in Downing Street?
Simon Case
As the Prime Minister has said, all of this will be declared in the proper way. The Prime Minister will make relevant declarations through his ministerial—
Mr Jones
So you are not answering that question now. Are you aware yourself of whether any private donations have been used to cover the cost of refurbishing the flat at Downing Street?
Simon Case
I am happy to tell you that the Prime Minister has asked me to conduct a review, because I have not been involved directly in this, into past—
Mr Jones
Forgive me, Mr Case; I am so sorry to interrupt you. I asked if you were aware whether any private donations had been used to refurbish the flat. That is a straightforward yes or no.
Simon Case
As I said, the Prime Minister has asked me to conduct a review into how this has been done and has asked that I share the details of those conclusions with the Committee.
Chair
Forgive the impertinence of the question, Mr Case, but the last review you have spoken to has gone on for months, so how long will this review take?
Simon Case
Again, I suspect it would only be a matter of weeks.
Mr Jones
I still would like Mr Case to tell the Committee whether or not he is aware that any private donations were used to pay the costs of refurbishing the flat. Are you aware of that, Mr Case?
Simon Case
Mr Jones, I do not have all of the facts and details at my disposal on this, which is why the Prime Minister has asked me to conduct this review and, as I said, to set out the conclusions for the Committee.
Mr Jones
That is absolutely fine. So you do not have all those details. Could you tell us what propriety issues fall to be considered in relation to this?
Simon Case
Yes, absolutely. There are predominantly two areas. The first is making sure that any donations are sound from a propriety point of view and are not being used to seek preferment and such. The second area is making sure that such donations are declared in the proper way, which I know the Prime Minister is committed to doing in his own declaration for the register of ministerial interests. That is the sort of detail on which I will need to get back to the Committee through this review.
Mr Jones
Thank you. To be absolutely clear, you have indicated that there is no charitable trust in existence to cover the cost of maintenance and refurbishment of the flat. Would any such donations, if there are any, be political donations?
Simon Case
I cannot answer that question today. I do not have all of those details. That is one of the things I will have to look at as part of the process the Prime Minister has asked me to do, and I am happy to set those out in writing for the Committee.
Mr Jones
It has been reported that the Electoral Commission is investigating this issue. Is that right?
Simon Case
As I understand it, there is an ongoing conversation between the Electoral Commission and CCHQ, but that is not a matter for civil servants or the Government, so I am not sighted on the detail of those conversations, Mr Jones.
Chair
Mr Case, you have known that you will be coming to this Committee—for which we are grateful—for some weeks now. There are a number of topical issues about the place at the moment, one of which is the vexed question of a flat’s refurbishment. I am surprised that you have not been better furnished with answers to give to the Committee. Has no conversation taken place between you and others? Is this a storm in a teacup or is it more serious? I am surprised you have not been briefed further.
Simon Case
What I want to avoid, Chair, is misleading the Committee in any way by giving you partial insights. The Prime Minister has asked me to do this review, which I will do, and he has asked me to share those conclusions with you.
Chair
Will you be able to set the date for publishing that, or at least writing to us? The review will be on your terms, will it not?
Simon Case
Yes, absolutely.
Chair
Have you done so yet? How long will this take?
Simon Case
No, but I will come back to you, Chair, as soon as I can with the timescale for this.
John McDonnell
I do not wish to be rude, Mr Case, but this is coming across like a badly scripted version of “Yes, Minister”. Could you at least provide us, within a limited period of time—say a week—with information about the advice the Prime Minister was given and by whom regarding the propriety issues of the flat refurbishment being funded by party political donations? If we could have just the trail of when the Prime Minister was advised and by whom, quickly—it should not require a detailed or time-consuming review—it would be helpful.
Simon Case
Yes, I am happy to do that, Mr McDonnell.
Ronnie Cowan
The Independent Adviser on Ministerial Interests is responsible for advising Ministers about how to comply with the Ministerial Code, but we have not had one for over five months since Sir Alex Allan resigned. How has this impacted on your role and on the oversight of propriety and ethics in government more generally?
Simon Case
The Independent Adviser on Ministerial Interests is an important role. It is, of course, only one part of the jigsaw underpinning propriety and ethics. The independent adviser has a couple of specific functions, one relating to ministerial interests and the other to do with investigations. In my experience so far, it has not had a particularly significant impact, but the Prime Minister is clear that he needs to get a new independent adviser in post as soon as possible.
Darren Tierney
The principal source of advice for Ministers on propriety and ethics is their Permanent Secretaries. They have still had access to that during this last period. Of course, they can come to me and my team if there is something particularly complex.
Ronnie Cowan
It has been five months without one and nobody seems to have noticed. Is that the message I am getting?
Simon Case
I do not think it is not five months and nobody has noticed. That is not what we are saying. It has been noticed and it is an important role, which is why the Prime Minister is seeking to appoint somebody very shortly.
Ronnie Cowan
Would your own involvement in the Greensill affair been different if an independent adviser had been in post?
Simon Case
That is an interesting question. The majority of issues to do with the Greensill affair have related to former, not current, Government Ministers, which would not have been something for the independent adviser. Under any circumstances, given the scale of issues that have come up through the revelations, it certainly would have taken a good deal of our time. The independent adviser would not have been particularly involved. This is one of those things that require a bespoke process, which is why the Prime Minister has asked Nigel Boardman to conduct a review. I know that this Committee and the Treasury Committee are also looking into this.
Ronnie Cowan
You mentioned that the recruitment of the independent adviser is ongoing, but we were told that last December. Michael Gove told us that recruitment for Sir Alex’s successor was underway. Do we know how far this has gone down? When should we expect an announcement?
Simon Case
The Prime Minister is in the final stages of discussions with the leading candidate, so I hope we will be able to announce very shortly.
Ronnie Cowan
Weeks rather than months?
Simon Case
I hope days rather than weeks, but do not hold me to that.
Ronnie Cowan
We are making progress, then. Given the circumstances under which Sir Alex departed, are you worried that his successor will lack public confidence?
Simon Case
Darren may want to comment on this, too. It has always been a tough job, given the role. It is an important role and has to be done by somebody of sufficient independence. It is absolutely vital that the independent adviser can command public confidence. That is why getting the right criteria, the right person and the right terms of reference is so important.
Darren Tierney
I have nothing else to add. I agree that the criteria is the important element.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
The independent adviser is appointed by the Prime Minister. Seeing as it was the Prime Minister’s inaction that led to the last adviser feeling like he had to leave, and we have now seen the Prime Minister texting friends about tax reforms in the UK so they can come back and not pay their taxes—and even some of the stuff on the front pages today—is it important that there is a role for people other than the Prime Minister in the recruitment process? What is your role in that recruitment?
Simon Case
As you say, this is a direct appointment for the Prime Minister. Darren can add, but we have had three aspects to our role in this. The first is developing criteria for the role, in HR speak the “person specification”—the characteristics that we are looking for. We have also been involved in drawing up a shortlist of candidates for the Prime Minister and we have been involved in supporting the Prime Minister in the remit of the job.
Darren Tierney
The criteria were: integrity and independence; expertise and experience, both of government and the constitution; and someone who could command the trust of the Prime Minister of the day.
Chair
Are you saying that there is a preferred candidate whom the Prime Minister is considering as we speak?
Simon Case
Correct.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Is that preferred candidate someone you have put forward?
Simon Case
Yes, we put forward a shortlist to the Prime Minister and discussed it with him. He has then gone for a preferred candidate from that list.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
This Committee would like to conduct a pre-appointment hearing with that preferred candidate. Can you undertake to ensure that that happens?
Simon Case
It could not be a pre-appointment hearing as such because it is a prime ministerial appointment, but I know that Sir Alex came before this Committee early in his tenure and we will encourage the same of the new independent adviser.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Is it appropriate that this is a prime ministerial appointment?
Simon Case
I think it is. It stems from the constitutional reality of how Ministers are appointed under the royal prerogative. Ministers are appointed on the advice of the Prime Minister.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Is the Prime Minister not also responsible for ensuring that they fulfil the standards that the independent adviser is meant to be laying down?
Simon Case
Everybody in government is responsible for upholding standards in public life. Sorry, have I misunderstood your point?
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
How can the independent adviser be looking at the actions of the Prime Minister if they are appointed by the Prime Minister?
Simon Case
That is perfectly possible when you have an individual in place who meets the sort of criteria that Darren has set out—somebody who is capable of commanding public confidence. I think that person would have the authority, by their very nature, to raise questions with the Prime Minister.
Chair
Are you confident that the person who has been recommended to the Prime Minister is such a character?
Simon Case
Yes. We would not have put the person on the shortlist if we did not believe that.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Sir Alex had to resign because the Prime Minister refused to uphold his advice. What additionally will this candidate have to prevent the Prime Minister running roughshod over them?
Simon Case
As part of this round, the Prime Minister has asked us to look at the remit of the role and the powers that the independent adviser has.
Chair
At that juncture, I will bring in Rachel Hopkins to pre-empt, perhaps, what you might be about to say.
Rachel Hopkins
Thank you, Chair. Lord Evans, Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, has written to the Prime Minister suggesting that, among other things, the independent adviser is empowered to initiate their own inquiries into alleged breaches of the Ministerial Code? Is this a change that you would welcome?
Simon Case
The Prime Minister’s request is part of identifying a new adviser. We have been looking at how to amend the remit of the job. We will be announcing any changes at the same time as announcing the new independent adviser. Of course those changes are ultimately a decision for the PM, but I know he has been paying close regard to Lord Evans’s letter, which you referred to. I have been in discussion with Lord Evans about the remit and how the role might work. We will set out any changes when we make the announcement.
Rachel Hopkins
May I push on that question about your views on whether it is a positive thing that the independent adviser could initiate their own investigations? Currently the Prime Minister decides whether to investigate others. Does that mean he is immune from being investigated unless there is an independent adviser with their own remit to be able to investigate the Prime Minister?
Simon Case
Yes, this is one of the key changes to make, which was brought out in Lord Evans’s letter. The point you are making has merit. Precisely how it works all needs to flow from the core constitutional principle that the Prime Minister advises the sovereign on who to call to be her Ministers. We are looking at this and will set out any changes when we make the announcement.
John McDonnell
Mr Tierney, when the Chair of the Committee asked you whether you were concerned about your own position if you were challenging Ministers, you answered firmly no, but it goes beyond that. How proactive a role do you and the propriety and ethics team take, for example, in relation to the enforcement of the Ministerial Code? How do you trigger action? What are the circumstances in which you would do that? I give these examples because I am a bit mystified at the moment about why there has not been more proactive engagement from you and your team. The Chancellor of the Exchequer’s texts have been published where he has been pushing civil servants to act after private lobbying. A number of firms’ donations to the Conservative party have been reported at least on a ratio of 10 to one with contracts. The Secretary of State for Health has admitted belatedly that he is related to someone who has received a contract. Then we have had the register of ministerial interests delayed some considerable time. Surely some of that would have triggered you into action if you were being proactive.
Darren Tierney
First, we do not just wait for stuff to come to us although, as I said earlier, the vast majority of our casework comes from Ministers proactively seeking advice upfront. It is important that the Ministerial Code is clear that it is for Ministers to satisfy themselves that they are following the code. It is even more explicit that it is not for the Cabinet Secretary or me to police the code. That is for Ministers. The ultimate arbiter of ministerial conduct is the Prime Minister. That said, we do not just sit there and let things go by. We will get involved in specific cases as necessary when we see them or at the request of the Prime Minister.
John McDonnell
You provide advice, Mr Tierney. On any of those instances, have you provided advice?
Darren Tierney
I do not want to get into individual cases, if that is okay with the Committee.
John McDonnell
How can we tell whether you are doing your job if we ask you a specific question about whether you are doing your job and then you tell us you cannot tell us whether you are doing your job?
Darren Tierney
I am saying that I do not want to comment on any ongoing casework that the team is doing.
John McDonnell
So you are engaged in some of these matters I have listed.
Darren Tierney
We are engaged in a range of issues that are live at the moment.
John McDonnell
Thank you. That moves us a bit further forward. The issue around the role of Permanent Secretaries is equally important. How important is the role of departmental secretaries in ensuring the relevant codes are adhered to? My fear is the one that the Chair raised. Recent experience suggests that Permanent Secretaries who displease their Secretaries of State do not seem to last long in their posts. We saw what happened to Philip Rutnam. How does a Permanent Secretary act as a regulator while keeping their job?
Simon Case
The role of Permanent Secretary in the Ministerial Code is clearly set out. There are some specific examples on security of Government business, matters relating to Ministers’ constituencies and also supporting Ministers in making sure that they avoid conflicts or the perception of conflicts. I think that the point about the role of Permanent Secretaries and relations came up when I was in front of the Committee last time. The overwhelming experience of the relationship between Ministers and civil servants and between Secretaries of State and Permanent Secretaries is incredibly collaborative. As Darren says, in the vast majority of cases, Ministers actively seek the support of their Permanent Secretaries and other officials like Darren in upholding their obligations under the Ministerial Code.
John McDonnell
Philip Rutnam’s advice was not followed and, to maintain his integrity, he had no other choice but to resign. It sounds as though other Permanent Secretaries may not be so robust in challenging their Secretaries of State and that is how they survive.
Simon Case
Personally, I do not share that view. Permanent Secretaries, I know, are as robust as they need to be when they need to be in making sure that Ministers’ obligations under the Ministerial Code are upheld. More often than not, Ministers are actively asking civil servants for support in making sure that they uphold their obligations under the various codes.
John McDonnell
That sounds difficult to accept when the register of ministerial interests has been delayed yet again, but we will await publication.
Rachel Hopkins
The existing transparency scheme covers meetings, gifts and hospitality. Is that the one that is published quarterly with all those things in it?
Darren Tierney
That is right, yes.
Rachel Hopkins
Does it cover phone calls and text messages that senior Ministers or senior civil servants may make in relation to things they need to declare?
Darren Tierney
It does not cover phone calls unless the phone call is in place of a meeting. It covers phone meetings, but it does not include routine phone calls or texts.
Rachel Hopkins
Given everything we have been talking about today and the public interest in a lot of that, if those sorts of calls and text messages are not included, how can we ensure that standards are upheld and the Ministerial Code is enforced?
Simon Case
That is a good question. The underpinning principles are there to answer your point. Government business is Government business however it is conducted and by whatever means of communication. Any Government business has to be handled in line with the codes, FOI, the Public Records Act and so on. These things have to be retained and declared to officials as per the code, whatever the means of communication.
Rachel Hopkins
The Prime Minister has said that he is going to publish text messages between himself and Mr Dyson and other business leaders in the public interest. They have not come to light just yet. When can we expect them, in the spirit of what you have just said?
Simon Case
As I understand it, Downing Street published—I think it was on Friday—a document fulfilling the Prime Minister’s commitment in the House. I think it was last Friday. I will have to check.
Rachel Hopkins
Other senior Ministers probably should follow suit, then, if that is the case with the Prime Minister. Is it appropriate that they should make public those sorts of text messages to ensure they are being transparent in accordance with the Ministerial Code?
Simon Case
The processes are there for the purposes of transparency. For example, the Freedom of Information Act is a way of getting hold of material relating to Government business that can be released whatever the means of communication. There are vehicles there for transparency.
Rachel Hopkins
Government business usually takes place with officials present and there will be a record or a note and it is covered that way. Sometimes Government business takes place over the phone or through a message and it is for Ministers to then declare subsequently. We have picked up reports that the Prime Minister still uses a personal mobile phone, despite requests from the Civil Service to make sure that it can be managed and that it is secure. What has been your advice about this? How do you help prevent inappropriate requests or lobbying through personal mobile phones if officials are not present?
Simon Case
On the specific point, the Prime Minister set out his account in the House last week, including by making clear, as he is required to do, that he has to declare to officials any contact he gets through his personal phone. He set that out in the House. The question about personal mobile phones is a good one. Communications security is important and Ministers get advice on that. For example, we regularly do sessions at Cabinet on security. The Committee will understand that by longstanding convention, I will not go into the detail of the advice my predecessors and I have given the Prime Minister. Changing personal telephone numbers can be a bit of a red herring, if I am honest. The Prime Minister and other Ministers, like parliamentarians, need to be in touch with a large number of people—colleagues around the House, across Government and so on. I will not invite you to comment, but the reality is that most parliamentarians’ telephone numbers would become quite widely known just because of how you have to do your business. The question is how you protect overall security and there are a range of measures to do that. As for the question about lobbying, the process is well established. If it is Government business and an official is not there, record it in the moment and, at the first opportunity, a Minister should be declaring it to their officials to make sure it is recorded.
Rachel Hopkins
I am pleased to hear you say about declaring at the first opportunity because we know through other recent issues—I am thinking of Westferry—that some of these had to be teased out because it was not at the time. A big concern—you touched on it there—about security is whether personal phones are sufficiently encrypted or are as secure as Government-issued ministerial phones. We have seen in other cases people have hacked into significant people’s phones and have used that as a means to blackmail or embarrass. Can we be assured? What is to stop our Prime Minister being vulnerable to inappropriate lobbying or blackmailing in that respect if he is using a personal mobile phone?
Simon Case
We put security packages around all the communications that Ministers have by whatever means. The levels of encryption and standards of security on everybody’s mobile phones are increasing all of the time because that is in the interests of the manufacturers. Customers all around the world demand it now. Everybody needs to follow basic cyber-security advice about how to protect their devices. It is the same advice to the public as it is to Ministers, to be honest. Government-issued IT is, in most instances, slightly more secure. The highly classified stuff is much more secure, but the levels of encryption and security on most people’s mobile phones is pretty good. If you use it in the right way—two-factor authentication and all that sort of stuff, and standard cyber-security advice—you can end up with very secure devices in everybody’s hands or pockets.
Rachel Hopkins
A final point around people doing business in this whole new way—messages, mobile phones and stuff, as you were saying. Is the Ministerial Code suitably robust in relation to all of these more technological communication methods? Does it cover it sufficiently?
Simon Case
I think I come back to my point before, which is the principles are there that underpin this: if it is Government business, it is Government business and needs to be declared and recorded in the proper ways, and that is set out in the Ministerial Code. I cannot think that technology fundamentally changes the requirements. It is the means of communication that is changing, rather than the fundamentals of needing to maintain recording of Government business.
Chair
We are going to move on now to look at the Greensill episode, and to open questions on that is my colleague, David Jones.
Mr Jones
Mr Case, was Lex Greensill employed as a special adviser at Downing Street?
Simon Case
Before I go on, the answer to your question is he was not employed as a special adviser but, if I may say at the outset, we know the Committee is looking into this and we are here to help as much as we can on that. As you know, the PM set up the Boardman review, so what we will do today is give you as many of the facts as we have. Some of those we have only been able to have a cursory look at in terms of handing it over to Mr Boardman, so we will not be able to give you all of the answers. We will give you what we have and Mr Boardman will—Darren, do you want to go through—
Chair
You have given a clear answer to Mr Jones’s first question that says that Mr Greensill was not employed as a special adviser at Downing Street. Is that correct?
Simon Case
Correct.
Chair
Right. Mr Jones, next question.
Mr Jones
I will just remark in passing that, famously, Mr Greensill’s business card announced that he was a senior adviser at the Prime Minister’s office, so what was the nature of his role?
Darren Tierney
I am happy to pick that up, Chair, if that is okay. As we said he was not a special adviser. His exact status is unclear and that is one of the things that we have asked Nigel Boardman to look into. He was appointed as an unpaid adviser, on supply chain finance, in January 2012. He did that until 2015. In 2013 he also became a Crown representative, which lasted until 2016 when he left the Cabinet Office. His status as an adviser is unclear on what basis that is, and that is something that we have asked Nigel Boardman to specifically look into.
Mr Jones
Was he present in Downing Street pursuant to the terms of any contract?
Darren Tierney
We have been unable to find a contract. What we have found so far are an appointment letter and then subsequent reappointment letters, which set out some conditions on his appointment—things like the Official Secrets Act, confidentiality, using the Business Appointment Rules when he leaves—but so far we have been unable to identify the contract.
Mr Jones
Who signed the appointment letter?
Darren Tierney
The initial appointment letter was signed by a director in the Efficiency and Reform Group of the Cabinet Office. We have had some evidence that the appointment was signed off by the then Minister for the Cabinet Office and the then Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office.
Mr Jones
That would be Sir John Manzoni?
Darren Tierney
No, that would have been Ian Watmore at the time and the Minister was Francis Maude.
Chair
I am interrupting David Jones—forgive me. Mr Tierney, would you be able to publish that appointment letter or at least furnish the Committee with it?
Simon Case
I cannot think why not, but if there is a reason why not we will let you know.
Darren Tierney
Obviously we have given all this to Nigel Boardman as well.
Mr Jones
Presumably Mr Greensill had a pass to work at No. 10?
Darren Tierney
He did. He was given a pass and IT for the Cabinet Office and a pass and IT subsequently for No. 10.
Mr Jones
Was he subject to the same level of security vetting and clearance as other members of staff who work at Downing Street?
Darren Tierney
He did have the appropriate level of security clearance. It was not there immediately on his appointment. It happened several months later, but that is not entirely unusual.
Simon Case
Are we clear whether he worked in Downing Street? The fact that he had a business card does not necessarily mean he was working from Downing Street. I don’t think he did.
Chair
He had access to Downing Street.
Simon Case
Yes.
Chair
What was he doing when he was there? Just popping in for a cup of tea—what was he doing?
Simon Case
We do not know. We were not involved at the time. This is something that—
Chair
No indeed. It is the purpose of the investigation to find out. David Jones?
Mr Jones
I find it extraordinary that you come before this Committee not really knowing anything about the terms upon which Mr Greensill managed to be installed in Downing Street, which members of the Committee may find rather alarming.
Simon Case
As Darren set out the—
Chair
Mr Case, if the Committee is alarmed, are you alarmed by this?
Simon Case
Yes.
Mr Jones
It was approved by a Minister and by the Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office?
Darren Tierney
The initial appointment, which was for three months, was approved by the Minister and the Permanent Secretary. We have found no evidence that subsequent extensions to that appointment were approved by Ministers, but that is one of the things, again, that we have asked Nigel Boardman to look into.
Mr Jones
Do you know the background to his introduction to Downing Street? Do you know why it was thought that it would be a good idea for him to work there?
Darren Tierney
I think we are reasonably clear that Jeremy Heywood was seeking to bring Lex Greensill in to work in the Cabinet Office—to bring his expertise of supply chain finance to bear to some policy issues that were around at the time.
Mr Jones
Jeremy Heywood had worked with Lex Greensill in the private sector, is that right?
Darren Tierney
Yes, they both worked together. I think it was at Morgan Stanley.
Mr Jones
Is it fair to assume, therefore, that it was Jeremy Heywood’s introduction that led to Mr Greensill being installed in Downing Street?
Darren Tierney
I think so, although as I said, Nigel Boardman is looking into the precise circumstances of his access to Downing Street.
Chair
Forgive me again, Mr Jones. You said it was Francis Maude and Ian Watmore who made the original three-month appointment, yet he was there for some years. Who signed off on the reappointment?
Darren Tierney
That is unclear.
Chair
Is there no documentation or a letter that says, “After three months you can carry on for another three months doing whatever it is you are doing”?
Darren Tierney
We have found further letters of appointment, either from HR teams or his then line management changed from one bit of the Cabinet Office to another. What we have not found is who authorised above those appointment letters.
Chair
You made clear that the first part of the oversight was in the Cabinet Office. Which was the second part?
Darren Tierney
It was then the Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat. It moved from ERG to EDS.
Chair
Who headed that?
Darren Tierney
The person named as line manager there was Clare Sumner.
Chair
Did she not sign it off? Was it not for a Minister to sign off, given that it had been done by a Minister in the first place?
Darren Tierney
Again I think that is unclear.
Chair
Forgive me, Mr Jones, for interrupting you.
Mr Jones
That is all right, Chair. To be clear, Mr Greensill was in the business of selling services to HM Government, wasn’t he?
Darren Tierney
I am not sure I can answer that. At that point he had only just set up his company.
Mr Jones
That is how it transpired, isn’t it? That he was selling services to the Government?
Darren Tierney
Again, we have asked Nigel Boardman to look into the details here, but my understanding is Greensill Capital did not have any contracts with Government until much later on, until I think 2018.
Mr Jones
Is it fair to say that he would have been in a position to acquire information during his period working at Downing Street? He would have acquired information that would have been of assistance to him in deciding the basis upon which he would offer commercial services to the Government?
Darren Tierney
I think it is exactly that potential conflict of interest that we have asked Nigel Boardman to look at.
Mr Jones
You say “potential conflict of interest”, but does it not look like a screaming, glaring conflict of interest?
Darren Tierney
Yes, it does.
Mr Jones
Does it not look appalling in competence on the part of those senior officials and Ministers who recommended that he be installed in Downing Street?
Darren Tierney
What we have not seen is the evidence of how the conflict was to be managed, and that is what we have asked Nigel Boardman to look into.
Chair
Mr Case, on one of the specific areas of alleged conflicts of interest with Mr Greensill, are you aware that Greensill’s contract with the NHS was open to competitive tender?
Simon Case
I am not aware. I do not have that detail. Sorry, it is not something I am familiar with.
Chair
I assume, therefore, that the Boardman review will be looking at that?
Simon Case
Yes, of course it will. All of these questions are ones that the Prime Minister has asked Mr Boardman to look at.
John Stevenson
Mr Case, are there people working in government who are not paid by Government and, if so, how many are there?
Simon Case
Are there people working in government who are not paid by Government—so, unpaid advisers? Yes, there will be people who have unpaid adviser status, I would think.
John Stevenson
Do you have any indication of how many there are?
Simon Case
I am afraid I don’t know. It would be something we would very happily look into and come back on. I am not aware—
John Stevenson
You will confirm to the Committee how many there are?
Simon Case
As much as we can determine. I don’t think there is anybody who will be in a similar position to Lex Greensill, but there may be other unpaid advisers in government and we can set those out.
John Stevenson
You will confirm to the Committee.
Simon Case
Yes.
John Stevenson
Thank you. Are these individuals subject to the same regulatory regime as those who are employed and paid by the Civil Service? Are they covered by the same regulatory regime?
Darren Tierney
If they are employed as civil servants they will be, so Ministers can make direct appointments and they will be civil servants and will be subject to the code in the normal way.
John Stevenson
If they are not civil servants they are not covered by the same regime, is that correct?
Darren Tierney
If they are not civil servants, so if they are a special adviser, they have their own code. If they sit on the board of a Department or are a non-executive, there is a separate code that governs their conduct as well.
John Stevenson
Would they be included in the register of special advisers?
Darren Tierney
No, to be a special adviser it is quite a distinct process. They have a particular legal status under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act, and we keep a register of who the special advisers are.
John Stevenson
How then can we find out exactly who they are? In what list are they published?
Darren Tierney
I am not sure that there is a separate list for direct appointments.
John Stevenson
Potentially, there are unpaid advisers to Government that we have absolutely no idea about being able to ascertain who they are?
Darren Tierney
Potentially, yes, but as the Cabinet Secretary said I do not imagine you are going to find very many of them.
John Stevenson
If there are only two or three they could be influencing Government in a way that I think we should be aware of. Would you agree?
Simon Case
They are very good questions and I would like to take them away and come back with the assurance that we can give you, or if we cannot give you the assurance, then what we are going to do about it.
John Stevenson
Right, so you will give us a list of who they are and how we can get a published list of individuals. Final question: what do you do with people who are seconded into government? Are they treated like contractors, or how are they dealt with?
Darren Tierney
It will depend on the basis on which they have been seconded. Most of them will be subject to ongoing duties of confidentiality and the like. It will depend on the specific circumstances.
John Stevenson
Again, this Committee could get a list of those who are seconded into Government as well? Quite often they are seconded on a temporary basis.
Simon Case
I suspect there will be a large number of secondments into the Civil Service who will be there under the same status as civil servants. We will give you the best account that we can.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Do you think it is acceptable that there are effectively some people advising Government—however small numbers—that there is no record of that you can easily get to and who seem to be covered by no guidelines and standards?
Simon Case
I think the point is we do not have that list, but we do require—
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
I do not care about the list. I want to know whether you think it is acceptable that that is the practice that has proliferated.
Simon Case
I do not believe that it has proliferated. A clear obligation—
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Do you think it is acceptable that one or two cases have happened?
Simon Case
For me, I cannot explain the Greensill case.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
I am not asking you to explain. I am asking you whether you think it is an acceptable standard of practice. You are the Head of the Civil Service.
Simon Case
I don’t think it is acceptable. I don’t believe it is a common practice. I certainly don’t think there is anything happening at the moment that is the equivalent. Of course, that is why we ask Permanent Secretaries and others who are in charge of Departments and senior officials. All of these responsibilities are delegated, of course, down to them.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
Will you be asking your Permanent Secretaries to ensure that this does not happen in the future?
Simon Case
Yes, of course. That obligation is already clear on them and we have discussed it at length in the context of the Greensill revelations.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle
When was that obligation made clear to them?