Did Gove mislead Parliament over Spad bullying claims?

10th February, 2013 10:37 am

Last Sunday the behaviour of Michael Gove’s Special Advisers came under scrutiny. Now Gove has been accused of misleading Parliament over their behaviour. The Observer reports:

Michael Gove faces accusations that he may have misled parliament over claims of bullying and intimidation by key advisers at the Department for Education. The Observer can reveal that a senior civil servant in the education secretary’s department has received a secret payoff of about £25,000 out of public funds, after a lengthy grievance procedure involving members of Gove’s team, including his special adviser, Dominic Cummings, and the department’s former head of communications, James Frayne.

While an investigation within the department cleared the men, and said no disciplinary action was necessary, the final judgment made clear that their conduct had on occasions fallen short of the levels expected and that the behaviour of Cummings and Frayne, who has since left the department, “has been perceived as intimidating”. After the internal investigation was launched in the spring of 2012, the civil servant also decided to lodge a case with a tribunal, where the allegations would have been heard in public. A date was set for last month, but after further negotiations the financial settlement was agreed and the tribunal was cancelled.”

In response, Stephen Twigg released the following statement:

“These are incredibly serious allegations. It appears that Michael Gove has either misled Parliament or appears to have no control or knowledge of what his advisers do on his behalf. Misleading Parliament would be a breach of the ministerial code. We need a full investigation by the Cabinet Secretary.”

These stories over Gove’s Spads are going to run and run…

  • Dave Postles

    Dysfunctional, but it’s minor by comparison with the leaked report that Gove is considering transferring academies into the private sector because the amount required to fund the prospective 5,000 is beyond the scope of his department. So we already have £1bn diverted from LA schools to the academies and free schools, and now the prospect of schools being passed to the private sector and hence for-profit. We have an ex-journalist and an ex-banker responsible for pre-tertiary education. At BIS, we have a minister (Willetts) who is circumventing the normal procedures to facilitate university status for private, for-profit organizations, when all the reports from the US are revealing the failings of those institutions. Abysmal.

    • Jeremy_Preece

      So it is privatisation by spending public money to asset strip the UK, and all in the name of “helping the deficit”.
      Tory dogma, and all without democratic mandate.

  • Pingback: SPADS Cost TaxPayers £5 and Half Million Too Much | ukgovernmentwatch()

Latest

  • Comment Unite believes in fighting the battle of ideas

    Unite believes in fighting the battle of ideas

    Richard Angell recalls the moves a couple of years ago to have Progress, the organisation he directs, excluded from the Labour Party.  Ungenerously, he omits to record that Len McCluskey spoke out, on behalf of Unite, against any such proposal.  That is because our union believes in debate and in fighting the battle of ideas, rather than solving differences through bans and anathemas. Clearly, Richard is not overwhelmed by gratitude, since he singles Unite and its General Secretary out for […]

    Read more →
  • News LabourList Podcast – EU referendum and leadership contests

    LabourList Podcast – EU referendum and leadership contests

    This week, the LabourList team discuss the deputy leader and Scottish leadership elections, Labour’s new position on an EU referendum, and the possibility of lowering the voting age.

    Read more →
  • Comment The problem for Labour isn’t toxicity, it’s credibility

    The problem for Labour isn’t toxicity, it’s credibility

    Polly Toynbee writes today that it would be a mistake for the next Labour leader to ditch the party’s most recent policies. In her view, the party lost the election not because of its policies but because of its reputation and leader. If that were the case, the party could win the next election with similar policies – so long as it addressed its other weaknesses. But can you separate the policies from Labour’s weaknesses? That is, did Labour lose because of […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Has the politics of aspiration fallen at the first hurdle?

    Has the politics of aspiration fallen at the first hurdle?

    In the fortnight after May 8 the word aspiration quickly became Labour Party shorthand for tapping into voters personal ambition. As quickly as the idea of aspiration politics took root in Labour policy circles – it has been discredited. Described as the rationale for the party to shift to the right, the vehicle to rebadge tax cuts, support free schools or public sector reform.  A TUC poll found that aspiration as a concept is an irrelevance to voters. But let’s […]

    Read more →
  • News Weekly Survey: EU referendum and votes at 16

    Weekly Survey: EU referendum and votes at 16

    This weekend, Labour announced a reversal of their opposition to an EU referendum. It seems likely that the party will now support legislation to hold a referendum at some point in the next two years. Do you think it is the correct decision for Labour to support a referendum of the UK’s membership of the European Union? While it is unlikely that Labour will support an out vote in the referendum, there are concerns on the left about the UK […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit