
No 10 gags civil servants to stop them speaking out in public
In an edict issued across Whitehall, Downing Street has warned public sector officials not to talk at open events where their comments have not been vetted in advance.
They have also been barred from taking part in any public question-and-answer sessions — even if they are part of an industry event.
The rules also apply to media briefings on issues such as public health, carried out by senior figures such as the chief medical and scientific officers. While these can go ahead they must be cleared in advance by Downing Street and have a minister or special adviser in attendance.
Those affected include public sector officials working for arms-length bodies such as the media regulator Ofcom and the education inspectorate Ofsted, which have operational independence from the government. The rules also apply to senior health leaders, diplomats and military officers.
The edict has already led to cancellation or curtailment of a number of public events where senior government officials were due to speak.
The Whitehall think tank the Institute for Government (IFG) was forced to cancel an event on Tuesday which was due to discuss Labour's new approach to public sector spending after Nick Donlevy, a senior civil servant at the Treasury, was made to pull out.
Last week the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) told journalists attending a land warfare conference that they would not be able to report on a speech by Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton, the chief of the air staff, who is expected to become head of the armed forces.
• No 10 gags military chiefs at events where a minister is present
The think tank said there had been a change in 'reporting rules relating to speakers from the British armed forces'. It said that the majority of speeches and panel appearances by British personnel 'will not be for reporting', whereas those by individuals from foreign militaries will be.
Sources confirmed that the change had been forced on Rusi by the new Downing Street rules.One senior Whitehall figure said the move had been made to prevent high-profile officials from causing 'problems' for the government by using speeches to 'lobby ministers in public' or criticising spending plans or government policy.
However, it has caused unease both inside and outside the government with one senior source describing it as 'unnecessary' and heavy-handed.
'It's the usual desire of No 10 to control absolutely everything without thinking through the consequences,' the source said. 'The idea that even the cabinet secretary cannot take part in a public question-and-answer event is both misguided and counterproductive.'
Another added: 'This is mad on so many levels.'
Alex Thomas, programme director at the IFG, said the rules would have a 'chilling effect' on public debate. 'This will lead to a more closed government and less effective policymaking,' he said.
• Foreign Office staff told to resign if they don't like Gaza stance
'Openness is one of the seven principles of public life and it cannot be a good thing that officials that are responsible for the day-to-day running of critical public services will no longer be able to attend, speak, and answer questions at events.'
'Ministers will always be the main public spokespeople for government activity but this is an overreach and will damage the quality of government and public discourse.'
Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, described the move as 'outrageous'. He said: 'This unprecedented ban on civil servants speaking in public will damage public debate, politics, policymaking and the civil service itself. What are they thinking?'
Baroness Spielman of Durlston, the former head of Ofsted and now a Conservative peer, said the restriction was 'astonishing and unworkable'.
She added that it would force bodies like Ofsted to cancel interactive stakeholder events without a minister present and slow down communication. 'Government grinds too slowly and this will jam the works completely,' she said.
Sir John Kingman, a former permanent secretary at the Treasury, said that when he worked for government he would participate in an event involving questions most days. 'It was quite an important part of the job because many people understandably want to know what the government thinks and why, and want a chance to discuss it,' he said.
A Downing Street source insisted the guidance was not heavy-handed and would be looked at on a 'case by case' basis.
But No 10 said it reflected the principle that ministers were responsible for representing the government in public — rather than officials.
A Cabinet Office spokesman said that the rules around media engagement were 'longstanding and established'.
'It has always been the case, and a constitutional principle, that ministers are ultimately accountable for decision-making to parliament and the public — so it is right they are routinely scrutinised by the media and MPs.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
22 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
ALEX BRUMMER: Bank fears Farage turmoil in No 10
As a public figure, the governor of the Bank of England Andrew Bailey receives most attention from consumers and businesses alike for his role in setting interest rates. Critical as that is to national wellbeing, it has long been my belief that Bailey is more comfortable with the Bank's other, less discussed role of maintaining financial stability. Bailey was first to the battlements in his early days in office in March 2020 as the pandemic shut down Britain and much of the world. Bond markets in New York were in panic, and the Bank, led first by Mark Carney and then Bailey, moved to calm events. A currency swap deal with the US was activated, interest rates were cut to the bone and more money printing, through quantitative easing, was authorised. Bailey passionately urged government to take steps to prevent scarring to the economy. He was also at the tiller in the autumn of 2022 when Liz Truss's tax-cutting mini Budget sparked a run on the pound and a sudden retreat from British government bonds. The scale and suddenness of the move caused ructions for pension funds which had used derivative products to gamble on returns. The episode had threatened, without Bailey's intervention, to cause a cascade of financial collapses among banks who had provided credit for the trades. The Bank of England became a butt of criticism, not least on these pages. Its twice-yearly Financial Stability Report had in the past warned of the potential danger of liability driven-investment products (LDIs) but neither the Bank nor the Pensions Regulator addressed the matter. It is one thing for the Financial Stability Committee to identify and warn of dangers to the financial system, but quite another to tackle a weakness and close it down. Bailey was in the Bank's engine room in the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, so has vast experience of dealing with fractures in the financial system and knows how rapidly contagion takes place. All this experience tells him that Chancellor Rachel Reeves' efforts to encourage growth, by deregulating the City, could be a huge error. It is a reminder of the light touch regulation in the run-up to the collapse of Northern Rock in 2007 and the crisis which followed. Readers of this month's Financial Stability document would find few clues to what Bailey believes is the most acute concern at present. It is not Trump tariffs or the present Government's borrowing needs, as serious as they may be. The governor's biggest worry is political uncertainty. It may seem mad to think that this should be the case given Labour's vast Commons majority and four more years in office. The significant statistic is that Nigel Farage's Reform UK has led the other parties in 65 consecutive polls. And the present kerfuffles in Epping and the record small boat arrivals in a long hot summer make the potential for a Farage journey to Downing Street ever more credible. Bailey and the independent Bank never indulge in party politics. But for the governor, pound sterling, the bond markets and the whole stability of the financial system, the number one threat is a big-spending populist released into Downing Street. Reach for the safety straps.


The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Stephen Flynn jokes he'll be ‘washing hair' when Donald Trump visits Scotland
Stephen Flynn joked he will be washing his hair when Donald Trump visits the UK. The Scottish National Party's (SNP) Westminster leader, who is bald, told Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg that he will find "any excuse possible" to avoid meeting the US president on his trip to Scotland. While insisting it was 'absolutely right' that First Minister John Swinney meets Mr Trump, Mr Flynn quipped that he'd be 'looking after his own toddlers' while the Republican is in the country.


Scottish Sun
23 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
John Swinney ‘could be in danger of losing his Holyrood constituency seat' if people vote tactically
The First Minister is facing a renewed challenge from veteran Tory Murdo Fraser next year SWINNERS & LOSERS John Swinney 'could be in danger of losing his Holyrood constituency seat' if people vote tactically Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) JOHN Swinney could be in danger of losing his Holyrood constituency seat if people vote tactically, a top pollster has claimed. The First Minister is facing a renewed challenge from veteran Tory Murdo Fraser in Perthshire North next year. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 The First Minister could be in danger of losing his Holyrood constituency seat if people vote tactically, a top pollster claims Credit: Michael Schofield 2 Analysis professional Mark Diffley thinks if voters snub Reform UK and Labour and cast ballots for Mr Fraser then Mr Swinney's 4,053 majority could be in jeopardy Credit: jo hanley 2020 And analysis professional Mark Diffley reckons if voters snub Reform UK and Labour and cast ballots for Mr Fraser then Mr Swinney's 4,053 majority could be in peril. Mr Diffley, of the Diffley Partnership, said: 'Tactical voting is a possibility but the Labour and Lib Dem vote shares in this seat in 2021 were negligible. 'Reform might expect to do well here and are likely to eat into Tory votes which makes the job easier for the SNP. 'The SNP took almost 50 per cent of the vote in 2021 and polls indicate that their vote share has fallen by around 15 points since, which might bring this seat into play.' Mr Fraser will be taking on Mr Swinney for a seventh time. He polled 15,807 votes compared to the First Minister's 19,860 in 2021, while Labour got 2,324. The Tory challenger said: 'Nigel Farage has already said he isn't worried about giving the SNP another five years in power. That should terrify every supporter of the Union living in John Swinney's backyard. 'If pro-UK voters in Perthshire want to deliver a verdict on the SNP leader being at the heart of 18 years of nationalist failure, then they must vote for me. 'I will be taking that message to local voters who are sick and tired of the SNP's continual focus on fringe issues, rather than delivering on the real priorities of the people.' Scottish Tory leader Russell Findlay has said Mr Fraser has a 'realistic' chance of winning the seat. In his conference speech last month, he said: 'The SNP will do everything to protect John Swinney but those seats can be in play for us. Wouldn't that be some prize? Swinney paying the price for his abysmal record.' 'Sad to see him go' - GAA fans emotional seeing Michael D Higgins attend last men's All-Ireland final as President But even if Mr Swinney loses the constituency he is still likely to be elected as a regional list MSP. Mr Diffley said Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar will be hoping his party's 'unexpected' win by new MSP Davy Russell in last month's Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election has boosted their chances of forming a government. He added: 'The SNP is far less popular than it was at the last Holyrood election and polls show low support for the government's performance across key policy issues. 'But Labour has not capitalised on that and the national polls point, at this stage, to the likelihood of the SNP being re-elected next year. 'Many voters are disillusioned with both the UK and Scottish governments which partly explains the rise of Reform and the likelihood that they will do well next year.' Reform and Labour confirmed they will be standing in every seat but their candidates for Perthshire North have yet to be announced. A Scottish Labour spokeswoman said: 'Scotland has been badly failed by both the SNP and the Tories, and Scottish Labour will be fighting to win in every part of the country. 'Only Scottish Labour can get rid of this incompetent SNP government and deliver a new direction.' The SNP did not respond to our request for comment.