Civil servants have discovered their most pointless money-waster yet
Well, the gov.uk logo, once chastely black and white, has blossomed into colour. The background is now a limpid sky-blue, and instead of lurking shyly at the foot of the lettering, the full stop has turned an ethereal shade of Cambridge blue and hovers halfway up the type.
This cost of this momentous change – part of a 'brand refresh' of the gov.uk site undertaken by the communications agency M&C Saatchi – is reported to be more than £500,000. And if that seems a bit steep for a spot of colouring-in with blue crayons, it comes with a hefty explanatory dossier, written in that curious argot used by officials hoping to deflect comparisons between their latest brilliant wheeze and the Emperor's New Clothes.
The functions that the cerulean blob is intended to undertake are as multifarious as they are baffling. 'The dot can take on different roles – guiding users through content, journeys and experiences across gov.uk channels', the guidance explains, adding 'it should always serve a clear purpose'. If only the same could be said of the dossier, which suggests that the dot should act as 'the bridge between government and the UK', and 'a guiding hand for life'.
If the dot is starting to sound like the changeling child of Isambard Kingdom Brunel and the Hand of the King from Game of Thrones, there is more to come. The dossier also suggests that the dot could depict a coin being saved into a piggy bank, or a text bubble in a guide on how to vote.
But there is a stern warning for larky civil servants thinking of busting out into a full-scale homage to the dotty artist, Yayoi Kusama. They are not to 'use the dot in a decorative way or distort or skew the dot'.
All this may evoke an episode of the Radio 4 comedy, The Consultants, in which Chesney fixes the leaky 'e' that has developed in the alphabet. The annals of consultant-led branding are littered with tragi-comic disasters, from Consignia to Abrdn (the meme-haunted rebrand of Aberdeen Asset Management). But the satire isn't quite as hilarious when it is hard-pressed taxpayers who have coughed up for the 'journey', or wild goose chase, on which the blue dot is to lead us.
If only the corridors of power were populated by classicists rather than PPE graduates, someone might have twigged that Aristophanes of Byzantium, the grammarian, editor of Homer and head librarian of the library of Alexandria, could have delivered a similar dot for free.
A couple of millennia ago, the great scholar devised a system of placing a dot, or punctus, at various heights in a text to denote rhetorical divisions in speech. Were he currently working in Whitehall, he would instantly recognise the fabulously pricey new dot, hovering at the midpoint of the surrounding type, as his very own stigma mese – a dot placed midway up the surrounding type – waiting patiently since 200BC to guide the public on a journey through the promised land of gov.uk channels.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
35 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Have no sympathy for Labour's ‘grown-ups', they brought this on themselves
The pattern for life under Labour has been set. Ministers, hopelessly out of their depth, try to save money, fail, reverse, ending up spending more, and yet the Left calls them closet-Tories and swans off to Jeremy Corbyn. The excess of lefty MPs in the Commons hasn't brought order to Labour but, like an experiment involving overbred mice in a cage, they've started to eat each other. No 10 will try to make a virtue of this. They will say: 'Keir Starmer is where the public is. He is trying to fix the mess left by the Tories in a fair way – balance the books, control the borders – and opposition from both Corbyn and Reform proves he is the non-ideological man we need.' He's the human version of the BBC. Everyone hates it, so it must be good. Except no one watches the BBC anymore, just as dwindling numbers vote Labour, and the vision of Starmer as a man patrolling the middle-ground doesn't ring true. It's more accurate of Rachel Reeves. For all her sins, she's been saying the same things for over a decade (loudly, through a fixed smile). As shadow work and pensions minister, she promised to be tougher on benefits than George Osborne. She did not serve under Corbyn. She called for immigration to be curbed after Brexit. By contrast, Starmer's career is built on a series of U-turns he believes it is our patriotic duty to forget. Forget that he was a militant Remainer, that he knelt for Black Lives Matter or that he won the Labour leadership calling Corbyn's manifesto 'our foundational document' stuffed with 'radicalism and hope'. Starmer, who said 'the free market has failed', stood for a 'moral socialism' that 'opposes austerity'. Left-wing activists had spent the 2010s alleging that welfare reform amounted to murder; John McDonnell quoted someone saying they wished to 'lynch' Esther McVey. Starmer's Labour might have turned on the Corbynites, but it drew from the same pool of assumptions and resentments. Torsten Bell called the two-child benefit cap immoral. David Lammy said his constituents were 'ruined by austerity, left hungry by Universal Credit'. Angela Rayner apologised for calling Conservatives 'homophobic, racist, misogynistic… scum.' Starmer ran ads that suggested Rishi Sunak was soft on paedophiles and his wife was a tax dodger. He called Boris 'pathetic', a man who 'had no principles, no integrity' (I 'loathed' him, he later said). Having abandoned a coherent critique of Tory economics – which, to be fair, had no coherence anyway – Starmer reframed politics from Left v Right to Good v Evil, and this is what a new generation of MPs presumably believed when they won in 2024. Everything the Tories had done was wicked and unnecessary, a choice born of greed. So, what happened when Reeves took over the Treasury, found Rishi had in fact spent too much money, and announced that 'Dickensian choices' had morphed into Labour necessities? Hurt and panic. Akin to a Puritan discovering their mother is a lush and daddy frequents a drag bar. And so the children rebelled – and we should have no sympathy for the adults who once claimed to be back in charge. Why? Because their moral tone before entering office implied that any effort to limit the state was class violence. Another example from Torsten Bell (there are many): in 2021 he wrote that revising the Covid-era uplift to Universal Credit, worth £20 a week, might damage not only 'family finances' but people's 'mental health'.Tory policy could drive you mad. Of course, the Left has well established in the popular mind that mental health is as serious as physical, so must get PIPs; that Britain is a nation of immigrants and human rights, so we can't deport lawbreakers; and the Earth is on fire, so we can't use new sources of fossil fuel. Many of the problems Labour inherited are the by-products of assumptions Labour has helped embed within British institutions (including within the Tory Party, which is why it did little to reverse the trend). Why was Starmer shouted at when he laid a wreath for the victims of the Southport killer last year? Why has Reeves been derided for crying in the Commons? Because most voters do not see Labour as a change agent with Fairy-soft clean hands, but rather as the latest iteration of a grubby establishment that has run this country for decades, and which shares as much blame as the Conservatives for where we are – arguably, more. New Labour bound Westminster with legal restraints, such as the Human Rights Act or the Climate Change Act, while empowering quangos that operate as watchdogs against elected officials. Whoever you vote for, policy options are narrowed so far that we can really only travel in one direction. Thus the economy is in constant crisis because spending is axiomatic, frugality penalised and alternatives for growth shut off (ask Liz Truss). Reeves, in her first year, found herself testing what this political system would tolerate with her modest mix of tax hikes and savings. Last week's welfare rebellion rules out further cuts, while her fiscal rules render it harder to borrow, leaving only taxes on the table, which will kill the growth that grows the pie that makes progressive government feasible. Changing course will be difficult. Starmer and Corbyn have profound differences, but they share the psychological defect of seeing themselves as Very Good People – a condition that makes it easy to give criticism but hard to take it. Good People cannot accept they are wrong because their rightness, or righteousness, is the rock upon which they construct a life. Sitting in Westminster, it's fun to hear Labour MPs bitch about each other. The Starmerites truly loathe the Corbynites; they are 'professional activists 'who harm the people they're meant to help'. The Corbynites say the Starmerites will never fix a capitalist system they don't understand, and thus haven't learnt to hate. Out of power, this conflict was barely worth a column in the Morning Star, but as we enter Year Two of the revolution, journalists must study every nuance, unpack every conference motion, to see where this civil war is taking us. If you want a vision of the future, Winston, it is pro-Gaza activists glueing themselves to a truck at London's Pride parade on Saturday. Black flags v rainbow flags. A family row with consequence, because the entire country is stuck in the traffic behind, pumping the horn, waving our fists, but going nowhere.
Telegraph
35 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Revealed: Palestine Action sets up secret website to recruit new members
Palestine Action has attempted to thwart the Government's terror ban by creating a secret website to recruit activists for further direct action, The Telegraph can reveal. The protest group said it would continue its activity 'regardless of the name it falls under', as it directed potential recruits to a vetting form for a 'new collective' set up an hour before Palestine Action was officially designated a terrorist organisation. The move to ban the group was spurred by it claiming responsibility for the vandalism of two Voyager aircraft at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire in June, which police said caused around £7 million of damage. Support or membership of Palestine Action is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. The group's website has also been blocked in the UK. On Saturday, hours after the midnight deadline brought the ban into effect, an 83-year-old retired priest was among 29 protesters arrested on suspicion of terror offences. The activists had displayed signs supporting Palestine Action outside Parliament. In a statement before the protest, Scotland Yard had warned that showing support for the group would lead to prosecution. But the group's ringleaders have now been privately messaging potential recruits encouraging them to 'join the frontline against Zionism' by signing up to a 'new collective' called Direct Action Training. The message, sent on Signal, an encrypted messaging app, on Saturday, said: 'While Palestine Action is banned, we do not want this draconian move from the Home Secretary to deter your dedication to your solidarity with Palestine. 'Direct action is for everyone, regardless of the name it falls under. We do believe that by staying focused and targeting the heart of the war machine again and again, the people will be able to shut the Zionist supply chain.' Following Saturday's arrests, Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, was asked on the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg whether arresting an 83-year-old priest was a good use of police time. He said: 'The law doesn't have an age limit, whether you're 18 or 80. If you're supporting proscribed organisations, then the law is going to be enforced. 'Officers, you could see, did it with great care and tried to preserve that person's dignity, but they're breaking a serious law.' The website for Direct Action Training was set up at 10.41 pm on Friday and has its internet protocol address in Iceland, a country which is not a part of any major international surveillance alliances and is renowned for its strong data protection laws. The new group, which describes itself as 'training to bring the Zionist machine down brick by brick, wall by wall', said it condemned the 'active participation of the UK' in nearly two years of 'ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza '. The group's website landing page said: 'Direct action has proven time and time again to be the most effective route to create the material conditions for the change we want'. To register an 'expression of interest', prospective protesters are asked 14 questions ranging from queries about their personal details to testing their 'dedication to the Palestinian cause'. The form clarifies that training 'will be specifically aimed at dismantling the Zionist war machine in the UK' and 'for this, your dedication to the Palestinian cause is key'. Candidates must disclose their full name, mobile number, email address, date of birth and where they are based. Recruits must also divulge their social media handles, the name of anyone who could 'vouch' for them, their membership of any other direct action or political groups, their understanding of direct action and any experiences of it. After this, the recruits are then asked if they have a 'political ideology that led you here' and any relevant skills. The new collective then asks recruits about their 'current knowledge of the Palestinian context,' before adding: 'Don't worry, you don't need to be an expert.' 'What led you into solidarity with Palestine?' the questionnaire probes, adding: 'What other causes are you passionate about?' The form was created using the same software as another questionnaire, seen by The Telegraph, which Palestine Action used to recruit members before it was proscribed. It also poses similar questions. In the previous 21-question form, Palestine Action said vetting had to be conducted in the 'interests of keeping cops, Zionists and other bad-faith actors out of the movement'. The Direct Action Training recruitment form also specifies that the group is looking for expertise in areas such as 'climbing' and 'organisational skills', and asks if candidates have a driving licence and would be prepared to drive for the group, given that it could risk 'points on your licence'. It also asks whether participants would be 'willing to take action that risks arrest' and if there were any actions they 'wouldn't consider'. Potential recruits are further questioned about which Palestine Action protests had particularly inspired them. Last month, The Telegraph accessed a Palestine Action workshop in which its host discussed a range of tactics, including 'accountable' and 'covert' actions. The former is carried out with the aim of getting caught and raising publicity, such as locking or glueing yourself to something. The latter, the host said, involves 'covering up anything that might make you identifiable, doing the action at a certain time, making sure it is as quick as possible, and essentially trying to get away at the end of it.' She later added: 'If you're very fast on your feet then it might be worth taking the risk to do covert and run away.'
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Axing two-child benefit limit still on table but 'harder' after welfare U-turn
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson insisted the Government will 'continue to look at every lever to lift children out of poverty' after reports plans to scrap two child limit 'dead' Scrapping the two-child benefit limit remains on the table - but last week's welfare U-turn will make it harder, a top minister has said. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson insisted the Government was "looking at every lever and we'll continue to look at every lever to lift children out of poverty". But she said it would be more difficult to find the money to axe the austerity-era measure after Keir Starmer was forced to gut his planned disability benefit cuts to see off a Labour revolt. The welfare climbdown has left a £5billion hole in Rachel Reeves's spending plans. Ms Phillipson, who is working on a long-awaited child poverty strategy, distanced herself from reports that plans to scrap the two-child limit were now "dead in the water". Many Labour MPs oppose the cap, which could become a new focal point for tensions between backbenchers and Downing Street. The policy, introduced in 2017, restricts claims for Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit to the first two children. About 1.6 million children live in households affected by it, which would cost around £3.4billion a year to lift. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that getting rid of the cap would lift 500,000 children out of relative poverty. Asked if the Government could no longer afford to scrap it, she told the BBC: "We're looking at every lever, we will continue to look at every lever to lift children out of poverty. It will be the moral mission of this Labour government, to lift children out of poverty." But she said there was a cost to the decision to shelve plans to restrict eligibility for the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) until after a review next year. Ms Phillipson said: "The decisions that have been taken in the last week do make decisions, future decisions harder. But all of that said, we will look at this collectively in terms of all of the ways that we can lift children out of poverty." She said she was "not going to pretend that it hasn't been a tough or a challenging week" and acknowledged that the Government botched its handling of the welfare reforms. "What the Prime Minister has said, and what I also believe, is that what we set out, we pushed ahead too fast, we didn't listen enough to people, including, I would say, including to lots of people who had concerns about the nature of that change," she said.
