Simon Case: Farage should talk to civil servants to prepare for government
Nigel Farage should be invited for talks with civil servants to help him prepare for government, a former Cabinet Secretary has said.
Simon Case said the Reform UK leader should be allowed to hold 'government access talks' before the next election.
Such a move would be controversial because the talks are usually open only to the Leader of the Opposition: at present Kemi Badenoch.
But last month, Sir Keir Starmer declared Reform his main opposition, saying the Conservatives had 'run out of road'.
Reform is well ahead of the Conservatives in the polls, with a MRP poll on Thursday suggesting Mr Farage's party was on 26 per cent support compared with the Tories on 18 per cent.
Such a result could see Reform win most seats in a general election, but not enough for an outright majority.
The poll comes after Reform's impressive results in May's local elections, when it seized 10 county authorities from the Tories. In the Commons, however, the party only has five MPs.
Mr Case served as cabinet secretary, the most senior civil servant in the country, from 2020 to 2024.
Speaking on the Politics Inside Out podcast, hosted by Gloria de Piero and Jonathan Ashworth, both former Labour MPs, he was asked whether he would be advising his former civil service colleagues to consider offering access talks to Mr Farage in advance of the next election.
The former cabinet secretary said: 'Yes. If they're still doing well in the polls, absolutely.
'If it looked credible that Reform could either form a government by themselves or be part of a government, then absolutely.'
A Reform source said: 'It's quite clear that the next election is going to be Reform or Labour.
'We would expect the offer in advance of the next election with our polling, as is the norm for any potential incoming government. We will soon see if the civil service are prepared to play by the rules or not.'
Access talks usually begin in the months before an expected general election, and have to be given the go-ahead by the prime minister.
Usually they are initiated by the leader of the opposition, who writes a letter to the prime minister requesting that they start.
The prime minister can offer talks to smaller parties, but that has never happened. In 2015, David Cameron refused Nicola Sturgeon's request that the SNP be granted talks.
Gordon Brown allowed talks to begin with the Tories some 15 months before the 2010 election, but the Liberal Democrats were not invited. The party later went into coalition with the Conservatives.
Mr Case acquired notoriety in his job as cabinet secretary when he was asked by Boris Johnson, the then prime minister, to undertake an inquiry into parties held in Whitehall while Covid restrictions were in place.
He had to step down from the inquiry a day later following reports a party had been held in his office. The report was eventually carried out by Sue Gray.
The Telegraph Lockdown Files – leaked messages from the Covid period – revealed Mr Case described Mr Johnson as a 'nationally distrusted figure' and warned the public were unlikely to follow isolation rules laid down by him.
Two days after Liz Truss took over as prime minister, he had to inform her that Queen Elizbeth II had died.
Mr Case stood down at the end of 2024, as he is suffering from a neurological condition which means he is unable to walk without a stick. In June, he was awarded a life peerage, and will sit in the House of Lords as a crossbencher.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
34 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Starmer aide Morgan McSweeney under fire after Labour welfare rebellion
Being the prime minister's right-hand man is a position of extraordinary power and privilege. But when things start to go wrong, you're directly in the line of fire. So has found Morgan McSweeney, the political mastermind credited with helping Keir Starmer win his election landslide, in recent days as the Labour party has collapsed into moral fury over planned welfare cuts. The softly spoken Irishman, now Starmer's chief of staff, has become the lightning rod for the frustration of many Labour rebels who backed a wrecking amendment designed to blow up the flagship welfare bill next week. Many of them blame McSweeney and his political operation for ignoring Labour MPs to such an extent that they missed the strength of feeling over the disability benefit cuts and just how far the rebels were prepared to go. 'They just kept saying that MPs were in a different place from the public on benefit cuts and we'd just have to tough it out,' said one MP who signed the amendment. 'But we speak to our constituents all the time and many of them are terrified. They just don't get it.' One rebel ringleader was reported as saying that while they were happy with the prime minister's leadership, they thought he should have fewer 'overexcitable boys' in his team. An MP even posted about 'regime change' in a Labour WhatsApp group. McSweeney has also been blamed for allowing the Treasury to focus too much on the financial case for change, rushing through the cuts before the spring statement to give Rachel Reeves more headroom. Senior No 10 sources now acknowledge that was a mistake. Those inside Downing Street also accept they should have done a better job making the moral case for welfare reform, and started doing so earlier. Starmer has been virtually silent on the issue, unless specifically asked, in the weeks running up to the vote. 'The criticism of our engagement with MPs and of our communications is fair,' one senior figure conceded. But allies of McSweeney pushed back hard on claims by some Labour backbenchers that he was using the cuts to chase down Reform voters. 'There's not a shred of evidence that we're pursuing a strategy of attacking welfare recipients to appeal to voters who feel that they're scroungers or whatever. We've never used language like that, nor would we,' one source said. 'These are real people and our motivation is to help get them back into work and improve their lives.' It is no new thing for backbenchers to feel under-appreciated or neglected by Downing Street, and to blame whoever the prime minister's closest political aide is at the time. David Cameron-era Conservatives turned on Steve Hilton, his 'blue skies' thinker, for pursuing his own agenda and leaving them out of the loop. Boris Johnson's troupe of Tory backbenchers fell out spectacularly with his chief aide Dominic Cummings after the Barnard Castle affair. But there are deeper tensions at play between McSweeney, whose instinct is to focus on Reform-inclined voters, and others in the party – said to include Pat McFadden, the powerful Cabinet Office minister – who believe the government should pitch to the entire electorate. While many of those same MPs who now criticise McSweeney owe him their seats, and few doubt his golden electoral touch, questions are starting to be asked about whether he is the right fit for chief of staff, which involves helping to run not just the government but also the party. But ultimately, some of those inside government whisper, the buck stops at the top. While the grumbling about McSweeney may continue, since the welfare cuts debacle some MPs have been quite openly suggesting it may be Starmer rather than his chief of staff who is not up to the job.
Telegraph
39 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Church of England ‘is preparing for UK at war'
The Church of England is preparing for the possibility of the UK going to war, according to the Bishop to the Armed Forces. The Rt Rev Hugh Nelson said the church was looking at the Second World War for inspiration on 'what it might mean for us to be a Church in a time of conflict'. And the Church is considering changing its rules to make it easier to appoint new Army chaplains, so they can be deployed more quickly in the event of war. Earlier this week, the Government's national security strategy said Britain must 'actively prepare' for a 'wartime scenario' in its homeland, for the first time in many years. At the Nato summit on Wednesday, Sir Keir Starmer announced that British fighter jets would carry nuclear warheads for the first time since the Cold War. Bishop Nelson said he had heard 'rising concern about the threat of very, very serious conflict, including conflict that involves the UK' from military personnel over the past two years. He said: 'As a Church, we want to take seriously those challenges, both to do everything that we can to pray for and work for and advocate for peace, because the kingdom of God is a kingdom of justice and peace, and to face the reality [of] how the Church might need to respond, and to be if there were to be a serious conflict.' The bishop said the Church needed to learn lessons from the Covid-19 pandemic, for which it was not prepared, and should recall the leadership it gave during the Second World War. He added: 'We're encouraging the Church to pray for peace and to prepare for, or to begin to do some thinking and some work around, what it might mean for us to be a Church in a time of conflict. 'We have looked back at some of the ways in which senior Church leadership – archbishops and bishops – led, the things that they said, particularly in the Second World War.' During the war, the Church, led by William Temple as archbishop of Canterbury from 1942 until his death in 1944, was key in seeking support for asylum seekers fleeing the Continent. Bishop Nelson was speaking ahead of the General Synod, the Church of England's legislative meeting in York next month. New proposals to be debated there would allow the appointment of Armed Forces chaplains to be streamlined, and increase their number. Chaplains would be able to minister under an Archbishop's licence, without also having to hold a Permission to Officiate (PTO), which is issued by a diocese. Papers submitted to the Synod for debate warned that the current rules were 'a serious administrative burden' and made it 'more difficult for Chaplains to deploy within the UK at the pace required by their roles'. There are almost 200 Church of England chaplains, serving as both regulars and reservists across the Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force. Brig Jaish Mahan, a Christian who served in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Iraq and Afghanistan, will address Synod members on the current global climate and the challenges for the UK, as well as speaking of his own experience in the military. He is thought to be the first serving member of the Armed Forces to brief the Synod. The Church has said it is developing resources for churches on peace, war and conflict. Proposals for working with schools on these issues as well as practical suggestions for making churches hospitable and welcoming to Armed Forces personnel and their families, are to be published in the coming months. The Bishop also warned that the Church of England needs to engage with the ethics surrounding AI robotics and drone warfare, adding that they 'pose a very serious challenge both to the practice of war and also the ethics of peace and conflict'.
Spectator
39 minutes ago
- Spectator
Keir Starmer climbs down on welfare cuts
At last, Keir Starmer has bowed to the inevitable. Having first adopted a posture of defiance, then conciliation, the Prime Minister has tonight admitted capitulation on the great welfare revolt. The Guardian reports that the ringleaders of the 126 rebels who signed a wrecking amendment to the Welfare Bill are now claiming 'massive concessions.' It follows a tense afternoon of talks between Starmer and his MPs. It means another big U-turn for Starmer – and another hole in the Treasury's finances The rebels say that they have been promised significant changes to planned cuts. These include moderating the Bill to make it easier for people with multiple impairments to claim disability benefits. Starmer also offered to protect Personal Independent Payments (PIP) for all existing claimants forever. This was to ensure there would be no detriment from the reforms for existing claimants – a key concern of the welfare rebels. But new claimants will be affected, as ministers desperately try to stop ever-spiralling disability and sickness welfare spending climb to £100 billion by 2030. It means another big U-turn for Starmer – and another hole in the Treasury's finances. Early estimates suggest that the Welfare Bill climb down could cost £2 billion: money which Rachel Reeves will now have to find elsewhere. Coming so soon after the winter fuel reversal, the whole debacle will raise further questions about the political judgment of those in Numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street. A U-turn looked inevitable from the moment that the initial list of 108 names on the amendment was published on Monday night. So why did Starmer persist with the plans for a further three days and completely overshadow his big Nato 5 per cent commitment? No government has been defeated on the Second Reading of its own legislation since 1986. Tonight's climbdown means that Starmer looks to have avoided that fate next Tuesday. But the damage from such a public humiliation is obvious. Rebellion is a habit; the concessions show that it can be a fruitful one too. As for the Treasury, now forced to plug the gap in its finances, the lesson by now ought to be obvious: Labour MPs will not wear major welfare cuts unless they are handled with the upmost care.
