Paul Tucker
Updated on: October 12, 2024 7:36 pm GMT
Sue Gray, the chief of staff to Labour leader Keir Starmer, is making headlines for a pay rise that has stirred controversy within the UK government. Newly reported figures indicate that Gray’s salary now exceeds that of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, leading to significant backlash among political insiders and raising questions about the functioning of the current administration.
Gray’s Salary Comparison Sparks Debate
Sue Gray’s recent salary increase to £170,000 puts her remuneration at £3,000 above that of Prime Minister Sunak, who earns £166,786. This hike has led to tensions within the government, especially given the perception of Gray’s role and influence as Starmer’s right hand.
– Gray’s increased salary surpasses that of any cabinet minister and her predecessor, Liam Booth-Smith, who earned between £140,000 and £145,000 when he served under Sunak.
– Sources indicate Gray was advised to accept a lower salary to avoid controversy but declined.
The rebanding of salaries for special advisers approved by the Prime Minister contributed to the rise in Gray’s pay. However, it is significant to note that Gray herself did not oversee the rebanding process.
Questions of Loyalty and Performance
The significant gap in salary has led to internal strife within the Labour Party and the broader governmental framework. Some insiders suggest that this financial decision reflects poorly on the leadership dynamics at Number 10.
One source expressed:
> “It speaks to the dysfunctional way No10 is being run – no political judgement, an increasingly grand Sue who considers herself to be the Deputy Prime Minister…”
Frustrations among advisers run high, particularly with claims of a personal campaign against Gray, which some consider unfair. A supportive government source criticized the focus on Gray, stating:
> “Any questions should be directed at the process and not an individual.”
Frustrations Among Special Advisers
Many special advisers feel discontented with their salaries compared to Gray. They anticipated salary rises upon assuming their positions but soon found they would actually earn less than what they did during the opposition cycle. This has fostered resentment, particularly towards Gray.
The perceptions surrounding salary discrepancies are further compounded by issues related to the processing of employment contracts:
– Several advisers report delays in receiving their formal contracts, leading them to accept salaries that were initially not in line with their expectations.
– Matthew Doyle, the Prime Minister’s director of communications, faced a similar situation with his salary being drastically lower until adjusted to align with predecessors.
Some advisers pointed out the lack of visibility in the preparations for government and the slow pace of appointing ministers, which, they argue, undermines their perceived efficacy.
Historical Context and Government Responses
Historically, previous Conservative administrations grappled with the idea of raising special adviser salaries during economic hardship. Concerns over public perception and the potential backlash led to these proposals being shelved.
A Cabinet Office spokesperson clarified:
> “It is false to suggest that political appointees have made any decisions on their own pay bands or determining their own pay. Any decision on special adviser pay is made by officials, not political appointees.”
This insight aims to reassure the public that the administration’s pay structure is grounded in systematic official processes rather than arbitrary decisions by political figures.
Pressure from Outside Forces
The media scrutiny on Gray’s salary also reflects broader social sentiments regarding public spending and value for money at a time when many households are struggling. Some government insiders argue that the pay of special advisers is out of sync with wider public expectations and salaries across Whitehall.
An adviser expressed dismay at the perception:
> “I’m working harder than ever in a more important job and they want to pay me less than the Labour Party was paying me when it was broke.”
The rift within the government is emblematic of challenges facing the current administration, as they navigate not just the practicalities of governance but the optics of their internal decisions.
Conclusion
The controversy surrounding Sue Gray’s salary illustrates a broader narrative of discontent within both the Labour Party and the government at large. As tensions rise and questions about transparency and accountability grow, it remains to be seen how this will affect Gray’s influence and the morale of special advisers trying to make their mark in a challenging political landscape.
This situation reminds us that being in public office means people will watch your actions closely. It’s important to think carefully about all money decisions, especially when times are tough.
