In a press release, the Foreign Secretary stated that “She will change the woke civil service culture that strays in to antisemitism”. The press release went on to state:

 

 

When pressed to provide evidence of antisemitism by journalists, Liz Truss’s team referred to an interview she gave to the Jewish Chronicle on Thursday.

 

In the article she refers to a policy decision she took regarding the United Nations Human Rights Council, where she had to “overrule” Foreign Office officials who voiced doubts, claiming it would lead to Britain becoming “isolated”.

 

She goes on to say “she accepted there were some civil servants — including Arabists at the Foreign Office — who did not share her views, even when she was sure of what was ‘the right thing to do’”.

 

The clear implication in this article, and the comments in the press release, are that antisemitism was a factor in the advice she received as Foreign Secretary. This is an extraordinary statement for any minister to make and one which she should recognise should not be made without evidence. On the day the comments were released, I wrote to Liz Truss jointly with the General Secretary of Prospect, Mike Clancy, calling on her to substantiate the allegations with evidence to the Cabinet Secretary or withdraw them.

 

The civil service is an organisation of over 450,000 people and, as such, reflects the wider society it serves. While we as a trade union, and civil service employers themselves, make enormous efforts to eradicate prejudice, it would be naïve to suggest that antisemitism, or other forms of racism and prejudice, do not exist. Many civil servants from the Jewish community have spoken publicly to challenge her comments, saying they have never experienced antisemitism in the civil service, but there will be others whose lived experience will be different.

 

My rejection of her sweeping statement and lack of evidence is not to ignore that lived experience, but to address her point that antisemitism is essentially institutionalised in the civil service and influencing policy advice. It is all the more ironic that this follows her statement the previous week where she pledged to do away with all diversity and inclusion posts in the civil service.

 

Her whole approach to this issue, equating that tired and insulting jibe “wokeism” with a culture in the civil service and then extending that to antisemitism, many will find abhorrent. That a potential Prime Minister, and therefore Minister for the Civil Service, is prepared to throw these baseless accusations around in a leadership election is extremely troubling. It not only damages the reputation of the civil service but further strains the relationship between ministers and civil servants, which many will have been hoping to see improve following a change of Prime Minister. Liz Truss will know that civil servants are unable to publicly defend themselves, that includes those closest to the policy advice she quoted as an example and more broadly.

 

Once again it begs the question: What do ministers hope to achieve by denigrating the civil service publicly and damaging the relationship with those that are tasked with delivering the government’s agenda?

 

As well as writing to the Foreign Secretary, I will be raising the issue with the Cabinet Secretary to convey the dismay that many members who have contacted the FDA feel about these statements. There is a short window with a new Prime Minister to reset relations with the civil service. For the good of the country, and given the enormous challenges it is currently facing, that opportunity cannot be lost.