Thread by @GoodLawProject

We are in Court today and tomorrow on a difficult case about an important principle: that the Government mustn't fill public jobs from amongst its friends.

👇🧵1/?

'By definition, when decision-makers conduct closed recruitments, they are only able to choose between candidates with whom they are already connected.' Our co-claimant: @Halima_Begum @RunnymedeTrust

Judge: I do regard question of whether there was a provision criterion or practice and whether it was particular disadvantage to groups with protected characteristics that we cite as being one of central questions in this case.

Government claims it would have taken 3 months to run an open recruitment process for Test and Trace appointments. But this is not compelling... the process can normally be completed in a few weeks ⬇️

Jason Coppell QC: Harding was already known to Hancock - she was a Tory peer, head of NHS Improvement. The suggestion that she met all the criteria could not have been made without any pre-existing knowledge of her

One email shows a Cabinet Office official describing the recruitment process for the head of Test and Trace as 'ludicrous'.

We agree. Appointing such an important role at such breakneck speed with so little information was seemingly ludicrous

Government claims they were justified in not having a proper recruitment process for Dido Harding as Head of Test and Trace because it was a 'temporary appointment' - but the letter of her appointment has no term in it 👀

The practice seems to be that direct public appointments (of those linked to the Conservative Party) are seldom remunerated - e.g. Dido Harding, Lord Feldman, George Pascoe-Watson, Gina Coladangelo's first role..."

When recruitment processes are closed, the only applicants who can be considered are those in Ministers’ phone books. The Government’s failure to offer remuneration for many of these high level full-time roles shuts out those who don’t have family wealth