Craig Oliver to replace Andy Coulson

BBC man is surprise successor to Coulson as Downing Street’s director of communications.

Craig Oliver, currently head of English at BBC Global News, will replace Andy Coulson as Downing Street's new director of communications.

Oliver, who was previously editor of the BBC's News at Ten and News at Six, will take up the post shortly for the same salary as Coulson. He was reportedly approached by the former News of the World editor last week.

According to Nick Robinson, the BBC's political editor, Oliver had no previous political involvement, although he notes his interest in David Cameron's early remodelling of the Conservative Party. Robinson offers an insider's account of the negotiations on his blog:

Coulson persuaded Oliver to meet the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff, Ed Llewelyn to discuss what the job might entail. That meeting led to others – a weekend trip to George Osborne's West London home and then onto Chequers to meet David Cameron himself. They liked what they saw and heard. After a meeting with Nick Clegg this morning the decision was sealed.

Oliver said: "I'm delighted to be joining David Cameron and his team at such an exciting and challenging time. My background is broadcasting, but I know that newpapers play a crucial role and I look forward to talking with them."

He is one of few journalists to have worked at the BBC, Channel 4, Five and ITV. Yet his appointment will take many by surprise, given that his experience is heavily weighted towards broadcasting. Krishnan Gury-Murthy, a newsreader at Channel 4, where Craig previously worked as a programme editor, said on Twitter: "Craig Oliver, former #c4news programme editor, intriguing choice . . . clever, shrewd and knows everyone in TV (but maybe not many in print)."

It's also possible that it is a strategic choice: the BBC could be seen as an area of weakness, and the Murdoch group papers are already onside.

Cameron says he is "very pleased" with the appointment: "Craig has formidable experience as a broadcast journalist. He will do an excellent job in explaining and communicating the government's programme."

Samira Shackle is a freelance journalist, who tweets @samirashackle. She was formerly a staff writer for the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Grenfell survivors were promised no rent rises – so why have the authorities gone quiet?

The council now says it’s up to the government to match rent and services levels.

In the aftermath of the Grenfell disaster, the government made a pledge that survivors would be rehoused permanently on the same rent they were paying previously.

For families who were left with nothing after the fire, knowing that no one would be financially worse off after being rehoused would have provided a glimmer of hope for a stable future.

And this is a commitment that we’ve heard time and again. Just last week, the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) reaffirmed in a statement, that the former tenants “will pay no more in rent and service charges for their permanent social housing than they were paying before”.

But less than six weeks since the tragedy struck, Kensington and Chelsea Council has made it perfectly clear that responsibility for honouring this lies solely with DCLG.

When it recently published its proposed policy for allocating permanent housing to survivors, the council washed its hands of the promise, saying that it’s up to the government to match rent and services levels:

“These commitments fall within the remit of the Government rather than the Council... It is anticipated that the Department for Communities and Local Government will make a public statement about commitments that fall within its remit, and provide details of the period of time over which any such commitments will apply.”

And the final version of the policy waters down the promise even further by downplaying the government’s promise to match rents on a permanent basis, while still making clear it’s nothing to do with the council:

It is anticipated that DCLG will make a public statement about its commitment to meeting the rent and/or service charge liabilities of households rehoused under this policy, including details of the period of time over which any such commitment will apply. Therefore, such commitments fall outside the remit of this policy.”

It seems Kensington and Chelsea council intends to do nothing itself to alter the rents of long-term homes on which survivors will soon be able to bid.

But if the council won’t take responsibility, how much power does central government actually have to do this? Beyond a statement of intent, it has said very little on how it can or will intervene. This could leave Grenfell survivors without any reassurance that they won’t be worse off than they were before the fire.

As the survivors begin to bid for permanent homes, it is vital they are aware of any financial commitments they are making – or families could find themselves signing up to permanent tenancies without knowing if they will be able to afford them after the 12 months they get rent free.

Strangely, the council’s public Q&A to residents on rehousing is more optimistic. It says that the government has confirmed that rents and service charges will be no greater than residents were paying at Grenfell Walk – but is still silent on the ambiguity as to how this will be achieved.

Urgent clarification is needed from the government on how it plans to make good on its promise to protect the people of Grenfell Tower from financial hardship and further heartache down the line.

Kate Webb is head of policy at the housing charity Shelter. Follow her @KateBWebb.