Nepotism is not just the bestowing of a job, it’s any unfair advantage that the family connection might bring. Theoretically in this case, maybe Boris didn’t fire his brother for saying something rebellious that a non-relative would have been turfed over on the spot. That’s the main reason nepotism and other non-professional chummy hiring practices get a bad rep: nobody can tell if a person is getting away with stuff because of personal loyalties rather than talent.
But nepotism is not illegal, it can just look bad for the people who practice it, the same as cronyism. Realistically, the UK government at large supports nepotism on a systematic level, so nobody’s going to suffer very much consequence for anything here, outside of people talking about it as we’re doing here.
This nepotism is ultimately of lesser practical consequence. If Jesse James asks his brother Frank to help him rob a train, nobody’s going to yell “Nepotists!” as they ride over the horizon with your money.
For goodness sakes, I said that appointing a sibling had the appearance of nepotism, and I later said that the more I thought about it the more I believed it was nepotism. This isn’t a court room and I’m not the prosecution. Your claim that it was not nepotism is just as much a statement of fact that has to be defended as anyone’s* claim that is was.
* Not my claim that it was nepotism, by the way, since I never said it was.
I know. That’s the attitude that drives me insane. I think the idea of choosing not to appoint your 100% qualified sibling to a position to avoid the appearance of impropriety is the best thing to do. I think senators who publicly said they weren’t sure who to believe between Cavanaugh and Blasey Ford and then voted to confirm are out of the goddamned minds. As if there is a presumption of being fit for the supreme court that is as sacrosanct as the presumption of innocence.
