DOCSLIB.ORG

Role of the Head of the Civil Service

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Role of the Head of the Civil Service House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee Role of the Head of the Civil Service Written Evidence . 1 List of written evidence Page no. 1 Professor David Richards and Professor Martin Smith (HCS 01) 3 2 David Laughrin (HCS 02) 10 3 Rt Hon Peter Riddell (HCS 03) 15 4 Professor Colin Talbot (HCS 04) 18 5 Sue Cameron (HCS 05) 22 6 Sir Douglas Wass (HCS 06) 26 2 Written evidence submitted by Professor David Richards and Professor Martin Smith1 (HCS 01) 1. The growing role of the Prime Minister and the development of his office have led to questions over the ability of the Cabinet Secretary to fulfil the dual role of adviser to the Prime Minster and as Head of the Civil Service responsible for its day-to-day corporate management. A view both from within Whitehall and beyond has taken root that the balancing of these two roles has become too onerous a task for one individual to execute effectively. Especially in the context of the continual process of reform that now appears to be the norm within Whitehall. 2. It is however interesting to note that as recently as 2009-10 both Lord Turnbull and Sir Gus O’Donnell opposed the splitting of the post into separate jobs. Lord Turnbull noted that it: “...has been tried twice and it was a flop both times. If you talk to the people who got the job as Head of the Home Civil Service … I think that they would probably say, ‘I wish I’d never done it’. They got very badly isolated.” (HC 2010: Q 165). While Sir Gus O’Donnell, argued that the functions of the post fit together well and that previous attempts to separate them out had not worked well (HC 2010: Q342). This inquiry would therefore be well served to ascertain from the latter in particular what has changed in the ensuing months since he gave evidence on this subject to persuade him of the need for a volte face on this issue. 3. The debate over the appropriate demarcation of the dual roles of Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service is far from new. A brief history of the way in which responsibility for the corporate management of the Civil Service has been organised over the course of the last forty or so years reveals that it has been in something of a state of flux: • Early 20th century – core responsibility for the management of the Civil Service lay with the Treasury • Following Fulton (1968), responsibility was transferred to a new body - the Civil Service Department (CSD 1968-1981). • With the abolition of the CSD, Civil Service pay and personnel transferred back to the Treasury, while the day-to-day running of Whitehall was off-loaded to a new unit – the Management and Personnel Office [MPO] located in the Cabinet Office. • 1983 - the joint responsibility for Head of the Civil Service between the Treasury Permanent Secretary and the Cabinet Secretary was abandoned. • In 1987, the MPO was also abolished, with most of its functions passing back to the Treasury, but following the creation of Next Steps Agencies (1988), the Office of the Minister for the Civil Service (OMCS) was created to oversee efficiency issues. 1 Department of Politics, University of Sheffield, UK. 3 • The OMCS morphed into the Office of Public Service and Science (OPSS and later OPS 1992-98) in the Cabinet Office with efficiency and personnel responsibilities. • 1995 - the transfer of the Management and Pay Divisions from the Treasury to the Cabinet Office establishing the current model for the demarcation of responsibilities (Richards 2008). 4. Moreover, those with long Whitehall memories will recall that on occasions when the roles of Cabinet Secretary and the Head of the Civil Service were split, it proved at times to be a less than happy affair. For the most part, conflict between the two post- holders mirrored a competitive tension for ascendency in the Whitehall village between the Cabinet Office and the Treasury. This is less likely to be repeated this time around, although some concern will be raised if the new Head of the Civil Service is also the Treasury Permanent Secretary. Nevertheless, there will be those within the Civil Service who will no doubt feel some element of apprehension that the future role of Head of the Civil Service, notwithstanding which Department he or she comes from, will carry less clout, in particular in terms of having the ear of the Prime Minister. The new arrangements would therefore benefit from ensuring that there are a set of both formal and informal mechanisms available to the future Head of the Civil Service to allow for appropriate access to the Prime Minister, similar to that enjoyed by the current Cabinet Secretary. 5. The key argument for splitting the post resides on the view that currently, the greater demands on the job, in particular in terms of acting as the Prime Minister’s principal adviser has compromised the ability of recent office holders to devote the required attention to corporate management and leadership issues within Civil Service. Yet there is something of a contradiction here. On the one hand, the view is being presented that recent changes have led to a sizeable increase in the portfolio of duties and responsibilities now required of the Head of the Civil Service. Yet on the other hand, it is deemed to be only a part-time job equating to the equivalent of two days a week. This sends out something of a mixed message. Moreover, what are the implications for the new post-holder in terms of being able to continue to properly fulfil their current function of permanent secretary within their existing department? 6. This also raises a further issue. If, as unconfirmed reports suggest, it is the case that the key driver behind this reform is a desire by the next Cabinet Secretary to off-load the responsibilities of Head of the Civil Service, allowing him to concentrate on his main interest, that of the policy function, this once again smacks of one of the besetting sins of British administrative reform – that of ad hocery and short-termism to suit the personal whims of individuals [be they ministerial or bureaucratic] of the day - rather than properly thought-out, longer term organisational reform based on a set of coherent structural and managerial plans. 4 7. Despite these concerns, it is our view that the decision to now split these two roles should be cautiously welcomed. Such a move offers the clear potential to enhance the ability of the officeholders to undertake these newly demarcated roles of i] Cabinet Secretary with responsibility to act as the senior policy adviser to the Prime Minister and Secretary to the Cabinet and ii] Head of the Civil Service with responsibility for corporate leadership and management in Whitehall. It will however require the new post-holders to establish an effective relationship with one another, but based on clear specifications of roles and functions, lines of accountability, and processes of policy implementation. In particular, both post-holders will need to recognise that the success of the new arrangements is contingent on their establishing a mutually inter-dependent working relationship with each other. If though, their relationship instead descends into a power struggle based on staking out individual Whitehall fiefdoms, the consequences will be fraught. 8. There are of course risks to these reforms. First, under the current [and new] arrangements the Cabinet Secretary works to the Prime Minister. But, in future, it is not clear who the Head of the Civil Service should work to. If it is purely a corporate- management function then it is an issue that is directly of concern to the Minister for the Civil Service. But if there are policy aspects (relating to the functions of government, the organisation of the civil service, constitutional aspects of governmental relations etc), this can potentially cut-across the Cabinet Secretary’s remit. In such cases, is the Head of the Civil Service reporting to the Prime Minister as well as the Minister for the Civil Service or indirectly to the Prime Minister through the Cabinet Secretary? The point here is that the boundaries between the management and policy functions are not mutually exclusive, leading to a blurring in the lines of responsibility. 9. This then raises the vexed issue of accountability. At a general level, it is worth making the point that an element of constitutional ambiguity still exists concerning civil service accountability. On one level, the position is clearly set-out in the most recent Civil Service Code (11 November 2010) that ‘civil servants are accountable to Ministers, who in turn are accountable to Parliament’. From this perspective, civil servants are directly accountable for their actions to their relevant minister. Yet, this somewhat rubs-up against the view presented elsewhere in three documents that are not without some constitutional significance - the 1918 Report of the Machinery of Government: Ministry of Reconstruction [commonly referred to as the Haldane Report], the Carltona Doctrine (1943) and the Armstrong Memorandum (1985). In terms of the former, Lord Haldane’s report affirmed a principle already established by Northcote-Trevelyan that the relationship between ministers, including the Prime Minister, and officials should be intrinsically linked: ‘The Government of the country [cannot] be carried out without the aid of an efficient body of permanent officers, occupying a position duly subordinate to that of the ministers who are directly responsible to the Crown and to Parliament, yet possessing sufficient independence, character, ability and experience to be able to advise, assist, and to some extent, influence those who are from time to time set over them.’ (Cmnd 3638:1968, pp.108- 5 119).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Megaphone Bureaucracy: Speaking Truth To
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. 1 Introduction FINDING VOICE Is politics broken? The dramatic events of the past decade have left many commentators convinced that there is something decidedly abnormal going on. A series of shocks— both economic and geopolitical— have combined to generate a ‘perfect storm’ of popular disquiet with democratically elected leaders around much of the world. First, the global financial crisis of the late noughties stung the world economy. Trailing in its wake has been a gradual but cumulatively dramatic increase in wealth inequality. Works such as Thomas Piketty’sCapital in the Twenty- First Century have struck an unexpectedly deep popular chord with people convinced that the financial bargain between elites and the rest is no longer holding. Over the same period, the long civil war in Syria and continued unrest in north Africa has fuelled new waves of refugees desperately striving to find safety in Europe. Their arrival has added to popular disquiet about immigra- tion levels across the continent, triggering intense public debate about their impact on the social and economic life of the EU and its constituent nations. That disquiet has blended with new fears about security to create a more hostile environment towards immigrants than Europe has seen at any time since World War Two. Irregular but not infrequent terrorist attacks have added to the nervousness that perhaps nation states are not able to keep 1 For general queries, contact [email protected] © Copyright, Princeton University Press.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship of the Home Office and the Ministry Of
    THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE HOME OFFICE AND THE MINISTRY OF LABOUR WITH THE TREASURY ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION 1919-1946 AN EVALUATION OF CONTRASTING NEEDS NORMAN GEORGE PRICE Thesis submitted for the degree of PhD London School of Economics (University of London) 1 UMI Number: U042642 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U042642 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 t h e s e s F 68 nu-oaaiS ABSTRACT The thesis examines three Departments of the British Home Civil Service from 1919 to 1946: the Home Office, the Ministry of Labour and the Treasury Establishment Division. The study investigates the contrasting needs, in establishment terms, of an old "Secretary of State" department the Home Office, performing a largely regulatory role, with a new department the Ministry of Labour performing an administrative role, and the relationship of both over establishment matters with the Treasury. The study assesses the roles of individual Administrative Class civil servants in the three departments from the rank of Principal to Permanent Secretary: with particular reference to the relationships existing between the Permanent Secretaries of the two departments and the Permanent Secretaries of the Treasury and their Controllers of Establishments.
    [Show full text]
  • Open PDF 390KB
    Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee Oral evidence: Propriety of governance in light of Greensill, HC 59 Tuesday 8 June 2021 Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on 8 June 2021. Watch the meeting Members present: Mr William Wragg (Chair); Ronnie Cowan; Jackie Doyle-Price; Rachel Hopkins; Mr David Jones; John McDonnell; David Mundell; Tom Randall; Lloyd Russell-Moyle; Karin Smyth; John Stevenson. Questions 1 - 123 Witnesses I: Lord Maude of Horsham, former Minister for the Cabinet Office; Ian Watmore, former Permanent Secretary for the Cabinet Office; Sir John Manzoni, former Permanent Secretary for the Cabinet Office; and Bill Crothers, former Government Chief Commercial Officer and former Director at Greensill Capital. Examination of witnesses Witnesses: Lord Maude of Horsham, Ian Watmore, Sir John Manzoni and Bill Crothers. Q1 Chair: Good morning and welcome to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee. This morning’s evidence session will consider propriety and ethics in light of Greensill. The Committee is very grateful indeed to all the witnesses who are giving their time today. This morning we will have four separate witnesses who will be speaking to us in turn; I will ask them each to introduce themselves for the record at the start of their particular section. I welcome, first of all this morning, Lord Maude. Could I ask you to introduce yourself for the record? Lord Maude of Horsham: I am Francis Maude. I was Minister for the Cabinet Office between 2010 and 2015. Q2 Chair: Thank you. During that time, Mr Lex Greensill was employed as an adviser on supply chain finance and subsequently as a Crown representative.
    [Show full text]
  • Weekly Information Bulletin
    Contents House of Commons • Noticeboard ..........................................................................................................1 • The Week Ahead..................................................................................................2 • Order of Oral Questions .......................................................................................3 Weekly Business Information • Business of the House of Commons 13 – 17 October 2008 .................................4 Bulletin • Written Ministerial Statements.............................................................................7 • Forthcoming Business of the House of Commons 20 – 24 October 2008............8 • Forthcoming Business of the House of Lords 20 – 24 October 2008.................12 Editor: Mary Durkin Legislation House of Commons Public Legislation Information Office • Public Bills before Parliament 2007/08..............................................................14 London • Bills - Presentation, Publication and Royal Assent ............................................24 SW1A 2TT • Public and General Acts 2007/08 .......................................................................25 • Draft Bills under consideration or published during 2007/08 Session ...............26 TEL: 020 7219 4272 FAX: 020 7219 5839 Private Legislation [email protected] • Private Bills before Parliament 2007/08.............................................................27 www.parliament.uk • Draft Provisional Orders as at 17 October 2008.................................................29
    [Show full text]
  • Jones, Blick Working Paper, Centre of Central Government
    LSE Public Policy Group Working Paper No. 3 The Centre of Central Government Andrew Blick and George Jones The centre of central government comprises three sets of institutions: the Prime Minister’s Office based at 10 Downing Street; the Cabinet Office at 70 Whitehall, and HM Treasury at Great George Street. Together they form what some political scientists have called “the core executive”. How these key institutions operate is of first importance for the overall performance of decision-making across central government as a whole. We first review the modern history of these bodies, beginning in 1968. (For an overview of the longer term picture, see also the Annex which sketches the UK core executive from the first appearance of the Prime Minister role in the 1720s up to the 1960s). Next we analyse the key recurring questions that surround the centre of the machine. Third, we briefly consider some possible reforms that set an agenda for the next few years. I: THE MODERN HISTORY OF THE UK CORE EXECUTIVE From the 1960s to 1997 A critical date for the current operations of the centre of UK central government was 1968. As a response to the Fulton Report on The Civil Service , the prime minister was at that time formally designated Minister for the Civil Service. And responsibility for the civil service was removed from the Treasury (whose permanent secretary had been Head of the Home Civil Service since 1919) and was allocated to a new Civil Service Department with its own permanent secretary who became Head of the Home Civil Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitor 50 Constitution Unit Newsletter | January 2012
    Monitor 50 Constitution Unit Newsletter | January 2012 Will the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee change the rules of succession? The announcement in October at the Commonwealth conference in the removal of the ‘unjust discrimination’ against Catholics, the Perth of changes to the rules of succession suggested it was a done Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, said that he recognised deal. David Cameron had obtained the agreement of the heads of the importance of the established Church of England. The Catholic government of the 15 other countries of which the Queen is head Church in Scotland has been less accommodating. And in the 15 of state (the realms). The UK can now be expected to lead the way, realms where Catholics outnumber Anglicans by three to one, riding the tide of goodwill towards the monarchy following the royal there may also be less understanding. wedding in 2011 and the Queen’s diamond jubilee in 2012. But all the realms will then have to change their laws, in a process which could take years. EXECUTIVE It has been a longstanding aim of British governments to end the discrimination in the laws of succession. 11 private members’ bills have been introduced into Parliament in the last 20 years to reform the Act of Settlement. Most other European monarchies have already Reconfiguration of the Cabinet Secretary’s role changed their rules of succession to make them gender neutral. Sweden changed their law in 1980, Holland in 1983, Norway in Sir Gus O’Donnell has retired as UK Cabinet Secretary after 32 years 1990, Belgium in 1991, Denmark in 2009 (with a referendum), and as a civil servant.
    [Show full text]
  • Making and Breaking Whitehall Departments: a Guide to Machinery of Government Changes
    Anne White and Patrick Dunleavy Making and breaking Whitehall departments: a guide to machinery of government changes Report Original citation: White, Anne and Dunleavy, Patrick (2010) Making and breaking Whitehall departments: a guide to machinery of government changes. Institute for Government; LSE Public Policy Group, London, UK. This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27949/ Originally available from LSE Public Policy Group Available in LSE Research Online: May 2010 © 2010 Institute for Government LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. The Institute for Government is here to act as a catalyst for better government. The Institute for Government is an independent centre founded in 2008 to help make government more effective. • We carry out research, look into the big governance challenges of the day and find ways to help government improve, re-think and sometimes see things differently. • We offer unique insights and advice from experienced people who know what it’s Making and breaking like to be inside government both in the UK and overseas.
    [Show full text]
  • Communication Between Central and Local Governments in the U.K
    Communication between Central and Local Governments in the U.K. Yukiko Fujita, Professor, Faculty of Law, Senshu University This article focuses on communication between central and local governments in the U.K., especially on the roles and functions of DCLG, LGA and SOLACE. Its two main features are firstly that networks among politicians are strictly separated from those of administrative officers, and secondly that their informal communication is as important as formal communication such as consultation and periodic meetings. Moreover, policies based on localism and decentralisation of the current coalition government have just started, so it is too early to evaluate them. The aggressive propositions by special local governments and joint bodies like GLA and GMCA might affect the relationship between central and local governments. Introduction In the United Kingdom1, the Localism bill was passed into law on October 31, 2011 (Royal Assent on November 15, 2011). The Act includes a wide variety of provisions including granting of general power of competence which allows local governments any activity unprohibited by law, enhanced authority of local communities, granting of more discretion on regional developments to local governments and communities, and a plan to introduce a mayor election system to metropolitan cities. Based on the Local Government Act 1972, the relationship between the central government and local governments in the UK (hereinafter called “the relationship between central and local governments”) has featured strong
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Service Commission Annual Report and Accounts 2019/20
    161 C 6% C Regulating recruitment to the Civil Service, Annual Report providing assurance that appointments are on merit on the and Accounts basis of fair and open competition Helping to promote the Civil Service Code and its values of honesty, integrity, objectivity and 2019/20 impartiality B declared, 44,858 53% 9% C S ISBN 978-1-5286-1925-7 SCS CCS0320292694 2 C HC 455 Civil Service Commission Annual Report and Accounts 2019–20 Accounts presented to Parliament, the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales pursuant to paragraph 16 of Schedule 1 to the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 Report presented to Parliament, the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales pursuant to paragraph 17 of Schedule 1 to the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 20 July 2020 HC 455 Part 1: Annual Report 2019/20 © Crown copyright 2020 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ version/3 Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at: www.gov.uk/official-documents Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: Civil Service Commission, Room G/08, 1 Horse Guards Road, London SW1A 2HQ [email protected], 020 7271 0830 ISBN 978-1-5286-1925-7
    [Show full text]
  • Treasury Minutes on the Twenty Fourth to the Thirtieth, the Thirty
    HM Treasury Treasury Minutes on the Twenty Fourth to the Thirtieth, the Thirty Second to the Thirty Ninth, the Forty Fifth, and the Forty Seventh to the Forty Eighth Reports from the Committee of Public Accounts Session 2008-09 Cm 7717 (2008/9) ISBN 9780101771726 CORRECTION On the title page (page 1), the title for the 47th Report should read as follows: DH: Reducing Alcohol Harm: health services in England for alcohol misuse November 2009 London: The Stationery Office Treasury Minutes on the Twenty Fourth to the Thirtieth, the Thirty Second to the Thirty Ninth, the Forty Fifth, and the Forty Seventh to the Forty Eighth Reports from the Committee of Public Accounts Session 2008-09 Presented to Parliament by the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury by Command of Her Majesty October 2009 Cm 7717 £19.15 Treasury Minutes on the Twenty Fourth to the Thirtieth, the Thirty Second to the Thirty Ninth, the Forty Fifth, and the Forty Seventh to the Forty Eighth Reports from the Committee of Public Accounts Session 2008-09 24th Report DCMS: Maintaining the Occupied Royal Palaces 25th Report DCMS: Radio production efficiency at the BBC 26th Report HMRC: Management of tax debt 27th Report DCSF: Building schools for the future: renewing the secondary school estate 28th Report HO: Management of asylum application by the UK Border Agency 29th Report DH: Pay modernisation in the NHS: agenda for change 30th Report MOD: Type 45 Destroyer 32nd Report HMT: Financial management in the EU 33rd Report DCLG: Planning for homes: speeding up planning applications
    [Show full text]
  • Weekly Information Bulletin
    Contents House of Commons • Noticeboard..........................................................................................................1 • The Week Ahead..................................................................................................2 Weekly • Order of Oral Questions.......................................................................................3 Information Business Bulletin • Business of the House of Commons 7 May – 11 May 2007 ................................5 • Written Ministerial Statements.............................................................................7 • Forthcoming Business of the House of Commons 14 May – 18 May 2007.........8 Editor: Nick Majer • Forthcoming Business of the House of Lords 14 May – 18 May 2007..............12 House of Commons Legislation Information Office London Public Legislation SW1A 2TT • Public Bills before Parliament 2006/07..............................................................16 • Bills - Presentation, Publication and Royal Assent ............................................24 TEL: 020 7219 4272 • Public and General Acts 2006/07.......................................................................25 FAX: 020 7219 5839 • Draft Bills under consideration or published during 2006/07 Session ...............26 [email protected] www.parliament.uk Private Legislation • Private Bills before Parliament 2006/07 ............................................................28 To Contact the Editor: Delegated Legislation TEL: 020 7219 5715 • Statutory Instruments
    [Show full text]
  • Cabinet Office Permanent Secretaries’ Meetings with External Organisations (Including Meetings with Proprietors, Editors and Senior Media Executives)1
    CABINET OFFICE PERMANENT SECRETARIES’ MEETINGS WITH EXTERNAL ORGANISATIONS (INCLUDING MEETINGS WITH PROPRIETORS, EDITORS AND SENIOR MEDIA EXECUTIVES)1: 1 July to 30 September 2011 Sir Gus O’Donnell, Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service, Date of Name of External Purpose of Meeting Meeting Organisation July Bank of England General Discussion July Steve Radcliffe General discussion July Martin Seligman Economics seminar July Frontier Economics Reception and Guest Speaker July SCCO International Launch Reception and Guest Speaker July BBC R4 Lobby General discussion August Stone court consulting Lunch and General discussion September UCL General Discussion and Interview September Salesian College Interview (for college magazine) September Build Africa General Discussion September Bank of England Lunch and Guest Speaker September Sir Peter Gershon General discussion September Lucy Neville-Rolfe General Discussion 1 Does not normally include meetings with Government bodies such as other Government Departments and Agencies, non-departmental public bodies, Government reviewers, and representatives of Parliament, devolved or foreign Governments. Sir Jon Cunliffe - Permanent Secretary Month of Name of External Purpose of Meeting Meeting Organisation July The Prince's Charities' Food security and G20 International Sustainability Unit July Oxford Analytica Middle East & North Africa July Financial Times UK Representation in Brussels July NYSE Euronext Financial Services July FTI Consulting Global Issues July BG Energy Holding Limited UK
    [Show full text]