The government is considering radical plans to “politicise” the civil service in the wake of the resignation of deputy prime minister and justice secretary Dominic Raab over allegations of bullying.
Writing in The Observer, the government’s adviser on the civil service, Francis Maude, said that Raab’s resignation raised “important issues” on the relationship between ministers and the permanent Whitehall employees tasked with carrying out their policies, and the tension between maintaining impartiality and continuity.
It follows an explosive interview on Friday, in which an unrepentant Raab claimed he had been forced out by a “very small minority of very activist civil servants” who were effectively trying to block reforms they did not like.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.
Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.
Latest Videos FromThe Week
‘More robust and less mealy mouthed’
Maude, a Conservative peer and former Cabinet Office minister, has called for “a much more robust culture, with less groupthink, more rugged disagreement, and the confidence to both offer challenge and to accept it” within Whitehall.
He is expected to report to the prime minister shortly and, crucially, has said “we also need to be more robust and less mealy mouthed about ‘politicisation’.”
Claiming “other systems deal with this better”, he highlighted how permanent civil servants in France have overt political affiliations, while permanent civil servants in ministers’ private offices in Australia are released from the obligations of political impartiality and can even take part in party political activity.
The Observer said Maude’s ideas will cause “deep alarm across Whitehall”, especially coming in the wake of the resignation of Raab on Friday after accusations were upheld that he had bullied officials whom he believed had underperformed.
With many in the Tory party still smarting over the defection of senior civil servant Sue Gray to Labour earlier this year, “the Raab case has highlighted tensions between the need for Conservative ministers to drive policies forward to deliver on their political objectives, and the independence of the civil servants who serve them”, said the paper.
John Oxley for UnHerd said ministers “increasingly talk about ‘the Blob’, and the perception that politically motivated intransigence is used to frustrate their policies”. So the fact “that a minister was ousted through civil servants’ grievances will only add succour to this”.
‘Genuine risk of losing years of knowledge’
Theresa May’s former chief of staff, Nick Timothy, in The Daily Telegraph set out the need to “overhaul our creaking civil service”.
He suggested the civil service should be reduced in size by half, while pay should be doubled, and ministers should be able to appoint the officials who do the work for which they are accountable. “This would improve the retention of the best officials, and help to recruit more experts to serve for chunks of their career,” he claimed. “Alignment between ministers and officials would mean better, swifter delivery.”
It follows proposals by former cabinet minister Liam Fox, also in The Telegraph, for a “hybrid” approach towards political appointees in the civil service that would improve skills, turnover and ultimately impartiality.
Yet this approach carries a “genuine risk”, said Doug McWilliams, an economist who has worked in Whitehall for decades, on Reaction. He argued that while it “might seem attractive to a Tory minister, when faced with what appears to be obstruction, simply to get rid of the top of the civil service and replace it with politicians… would lose years of knowledge.”
He added: “The system only works (in a ramshackle way) in the US because of the importance of state and local governments where apprentice politicians/civil servants can cut their teeth,” he concluded. “In the UK’s largely unitary system, placing those with no administrative experience in charge of departments would make maladministration endemic.”
