|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Jun 30, 2020 16:17:49 GMT 1
Cummings has written that the Civil Service is “stuffed with generalists who cycle between jobs too quickly without acloserg expertise”.
A perfect description of government ministers.
He has also written of top civil servants that they are “confident public school bluffers”. I wonder what his boss (Eton and Oxford) makes of that. Cummings himself went to Durham School, established 1414, and Oxford.
He is said to be in favour of decentralisation while at the same time ensuring that power and decision making is controlled from the office he heads.
I wonder how he manages all these contradictions.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Jun 30, 2020 16:19:12 GMT 1
Because he knows he can get away with it. He is a very dangerous person.
|
|
|
Post by harboroughshrew on Jun 30, 2020 16:23:14 GMT 1
I am not very confident of the correctness of any decision Cummings will make. This is the 'genius' who wanted us to believe that the best way to check faulty eyesight is to pack his nearest and dearest into his car and drive for sixty miles. He has shown utter contempt for the public and should never be forgiven for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 16:52:40 GMT 1
Cummings has written that the Civil Service is “stuffed with generalists who cycle between jobs too quickly without acloserg expertise”. This is rather an odd description, because the experts of the Civil Service are supposed to support the government ministers of the day. Particularly at a junior level. What he means is that the Civil Service are there to provide checks and balances on the government of the day. And he and Johnson don't like it. Meanwhile, some people think that BLM is a threat to liberal democracy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 18:59:37 GMT 1
DC May be a vile person, but the CS is full of people on easy rides, it needs a good shake up, mainly filled by jobs for the boys, and if not good at 1 job, they get promoted out of it.... needs a good shake up and has been that way for years.....
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 30, 2020 19:29:46 GMT 1
The civil service is there to enact government policy. If the government deem that the civil service is either unwilling or unable to do that (to an expected level) then it is hardly surprising that they will look to reform it. There is of course going to be an awful lot of fuss made about this (I think primarily because of who is looking to make the reforms) but pretty sure the discussion around reforming the civil services isn't something new. I guess some are going to be critical now come what may, even though we have yet to see the results of any reforms made. Whilst I guess some will wait and see what comes about from whatever reforms made. Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Jun 30, 2020 19:36:17 GMT 1
For me it's tainted by knowing Boris and Cummings lie. I don't think that's something you would expect from the Civil Service.
So much is done by Select Committee these days, why can't Civil Service reform be?
|
|
|
Post by barrynic on Jun 30, 2020 19:36:50 GMT 1
Let's hope the next step by Cummings is to finally get rid of the many quangos wasting tax payers money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 19:39:42 GMT 1
For me it's tainted by knowing Boris and Cummings lie. I don't think that's something you would expect from the Civil Service. So much is done by Select Committee these days, why cant Civil Service reform be? It was interesting to see May's reaction to the appointment of Frost and calling it a political appointee. That's Theresa May, blimey.
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Jun 30, 2020 20:32:15 GMT 1
Let's hope the next step by Cummings is to finally get rid of the many quangos wasting tax payers money. Like?!
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Jun 30, 2020 20:43:42 GMT 1
DC May be a vile person, but the CS is full of people on easy rides, it needs a good shake up, mainly filled by jobs for the boys, and if not good at 1 job, they get promoted out of it.... needs a good shake up and has been that way for years..... A bit like Gavin Williamson, Michael Gove et al
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 30, 2020 21:31:40 GMT 1
I despise Cummings but that’s not why this development concerns me.
Once the civil service is politicised I’m not sure we can ever go back to an impartial, politically neutral institution. Whatever anyone thinks of it, the UK civil service has always maintained its neutrality and served governments of whatever political hue. As a former civil servant (a long time ago), I know we had our individual opinions and political beliefs but we got on with the job we were required to do. I served under Thatcher after all!
I see those saying ‘oh, it’s just because it’s Cummings’, ‘reform is needed’ and the old ‘80 seat majority they can do what they like’ complacent nonsense. To them I say remember it won’t always be a Tory government and don’t be so hypocritical as to complain when you don’t like the political appointments to the civil service that are made then.
Our country is diminished by this, it really is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 22:23:25 GMT 1
I despise Cummings but that’s not why this development concerns me. Once the civil service is politicised I’m not sure we can ever go back to an impartial, politically neutral institution. Whatever anyone thinks of it, the UK civil service has always maintained its neutrality and served governments of whatever political hue. As a former civil servant (a long time ago), I know we had our individual opinions and political beliefs but we got on with the job we were required to do. I served under Thatcher after all! I see those saying ‘oh, it’s just because it’s Cummings’, ‘reform is needed’ and the old ‘80 seat majority they can do what they like’ complacent nonsense. To them I say remember it won’t always be a Tory government and don’t be so hypocritical as to complain when you don’t like the political appointments to the civil service that are made then. Our country is diminished by this, it really is. Do you think that Mark Sedwell attempt at doing a deal to extend the consultation period behind the back of Boris helped the situation and was it serving the current government?
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Jun 30, 2020 23:30:04 GMT 1
I despise Cummings but that’s not why this development concerns me. Once the civil service is politicised I’m not sure we can ever go back to an impartial, politically neutral institution. Whatever anyone thinks of it, the UK civil service has always maintained its neutrality and served governments of whatever political hue. As a former civil servant (a long time ago), I know we had our individual opinions and political beliefs but we got on with the job we were required to do. I served under Thatcher after all! I see those saying ‘oh, it’s just because it’s Cummings’, ‘reform is needed’ and the old ‘80 seat majority they can do what they like’ complacent nonsense. To them I say remember it won’t always be a Tory government and don’t be so hypocritical as to complain when you don’t like the political appointments to the civil service that are made then. Our country is diminished by this, it really is. Do you think that Mark Sedwell attempt at doing a deal to extend the consultation period behind the back of Boris helped the situation and was it serving the current government? What consultation period?
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jul 1, 2020 0:14:43 GMT 1
Do you think that Mark Sedwell attempt at doing a deal to extend the consultation period behind the back of Boris helped the situation and was it serving the current government? What consultation period? He means transition period. The big Brexit conspiracy, apparently it’s the Civil Service’s fault we haven’t left 4 years after the vote. This lot don’t take responsibility for anything
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2020 5:09:11 GMT 1
What consultation period? He means transition period. The big Brexit conspiracy, apparently it’s the Civil Service’s fault we haven’t left 4 years after the vote. This lot don’t take responsibility for anything If the situation wasn't so serious it would be laughable.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Jul 1, 2020 8:08:42 GMT 1
Let's hope the next step by Cummings is to finally get rid of the many quangos wasting tax payers money. Don't worry. He's already on the job. Daily Telegraph is reporting today that PHE is likely to be axed as the government tries to deflect blame from their own inept handling of the Covid19 crisis.
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on Jul 1, 2020 8:51:57 GMT 1
Let's hope the next step by Cummings is to finally get rid of the many quangos wasting tax payers money. Name them and their function please.
|
|
|
Post by sheltonsalopian on Jul 1, 2020 8:52:44 GMT 1
This man infuriates me. I actually read some of his blog posts and some of his ideas I completely agree with and wish he'd implement, like proper government reform and choosing people based on their intelligence not their family connections. He also believes science should guide us not populism.
But his actions just don't follow his own "beliefs" all he's doing is kicking out people who don't agree about Brexit. No matter how good they are at their job if they don't bow to the holy grail of a no deal brexit they're kicked out. He's not choosing the best people for the job he's choosing people who will nod along to his every request, that's not a healthy government.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jul 1, 2020 8:57:29 GMT 1
Hardly surprising PHE will be looked at. As mentioned elsewhere there have been questions asked about PHE and how it has performed during the pandemic (seen as too slow, too cumbersome). If it has been shown that it is not up to the task then surely it would make perfect sense to reform; whether to the body itself or the creation of something new to take its stead. Within the Telegraph article we have the following...
Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader, said: "I would abolish PHE tomorrow. What this has shown is that if ministers are to take responsibility for things they must also have control, and they don't have control over PHE. It has made all sorts of decisions that have puzzled people, like insisting on setting up an app from scratch, which is just arrogance laced with incompetence."
Whitehall sources said PHE had been "too slow" in its responses and forced the government to take over some of its functions and set up new bodies.
If I were a minister then for sure I would think the same, if I was to take responsibly for the actions of others I would want to have some degree of control. I don't fully understand the structure in place when it comes to the government and PHE, I did think that it was an extension of the government and its actions were driven by ministers. Perhaps that isn't quite right looking to those comments from Duncan Smith. Perhaps its more independent than I first thought.
Linked within the same article is an article in which it talks about...
PHE was blamed for holding back the government's testing programme by refusing offers of help from private laboratories and insisting on doing testing in-house.
That...
Public Health England is hampering the development of accurate antibody tests by refusing to share vital blood samples from Covid-19 patients, private laboratories have claimed.
It was the combination of the public and private sector here in Germany that helped Germany cope better with the pandemic. If that was in some was stifled by PHE then questions need to be asked why and whether it is best suited to deal with such things in the future. Or whether something new needs to be introduced to replace it.
If it isn't working as well as you hope or expect then surely you make changes.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jul 1, 2020 9:19:49 GMT 1
I despise Cummings but that’s not why this development concerns me. Once the civil service is politicised I’m not sure we can ever go back to an impartial, politically neutral institution. Whatever anyone thinks of it, the UK civil service has always maintained its neutrality and served governments of whatever political hue. As a former civil servant (a long time ago), I know we had our individual opinions and political beliefs but we got on with the job we were required to do. I served under Thatcher after all! I see those saying ‘oh, it’s just because it’s Cummings’, ‘reform is needed’ and the old ‘80 seat majority they can do what they like’ complacent nonsense. To them I say remember it won’t always be a Tory government and don’t be so hypocritical as to complain when you don’t like the political appointments to the civil service that are made then. Our country is diminished by this, it really is. Do you think that Mark Sedwell attempt at doing a deal to extend the consultation period behind the back of Boris helped the situation and was it serving the current government? Firstly, I don't know enough about the facts of any alleged attempts to do such a deal, or the background - and I don't expect anyone on here does either. Secondly, if you're suggesting that Sedwill unilaterally undertook a mission that would undermine the government, I don't believe that for a moment. Don't forget that a lot necessarily went on 'behind the back of Boris' during his illness. That episode showed the weakness of the government as Raab didn't seem to be in control and Sedwill certainly isn't answerable to Cummings (whatever Cummings might think). Perhaps you're alluding to something that happened during that period but, as I say, I don't think any of us knows enough to judge that Sedwill's behaviour was that of an executive rather than a civil servant.
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Jul 1, 2020 10:04:14 GMT 1
Hardly surprising PHE will be looked at. As mentioned elsewhere there have been questions asked about PHE and how it has performed during the pandemic (seen as too slow, too cumbersome). If it has been shown that it is not up to the task then surely it would make perfect sense to reform; whether to the body itself or the creation of something new to take its stead. Within the Telegraph article we have the following... Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader, said: "I would abolish PHE tomorrow. What this has shown is that if ministers are to take responsibility for things they must also have control, and they don't have control over PHE. It has made all sorts of decisions that have puzzled people, like insisting on setting up an app from scratch, which is just arrogance laced with incompetence." Whitehall sources said PHE had been "too slow" in its responses and forced the government to take over some of its functions and set up new bodies.If I were a minister then for sure I would think the same, if I was to take responsibly for the actions of others I would want to have some degree of control. I don't fully understand the structure in place when it comes to the government and PHE, I did think that it was an extension of the government and its actions were driven by ministers. Perhaps that isn't quite right looking to those comments from Duncan Smith. Perhaps its more independent than I first thought. Linked within the same article is an article in which it talks about... PHE was blamed for holding back the government's testing programme by refusing offers of help from private laboratories and insisting on doing testing in-house. That... Public Health England is hampering the development of accurate antibody tests by refusing to share vital blood samples from Covid-19 patients, private laboratories have claimed.It was the combination of the public and private sector here in Germany that helped Germany cope better with the pandemic. If that was in some was stifled by PHE then questions need to be asked why and whether it is best suited to deal with such things in the future. Or whether something new needs to be introduced to replace it. If it isn't working as well as you hope or expect then surely you make changes. Don't forget, PHE was set up when the Lansley pushed through the health reforms against the advice of most medical bodies to take public health out of the nhs. And the problem with the testing data here is the commercial tests are not being published, only those done by the nhs labs.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jul 1, 2020 10:21:21 GMT 1
Hardly surprising PHE will be looked at. As mentioned elsewhere there have been questions asked about PHE and how it has performed during the pandemic (seen as too slow, too cumbersome). If it has been shown that it is not up to the task then surely it would make perfect sense to reform; whether to the body itself or the creation of something new to take its stead. Within the Telegraph article we have the following... Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader, said: "I would abolish PHE tomorrow. What this has shown is that if ministers are to take responsibility for things they must also have control, and they don't have control over PHE. It has made all sorts of decisions that have puzzled people, like insisting on setting up an app from scratch, which is just arrogance laced with incompetence." Whitehall sources said PHE had been "too slow" in its responses and forced the government to take over some of its functions and set up new bodies.If I were a minister then for sure I would think the same, if I was to take responsibly for the actions of others I would want to have some degree of control. I don't fully understand the structure in place when it comes to the government and PHE, I did think that it was an extension of the government and its actions were driven by ministers. Perhaps that isn't quite right looking to those comments from Duncan Smith. Perhaps its more independent than I first thought. Linked within the same article is an article in which it talks about... PHE was blamed for holding back the government's testing programme by refusing offers of help from private laboratories and insisting on doing testing in-house. That... Public Health England is hampering the development of accurate antibody tests by refusing to share vital blood samples from Covid-19 patients, private laboratories have claimed.It was the combination of the public and private sector here in Germany that helped Germany cope better with the pandemic. If that was in some was stifled by PHE then questions need to be asked why and whether it is best suited to deal with such things in the future. Or whether something new needs to be introduced to replace it. If it isn't working as well as you hope or expect then surely you make changes. Don't forget, PHE was set up when the Lansley pushed through the health reforms against the advice of most medical bodies to take public health out of the nhs. And the problem with the testing data here is the commercial tests are not being published, only those done by the nhs labs. Understand your first point but not the second.👍 What I get from looking to some of the complaints made towards PHE is that the private sector were willing and able to do more (and perhaps quicker) but were hindered from doing so by PHE. Whether it was the sheer scale of it all and PHE weren't able to cope because they had neither the staff or the resources, whether it was the structure of the organisation, whether it was some reluctance in PHE to work together with the private sector...who knows. But it ought to be looked at and reforms made if needed.
|
|
|
Post by Minormorris64 on Jul 1, 2020 10:48:36 GMT 1
Because he knows he can get away with it. He is a very dangerous person.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Jul 1, 2020 11:04:13 GMT 1
Because he knows he can get away with it. He is a very dangerous person. Two wrongs most definately do not make it right. You also forget that in the above case the pair of them had a brain and ideas, wether we think they were right or wrong. The devastating characteristic now is that one of them is an unelected svengali and the other one's narcisistic and shallow.
|
|
|
Post by Minormorris64 on Jul 1, 2020 11:07:16 GMT 1
Two wrongs most definately do not make it right. You also forget that in the above case the pair of them had a brain and ideas, wether we think they were right or wrong. The devastating characteristic now is that one of them is an unelected svengali and the other ones narcisistic and shallow.I trust you are being ironic with your last sentence when referring to Campbell & Blair?
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Jul 1, 2020 11:36:16 GMT 1
Don't forget, PHE was set up when the Lansley pushed through the health reforms against the advice of most medical bodies to take public health out of the nhs. And the problem with the testing data here is the commercial tests are not being published, only those done by the nhs labs. Understand your first point but not the second.👍 What I get from looking to some of the complaints made towards PHE is that the private sector were willing and able to do more (and perhaps quicker) but were hindered from doing so by PHE. Whether it was the sheer scale of it all and PHE weren't able to cope because they had neither the staff or the resources, whether it was the structure of the organisation, whether it was some reluctance in PHE to work together with the private sector...who knows. But it ought to be looked at and reforms made if needed. The problem is that the commercial testers are doing the tests but not sharing the results with local governments, meaning they cant do anything to prevent spread in light of positive results Confirmed by a parliamentary question
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jul 1, 2020 11:48:41 GMT 1
Two wrongs most definately do not make it right. You also forget that in the above case the pair of them had a brain and ideas, wether we think they were right or wrong. The devastating characteristic now is that one of them is an unelected svengali and the other ones narcisistic and shallow.I trust you are being ironic with your last sentence when referring to Campbell & Blair? As I recall, Campbell advised Blair (which was his job and is also the limit of what Cummings should be doing) but didn't interfere with the civil service or seek to 'reform' it. Blair a narcissist? Perhaps - most PMs have something of that about them - but shallow? No, he wasn't that, whatever else you might think of him.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jul 1, 2020 11:51:17 GMT 1
Understand your first point but not the second.👍 What I get from looking to some of the complaints made towards PHE is that the private sector were willing and able to do more (and perhaps quicker) but were hindered from doing so by PHE. Whether it was the sheer scale of it all and PHE weren't able to cope because they had neither the staff or the resources, whether it was the structure of the organisation, whether it was some reluctance in PHE to work together with the private sector...who knows. But it ought to be looked at and reforms made if needed. The problem is that the commercial testers are doing the tests but not sharing the results with local governments, meaning they cant do anything to prevent spread in light of positive results Confirmed by a parliamentary question Very nicely done. How typical that the cry for reform is always directed at the public sector. The knee jerk reaction of some (and of some on here) is all too predictable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2020 12:07:54 GMT 1
The problem is that the commercial testers are doing the tests but not sharing the results with local governments, meaning they cant do anything to prevent spread in light of positive results Confirmed by a parliamentary question Very nicely done. How typical that the cry for reform is always directed at the public sector. The knee jerk reaction of some (and of some on here) is all too predictable. There's always this idea that the private sector is more efficient than the public sector. Have worked in both, the private sector can just be as inefficient as the public sector. How efficient a workplace is depends on ethos, management and leadership. It can be good, or bad in both sectors.
|
|