Title

Followers of central government could be excused for feeling nauseous. Not so much from wheel-squealing U-turns such the forestry sell off, the inner tensions of enforcing the coalition agreement, or the rapid pace of announcements. It's more a question of perspective, sudden oscillations in viewing the telescope from both ends, the big picture to the small detail, the micro to the macro... How are we to make sense of these sets of seeming contradictions – planning reforms which empower NIMBY-ish localism yet contain a presumption in favour of supporting dynamic growth? Or concentrating government's bulk purchasing power on fewer providers, yet giving small business one-quarter of the market? In the latter case, a senior official working at the heart of government attempts to drive procurement efficiency told me: ‘It's a leap of faith.' Officials are being won over by seeing at first hand the serious intent with which ministers personally involve themselves in negotiations with major suppliers. Managers head-hunted from the private sector to drive the billion pound cost reductions the Spending Review demands speak with relish of being given eight times as much freedom and latitude in the supposedly-staid world of government as they'd be permitted in the sharp cut-and-thrust private sector. It may be the case that the issue of trust is flummoxing commentators. Weaned for many years on a diet of top-down, rigidly-enforced, target-driven public service agreements, they are struggling to accept a new world of new structures bringing greater accountability and transparency. In 1492, the natives of Cuba were, allegedly, only able to see the wake of Christoper Columbus' expeditionary ships because their minds refused to acknowledge the reality of the strange and the new before their eyes. For 15th century barques read Whitehall releasing long-held attachments to central control and the pretence of being able to manage and massage the outcomes. Ultimately, however, results count, and scrutiny will become more merciless the closer the 2015 general election looms. Knives are being sharpened. Andrew Haldenby, founder of think-tank Reform says the civil service isn't being held properly to account. And Cabinet Office minister, Francis Maude, has engineered a sharp reduction to the numbers of special advisers and outside consultants, which has made the working life of senior civil servants both easier and more engaging. But, he argues issues of competency and leadership remain unaddressed. He says the civil service can't be considered a neutral force in the sense that mandarins don't support ministers as much as they should. Ex-ministers David Blunkett and Caroline Flint are cited as witnesses for the prosecution that permanent secretary appointments should be subject to parliamentary approval, and civil servants pick up the tab for ministerial responsibility. Jonathan Werran is editor of Governetz Public Property

Title

WHITEHALL

Inside View

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING