Report calls for ‘more power’ in Whitehall to be centralised

Written by Jim Dunton on 26 January 2021 in News
News

UK’s top two civil servants should be handed more responsibility as part of drive to make Cabinet Office more effective, says IfG

Credit: Sgconlaw/CC BY-SA 3.0

Ministers should equip the centre of government with greater power, and the cabinet secretary and civil service chief operating officer should be given more responsibility for ensuring officials deliver on the government’s policy objectives, according to the Institute for Government.

A new report from the think tank says the move should form part of measures to make the centre of government – principally the Cabinet Office, the Prime Minister’s Office, and HM Treasury – more effective. It follows the appointment last week of Sir Michael Barber to lead a review into ways departments can make the delivery of projects and programmes more “focused, effective and efficient”.

The IfG report – titled Heart of the Problem – argues that government in the UK is being undermined by a centre that is “too weak” and proposes a four-strand approach as a “contribution” to Barber’s review.

Giving the cabinet secretary and COO – currently Simon Case and Alex Chisholm, respectively – more responsibility for running the civil service is one of the four proposals, increasing their authority over functions providing cross-cutting services – including digital, as well as finance and human resources.


Related content


The report said that whatever their home department, functions must have a direct line into the head of function, based in the Cabinet Office,  who would report to the cabinet secretary through the chief operating officer.

It said such a chain of command would mean that where the cabinet signed off on a change across any of the different functional areas, the cabinet secretary and COO would be able to direct it to happen, and be held accountable for its delivery.

The greater degree of operational control proposed for the nation’s top two civil servants would fit with the IfG’s three other proposals: a strengthened role for the Cabinet Office in agreeing the government’s policy programme; the early-stage agreement of “a small number of top cross-cutting priorities” to be led by teams based in the Cabinet Office; and the creation of a “strong central delivery unit” to support the work.

Report author Alex Thomas, a programme director at the IfG, said holding departments to account for their performance had been the weakest part of the centre in recent years.

He said former prime minister David Cameron’s decision to abolish the New Labour-era delivery unit in the Cabinet Office had never been fully reversed. However, he acknowledged that staff in the Prime Minister’s Implementation Unit had “done their best to plug the gap” while working in an “unclear and under-powered structure”. 

Thomas said it was a “core role” of No.10 and the Cabinet Office to set a coherent programme for the government and then hold departments to account for delivering it.

“Both functions are currently too weak,” he said. “That does not mean sidelining departments from policymaking, or running everything from the centre, but it does require sustained political and administrative focus from No.10 and the Cabinet Office.”

Thomas, who had a civil service career that included stints at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Cabinet Office and the Department of Health before he joined the IfG, said boosting the centre of government should be “enabling not disabling”.

“This government has shown signs of creating the worst of all worlds where, with weak ministers and a cowed civil service, a dominant centre disempowers and clogs up activity,” he said. “Instead, the government should prioritise creating an effective Cabinet Office, supporting a small but powerful No.10.”

Thomas said the Cabinet Office and No.10 – and to some extent the Treasury – needed to focus on setting priorities, allocating and reallocating resources and mobilising departments, giving consistent and coherent messaging, and looking ahead to spot and troubleshoot problems.

He added that other vital work included quality-assuring policies and delivery plans, to find gaps and inconsistencies in the government’s programme; acting as a broker and adjudicating disputes; and determining a common evidence base.

 

Share this page

Tags

Categories

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM READERS

Please login to post a comment or register for a free account.

Related Articles

Related Sponsored Articles

Tackling vaccination misinformation with local government communications
9 March 2021

As misinformation about the coronavirus vaccine spreads, Granicus outlines key considerations for local government when delivering a successful vaccine communications campaign 

Optimising the Benefits of Hybrid IT
7 April 2021

SolarWinds explains how public sector organisations can make the most of their hybrid IT investments - delivering services that are both innovative and reliable 

Avoid Infrastructure Paralysis: Six benefits of moving legacy Oracle workloads to the cloud
6 April 2021

There are many reasons to keep your Oracle workloads running on local servers. But there are even more reasons to move them to the cloud as part of a wider digital transition strategy. Six Degrees...

Human Centric Process Management: The common base for digital transformation, cost savings, compliance and agility
11 March 2021

Engage Process explains how to ensure that process remains at the heart of your management programs - and how to keep undue pressure from those processes