Bureaucracies become self-serving - which includes some 400 agencies as well as the central departments - and so become bloated and extractive of the public purse over time. At the local level authorities used to be run by civic minded town clerks, but are now run by CEOs on salaries of £150K to over £300K (with large pensions to match). Are they better, more effective as a result? Is the 'not fit for purpose' Home Office better these days? I agree that the right's analysis of what it wants the civil service to do is weak, but a goal of a leaner, less costly civil service is desirable. There is a need for the right to work out how to contain the self-serving, forever bloating tendencies not least because its unfunded pension liabilities are unsustainable and a source of inequality in old age. Without the motivation of a goal, no matter that detailed work on it has yet to be done, no-one will work out what to actually do.
On the basis of 1:126 people the Civil Service doesn’t look massively bloated. However when you look at the 160000 NGOs and Charities all funded in part by the government it looks huge as they do a lot of the Civil Service’s work. We are massively over governed.
Whilst I agree that we need to look at the functions undertaken, we cannot ignore the bloat that has taken place. Many extra civil servants were taken on "for covid" who are still in place.
According to the ONS, Central Government employed the following
Year Number
2000 2,353,000
2005 2,772,000
2010 2,835,000
2015 3,053,000
2020 3,489,000
2025 4,045,000
So it's not just the civil service but it seems that soon the tax payer will employ everyone - crash!
Maybe we need a target of reducing the number by 5% a year, leaving it up to departments to reduce the number. It has been done before.
Unlike you I'm convinced that our Civil Service IS bloated but agree it is almost certainly top heavy as well, rather like the example that the Navy has more Admirals than ships.
On the other hand as set out in demand two of THA, Real Local Democracy, a number of centralised functions should be devolved to counties including hospitals and schools.
In my book big in the functioning of governments is not beautiful.
The problem is that systematic inefficiency and dysfunction in the government apparat is so enormous, so complex, so pervasive, that trying to unpick and restructure bits of it, let alone the whole, is akin to trying to re-engineer spiders' webs in the forest. Even if coherent reforms could be devised which worked, they could never be implemented. There are just too many interests at stake, too many conflicts. Beeching had a similar issue on a much smaller scale with the railways. The system must taken down to the bone; layers and layers removed; many, many people 'retired' - and not re-hired as 'consultants'! Above all every state employee must be held accountable and sackable. I'll leave it to you to decide if this is possible, or whether like a rubbish dump, the whole festering pile continues to smoke, reek and pollute; diggers and dozers rush around shoring up the worst collapses, while the whole rotting midden grows to engulf the land entire
I agree that a lot , or most departments are needed in one form or other , what’s not is the many many managers . The operative here is ‘work’ . Many frankly , are carried by a few . Removed ‘woke’ attitude to allowing everyone employed to do as little as they want would be a start . ‘The place’ seems to be run on Chinese ( very topical ) whispers . We all know very dedicated people in the public sector , what I find upsetting is seeing good people being brow beaten into becoming institutionalised , and losing their enthusiasm .
The thing needs to be policed in terms of productivity , WFH etc enables a lot to hide ( ask any business that has to have dealings with , for eg , planning departments ) . This sort of stuff , my local councils email footer , really speaks volumes about whose benefit ( no puns intended ) the civil service is run for : “City Council supports flexible working. I may be sending this now as it suits my work/life balance. I am not expecting a reply until a time that suits your working hours”
Like politicians , a lot of civil servants would do well to remember , or be told , they are there for our benefit , not the other way around .
A review of rules to simplify procedures is long and taking advantage of AI in conjunction with that simplifying would lead to a big reduction in staff.
Much of the work is mundane and reviewing what is no longer needed or just not worth the hastle, is a no brainer.
A example is in shipping admin where in the 1970s Liverpool broadsheet newspapers listed clerical jobs on 6 to 7 pages, all linked to shipping.
Computerisation, simplification and standardisation led to a big crash in clerical work.
If large scale repatriation of migrants occurs, the civil service (and the NHS) will be areas where staff reductions will be looked for.
But are there sufficient professionals to identify tasks no longer necessary?
University’s should offer courses in AI in order to establish workforce efficiencies.
I think I'm on the fence on this one for now. More information needed. I had assumed that the civil service was just a synonym for 'public sector workers', so admit to over-estimating the numbers probably by an order of magnitude.
And I also distinctly remember a point back in the Blair/Brown era when a very large noise was made about public sector jobs in the UK overtaking total private sector jobs.
This last one though, I think was BS. I just looked it up and by 2010 (according to ONS) the public sector employed 20% of the UK workforce (not 51%+). Then it dropped again. And is currently on the rise (esp in NHS and education).
I'm not sure whether NGOs and other pseudo-govt orgs were/are counted. I think it should be counted as government/public sector if they get ANY money from the taxpayer. (Probably isn't though ATM).
Bureaucracies become self-serving - which includes some 400 agencies as well as the central departments - and so become bloated and extractive of the public purse over time. At the local level authorities used to be run by civic minded town clerks, but are now run by CEOs on salaries of £150K to over £300K (with large pensions to match). Are they better, more effective as a result? Is the 'not fit for purpose' Home Office better these days? I agree that the right's analysis of what it wants the civil service to do is weak, but a goal of a leaner, less costly civil service is desirable. There is a need for the right to work out how to contain the self-serving, forever bloating tendencies not least because its unfunded pension liabilities are unsustainable and a source of inequality in old age. Without the motivation of a goal, no matter that detailed work on it has yet to be done, no-one will work out what to actually do.
On the basis of 1:126 people the Civil Service doesn’t look massively bloated. However when you look at the 160000 NGOs and Charities all funded in part by the government it looks huge as they do a lot of the Civil Service’s work. We are massively over governed.
Whilst I agree that we need to look at the functions undertaken, we cannot ignore the bloat that has taken place. Many extra civil servants were taken on "for covid" who are still in place.
According to the ONS, Central Government employed the following
Year Number
2000 2,353,000
2005 2,772,000
2010 2,835,000
2015 3,053,000
2020 3,489,000
2025 4,045,000
So it's not just the civil service but it seems that soon the tax payer will employ everyone - crash!
Maybe we need a target of reducing the number by 5% a year, leaving it up to departments to reduce the number. It has been done before.
"It has been done before."
Mere localised blips. The growth and centralization cannot be stopped, let alone reversed.
Impact with reality will solve the problem, as it always does.
Unlike you I'm convinced that our Civil Service IS bloated but agree it is almost certainly top heavy as well, rather like the example that the Navy has more Admirals than ships.
On the other hand as set out in demand two of THA, Real Local Democracy, a number of centralised functions should be devolved to counties including hospitals and schools.
In my book big in the functioning of governments is not beautiful.
https://harrogateagenda.org.uk/
The problem is that systematic inefficiency and dysfunction in the government apparat is so enormous, so complex, so pervasive, that trying to unpick and restructure bits of it, let alone the whole, is akin to trying to re-engineer spiders' webs in the forest. Even if coherent reforms could be devised which worked, they could never be implemented. There are just too many interests at stake, too many conflicts. Beeching had a similar issue on a much smaller scale with the railways. The system must taken down to the bone; layers and layers removed; many, many people 'retired' - and not re-hired as 'consultants'! Above all every state employee must be held accountable and sackable. I'll leave it to you to decide if this is possible, or whether like a rubbish dump, the whole festering pile continues to smoke, reek and pollute; diggers and dozers rush around shoring up the worst collapses, while the whole rotting midden grows to engulf the land entire
I agree that a lot , or most departments are needed in one form or other , what’s not is the many many managers . The operative here is ‘work’ . Many frankly , are carried by a few . Removed ‘woke’ attitude to allowing everyone employed to do as little as they want would be a start . ‘The place’ seems to be run on Chinese ( very topical ) whispers . We all know very dedicated people in the public sector , what I find upsetting is seeing good people being brow beaten into becoming institutionalised , and losing their enthusiasm .
The thing needs to be policed in terms of productivity , WFH etc enables a lot to hide ( ask any business that has to have dealings with , for eg , planning departments ) . This sort of stuff , my local councils email footer , really speaks volumes about whose benefit ( no puns intended ) the civil service is run for : “City Council supports flexible working. I may be sending this now as it suits my work/life balance. I am not expecting a reply until a time that suits your working hours”
Like politicians , a lot of civil servants would do well to remember , or be told , they are there for our benefit , not the other way around .
The biggest libertarian bores believe there shouldn't be roads. That puts them in league with eco-loons with their 15 minute cities.
A review of rules to simplify procedures is long and taking advantage of AI in conjunction with that simplifying would lead to a big reduction in staff.
Much of the work is mundane and reviewing what is no longer needed or just not worth the hastle, is a no brainer.
A example is in shipping admin where in the 1970s Liverpool broadsheet newspapers listed clerical jobs on 6 to 7 pages, all linked to shipping.
Computerisation, simplification and standardisation led to a big crash in clerical work.
If large scale repatriation of migrants occurs, the civil service (and the NHS) will be areas where staff reductions will be looked for.
But are there sufficient professionals to identify tasks no longer necessary?
University’s should offer courses in AI in order to establish workforce efficiencies.
I think I'm on the fence on this one for now. More information needed. I had assumed that the civil service was just a synonym for 'public sector workers', so admit to over-estimating the numbers probably by an order of magnitude.
And I also distinctly remember a point back in the Blair/Brown era when a very large noise was made about public sector jobs in the UK overtaking total private sector jobs.
This last one though, I think was BS. I just looked it up and by 2010 (according to ONS) the public sector employed 20% of the UK workforce (not 51%+). Then it dropped again. And is currently on the rise (esp in NHS and education).
I'm not sure whether NGOs and other pseudo-govt orgs were/are counted. I think it should be counted as government/public sector if they get ANY money from the taxpayer. (Probably isn't though ATM).