| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
British
Government in Crisis Sir Christopher Foster |
|
Michael
Savage | |
|
Books
with crisis in the title should generally be avoided. This is a
worthwhile exception because its analysis is cautious and sensible, and
the crisis it describes is real – the British state, granddaddy of
them all, is falling apart. Above the froth of political argument, the
state used to have a coherent sense of purpose, there was camaraderie
among the elite and an integrated apparatus of rule. But government in
Britain doesn’t work any more, and no one knows what to do about it. This
book focuses on administrative matters like transport policy and civil
service reform, which sounds a bit dull. But Sir Christopher Foster
tells a fascinating story that explains how a focus on targets and
professionalism in the public sector has led to really bad and
ineffective governance because the respective roles of politicians and
civil servants have both been undermined. Foster’s writing is never
stylish, but it is always focused and compelling. He has an
administrator’s talent for writing a good brief, and a raconteur’s
ear for a good anecdote. When
politics was more clearly structured between left and right there was
lively debate based on disagreement about how the country should go
forward. But there was also agreement about the goalposts – politics
was about nation states, it was about left and right, the national
interest, the unions and the bosses. We knew what we were arguing about,
which provided agreed ‘terms of reference’ for national
administration. Britain was especially stable, with a long-established
Civil Service mission of public service, and a long line of radicals at
least as keen on tradition as their conservative counterparts. Now
civil servants are mistrusted. Politicians are skeptical that something
as ethereal as ‘mission’ can sustain a large bureaucracy; targets
and measurements are needed. The functional organisation
of the universal Civil Service has therefore been replaced by something
more piecemeal, with fragmented agencies, contradictory central
direction and dispersed expertise. Attacks on ‘big government’ and
cuts in the Civil Service hit specialists and experts particularly hard,
making it hard to provide the detailed policy guidance that politicians
relied on. It was increasingly necessary to buy-in knowledge from
consultants and academics with their own agendas.
The
loss of expertise in the Civil Service has encouraged politicians to
surround themselves with special advisors and spin doctors. They
generate lots of ideas, but they are separated from the people who
actually govern, who have to make messy compromises to implement
policies. The complexities and competing interests involved in making
things happen are of no interest to the new mandarins, who don’t
understand how to exercise power or make policy work. The
‘joined-up’ government that people like to talk about is thus
further away than ever. The messy politics of competing sectional
interests cannot be managed away by consultants, targets, initiatives
and PowerPoint presentations. We no longer have a vocabulary to
generalise interests in a way that can make sense in a social and
political context. MPs
are no better than the civil servants they disdain. They are motivated
more by constituency work than by big ideas, Lord Nolan and the
anti-corruption crusade has cut off avenues of external engagement,
there is less opportunity to shine in the House of Commons. It is a
familiar story, but Foster draws out the consequences well. Because MPs
are less equipped to scrutinise
bills, the role has defaulted to the House of Lords, whose role has
increased at precisely the time when distaste for their privileged
position has prompted reform. And in a less political environment,
lawyerly analysis is to the fore. Foster notes that now ‘the most
active and coherent thinking in Britain about the future of government
is among judges, barristers and academic lawyers.’ (p293) Foster
is strong on description, but his analysis is weak and his suggestions
frivolous because he is astonishingly disengaged in politics. The book
relies on personal observation, which idealises the recent past. The
simultaneous evisceration of the roles of MPs
and of civil servants means that less talented individuals are bound to
fill them, and they will not be challenged and developed in the world
that Foster describes. But his analysis too often focuses on individual
weakness without probing into the context. It
also fails to consider the present other than through the narrow frame
of the mandarins. There is nothing about how political parties have been
hollowed out, their political culture impoverished, their membership
aging. There is nothing about declining political participation, or the
trivialisation of political ideologies. He also idealises the
relationship between civil servants and politicians. It was often
effective, but big ideological changes had to be wrested from stick in
the mud traditionalists who ran the civil service. Foster
highlights how basic elements of common sense and good management have
been lost. In simple, direct language he defends basic elements of
competent governance against faddish obscurantism. The dull
administrative competence of the British Civil Service has gone.
Foster’s desire to inject some good old fashioned common sense is naïve,
reflecting his misdiagnosis of the cause of the crisis. But his detailed
discussion is rewarding, and the questions he raises are to the point. |
|
|