We might be on the verge of a major democratisation of the UK bureaucracy
But then again, we might not
Every week, when I plan to sit down and write this article, something gets in the way. Usually, it is the latest development from the Boris Johnson-led UK government (which if nothing else has kept civil service watchers on their toes) and, indeed, today is no different. But I also have a secondary interloper – toothache. So this will have to be short and sweet before I head to the emergency dentist.
To cut to the chase, then – the decision by the prime minister (and seeming approval of the cabinet secretary) to name Stephen Barclay as his chief of staff is an extraordinary moment for the UK government, and what happens next could be pivotal to how the state is run in future.
Barclay was already a top minister in the Cabinet Office1 when it was announced yesterday that he would take on the role of the chief of staff in No.10 Downing Street. This too, is an important job – done well, it acts as the gatekeeper and fixer to the PM, keeping his energies (and in-tray) focused, and running elements of the central political operation in No.10 Downing Street2 as well as liaising with other special advisers across government to make sure the PM and his team are picking up intel that, to put it kindly, might not be in a specific cabinet minister’s interest to share.
The decision to get Barclay to hold both these roles at once is unprecedented. It comes as the prime minister has pledged to revamp his Downing Street operation after the Partygate affair3 which includes the creation of a proper Office of the Prime Minister to properly recognise the expanding power in the centre. This is probably a good idea on its own – even a more focused prime minister than the current incumbent has found the sprawling responsibilities of Downing Street a challenge, and that was before both Brexit and COVID.
The rationality of Barclays appointment, as I understand it, is therefore that he will bring his expertise of how the Cabinet Office works into the chief of staff role, and then be able to properly scope out the new OPM, which the prime minister has already said will be run by a civil service official at permanent secretary grade. The person who replaces Martin Reynolds as the prime minister’s principle private secretary will be among the candidates for this, as will other departmental perm secs.
That is, I think the logic of it. But it is also worth restating that this is very, very unusual. Never before has an minister been appointed to what was previously a special adviser role. It is rare for an MP to be appointed to one (among the slate of new Downing Street appointments is Andrew Griffith as the new head of the No.10 Policy Unit, in what has been transformed from a special adviser role when held by Munira Mirza to a ministerial post) but the collision of the two for a serving minister has never happened before.
It immediately raises many questions. Chief among them, as Jonathan Powell (a former Downing Street chief of staff himself) raised, is one of time.
“I found being No 10 chief of staff a full time job. Not sure how it could be combined with representing a constituency. And having to go to answer parliamentary questions about the PM would be tricky,” he wrote on Twitter.
He also zeroed in a number of other potential issues, including whether Barclay would now be answerable to parliament as the Downing Street chief of staff. “I can think of no democracy where the chief of staff can also be in the legislature,” he wrote in a Twitter thread.
“Who pays his salary - does it count against the ministerial salaries limit? [A]mazed that the cabinet secretary has agreed to this. It all seems a bit desperate.”
One interesting thing in some of the commentary around Barclays’ appointment has been Conservative voices saying that the dual hats could help the Downing Street operation better connect with MPs. Likewise, a chief of staff who sits in parliament could be open to questions, and begin to shed a lot of light into what has hitherto been a very backroom and secret role.
Such a move would be massive change in government transparency. People would begin to know more about how the office around the prime minister works, how civil servants and special advisers interact, and where ministers fit into the picture.
This is why I think it is unlikely that such a revolution will happen – that and the fact that this prime minister, even if he wanted such an approach, may not be in office long enough to see it through. I don’t think the last two-plus years have shown that the UK governance system works well, but there will be a lot reticence about putting more of what goes on behind the famous black door of No.10 on public display. The reason the newspapers are so full of leaks from Downing Street under all PMs is that it allows people to build their narratives and alliances. The system works for those it works for, and I don’t think the Game of Thrones-style display we have seen in the last year (including, let’s remember, multiple sources claiming that Boris Johnson was phoning up newspaper editors himself to brief against his former top aide Dominic Cummings behind the cloak of a Downing Street source) indicates all that much willingness to change it.
I will sign off though, with this thought. Imagine if it did. Imagine if the chief of staff was indeed open to parliament scrutiny and the nation got to see an informed, on-the-record look at how government worked. I don’t know if the picture painted would be good one, but I am not sure it would necessarily be worse than now.
Links and thoughts
Another week of interesting content on globalgoveernemntforum.com. I will flag tow things - in an interesting development, Belgian civil servants granted ‘right to disconnect’ after working hours. This is the latest stage in global campaign for working life to reconfigure to the COVID-induced flexible working system, where, as someone once memorably put it to me, it was not so much working at home but living at work. There have also been calls from the Prospect trade union for such a right to disconnect in the UK. We will be keeping an eye on how this develops.
We also published the thoughts this week of Michael Wernick, Canada’s former public service chief, on his tops for working with ministers. It is a very interesting look into the key relationship that keeps government going, and I recommend it to you this week more than ever.
Thanks for reading.
As Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, he is the second-most senior minister in the Cabinet Office behind Johnson himself, and responsible for oversight of the delivery of cross-cutting domestic and economic priorities, as well as for Whitehall reform. It is for my money, easily the most interesting job in government.
The role is a special adviser one, not a civil service one
Can we really use the past tense yet?