Why the next prime minister must fix how government works 

As Boris Johnson’s political authority was crumbling last week the IfG held a conference about government reform. We discussed why the civil service needed stronger statutory underpinning, the authority of the cabinet secretary to run the civil service, the need to revive the civil service’s purpose and objectives, and how to make better policy by reducing civil service churn, opening up policy decisions and reinforcing the quality of civil service advice. 

The debate reflected two papers we published in March on a new statutory role for the civil service and on better policy making. 

Towards the end of the morning session Lord Herbert, who chaired a ‘Commission for Smart Government’ that last year looked at some of the same areas, asked how to “create support for the idea that this all matters”. He argued, depressingly convincingly, that “political leaders don’t see that this matters; they don’t really talk about this … they’re not interested in this subject”. Herbert’s first test of success was about whether we could persuade future political leaders of the importance of this work. 

The Johnson administration showed why government reform matters 

Now is a good moment to make the argument because we have a fresh case study. Boris Johnson led an administration without policy direction, lacking the capacity or ability to maintain focus on the medium- and long-term and leaked against by those who should be most loyal. Any such government will fail. 

A cascade of scandal was one reason for its failure. Political misjudgement was another. But underlying structural problems was the third. Boris Johnson discovered what happens when the civil service is battered, demoralised and left without purpose, and when the institutions that exist to serve ministers lack a clear objective to which they can be held to account.  

Five reasons why reforming government matters 

We published a follow up paper on Monday, After Boris Johnson: what now for the civil service? that grapples with Lord Herbert’s question and the problems faced, and created, by the Johnson administration. Drawing on that, here are five reasons why improving the way government works matters: 

• Without authoritative policy advice reflecting the best evidence and analysis available then decision making will be worse and citizens – and politicians – will be badly served. Rachel Wolf, the co-author of the 2019 Conservative manifesto, and Paul Kissack, group chief executive of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, at the conference talked about improving technical policy making but also overhauling the whole process of where and how decisions are made to build the consensus required to make fundamental policy interventions. 
   
• Then, however good the policy decisions are, the civil service workforce needs to be equipped to implement them. Otherwise government programmes will fail. The effectiveness of the civil service in project management, procurement, digital and finance is as important as its policy advice.
   
• The pressure will always be for government to prioritise the short-term, and the incentives in UK government are all geared to encourage this. So it is essential that there is institutional encouragement to think longer term, especially on existential areas like planning for catastrophic risks and climate change. 
   
• Failing to tackle problems with government are self-reinforcing. If the system is not working well then enthusiastic and skilled officials will leave and be replaced with less effective performers, particularly in competitive fields like project management and digital, leading to further loss of capacity in the state. 
   
• The civil service draws its legitimacy from its effectiveness and its integrity. Problems with both, from partygate to leaks and internal opposition to government policy, from the Kabul evacuation to the response to the Windrush scandal, badly undermine the institution. A loss of faith among politicians and the public in the civil service opens the door for a dilution of the civil service’s impartiality that would lead to even more short-term policy decisions, a less skilled workforce and a creeping corruption of public life. 

Of course governments do good things, and even just keeping the wheels – more or less – on the British constitution over the last fortnight has been a success. But all governments, and the civil service, can do better. 

Exhortation to improve is not enough – underpinning incentives must change 

And as our outgoing director Bronwen Maddox said in her valedictory lecture this week, for government to change “exhortation is not enough”. The underpinning incentive structures for ministers and civil servants need to be different. That is why we will keep returning to the issue of a new statute for the civil service. 

Sir Jonathan Jones, former head of the Government Legal Department and another contributor to the conference, supported the idea of a civil service statute, pointing out that “as with a contract, the process of drawing up the contract helps you define terms, and the rules of engagement [and] allocates roles and responsibilities”. 

If all goes well then the contract does not need to be referred to, but, as Sir Jonathan said, “at the moment we do have a problem … if you have ministers accusing civil servants of thwarting policy, or civil servants being put in the position of having to lie … this is not a functioning set of relationships. I think legislation could help to set some parameters”. 

We have a problem. We have a new government coming in that will be looking to put some distance between it and the failures of the Johnson administration. It is time for ministers and civil servants to enhance the capability of the government and to find ways to improve and strengthen the civil service, not to weaken it.