| Plan for change 13:06 - Dec 5 with 1846 views | Pinewoodblue |
All I see is targets with no signs of a plan to achieve them. |  |
| |  |
| Plan for change on 13:12 - Dec 5 with 1810 views | homer_123 |
Aren't they pledges? |  |
| |
| Plan for change on 13:15 - Dec 5 with 1789 views | PrideOfTheEast |
Assuming you’re talking politics.
It’s almost as if a system that encourages short term thinking isn’t fit for purpose in delivering long term results….. |  | | |
| Plan for change on 13:28 - Dec 5 with 1757 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Plan for change on 13:12 - Dec 5 by homer_123 |
Aren't they pledges? |
What good are pledges if no one knows how they will be achieved, or paid for? | |
| |
| Plan for change on 13:35 - Dec 5 with 1730 views | homer_123 |
| Plan for change on 13:28 - Dec 5 by Pinewoodblue |
What good are pledges if no one knows how they will be achieved, or paid for? |
So, basically, we can agree that it's no different from every Party's Manifesto.
Nothing new here, sadly. | |
| |
| Plan for change on 13:39 - Dec 5 with 1717 views | tonybied |
| Plan for change on 13:35 - Dec 5 by homer_123 |
So, basically, we can agree that it's no different from every Party's Manifesto.
Nothing new here, sadly. |
Indeed, the only true measure is if the government deliver on these pledges, unlike the last shower! |  | | |
| Plan for change on 13:47 - Dec 5 with 1700 views | bluejacko |
Nothing about defence or migration either! | | | |
| Plan for change on 19:13 - Dec 5 with 1538 views | brazil1982 |
I thought they were milestones. |  | | |
| Plan for change on 19:35 - Dec 5 with 1501 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Plan for change on 19:13 - Dec 5 by brazil1982 |
I thought they were milestones. |
You misspelt millstones | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Plan for change on 19:53 - Dec 5 with 1473 views | stonojnr |
| Plan for change on 13:12 - Dec 5 by homer_123 |
Aren't they pledges? |
More like guidelines... | | | |
| Plan for change on 20:43 - Dec 5 with 1406 views | DJR |
As a former civil servant in Whitehall, I thought this part of the speech was a bit of an insult.
"Starmer accuses Whitehall of being comfortable with failure in landmark speech"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/05/starmer-accuses-whitehall-of-be
The situation we are in on so many fronts (record court backlogs, lack of prison spaces, record net migration etc) are not down to civil servants but are a direct result of government (especially Tory) policies. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 20:43]
|  | | |
| Plan for change on 20:46 - Dec 5 with 1381 views | WeWereZombies |
| Plan for change on 20:43 - Dec 5 by DJR |
As a former civil servant in Whitehall, I thought this part of the speech was a bit of an insult.
"Starmer accuses Whitehall of being comfortable with failure in landmark speech"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/05/starmer-accuses-whitehall-of-be
The situation we are in on so many fronts (record court backlogs, lack of prison spaces, record net migration etc) are not down to civil servants but are a direct result of government (especially Tory) policies. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 20:43]
|
Ossification strikes all parts of a system and it is up to the executive to identify the problem and set a course for a solution. |  |
| |
| Plan for change on 14:10 - Dec 6 with 1234 views | DJR |
I am a retired member of the FDA union and set out below a message from the General Secretary. I also attach below a link to the letter he has written to the Prime Minister.
Colleagues,
I know from the number of messages I have received from members how despondent many of you were at the language used by the Prime Minister in his speech yesterday.
No one knows of the need for reform to deliver better and more efficient public services more than public servants. They also know that the causes of inefficiency or delay are many, not least because of the scale and complexity of government, but also by the limitations on resources and impact of political choices.
That is why the Prime Minister’s words - invoking the Trumpian language of “draining the swamp”, however qualified - are so disappointing and damaging. I know that many of you found the soundbite “too many are comfortable in the tepid bath of managed decline” particularly insulting.
It is perhaps all the more disappointing given that the Prime Minister is a former civil servant, so is aware of all of these complexities - as well as the inability of civil servants to respond publicly to those criticisms.
He also promised to govern differently. Many of you were heartened when he and his ministers took office and said that they would draw a line under the public criticism of the civil service endured over much of the last decade.
As I said yesterday on Newsnight, the Prime Minister has a responsibility, as Minister for the Civil Service, to show leadership. He could have praised the incredible work being done every day by civil servants - but challenge them to embrace the need for reform to help deliver the government’s challenging agenda.
Whatever the Prime Minister’s motivation for choosing those words, I doubt that he has understood how damaging they are. I have today written to him, asking him to reflect on their impact, intended or not, and seek to repair the damage urgently.
I will of course share any response that is received.
Dave Penman
FDA General Secretary
https://mcusercontent.com/365dd7fd25caa901b9c177c40/files/5a6af850-8468-da73-bec [Post edited 6 Dec 2024 14:12]
| | | |
| Plan for change on 17:47 - Dec 6 with 1133 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Plan for change on 14:10 - Dec 6 by DJR |
I am a retired member of the FDA union and set out below a message from the General Secretary. I also attach below a link to the letter he has written to the Prime Minister.
Colleagues,
I know from the number of messages I have received from members how despondent many of you were at the language used by the Prime Minister in his speech yesterday.
No one knows of the need for reform to deliver better and more efficient public services more than public servants. They also know that the causes of inefficiency or delay are many, not least because of the scale and complexity of government, but also by the limitations on resources and impact of political choices.
That is why the Prime Minister’s words - invoking the Trumpian language of “draining the swamp”, however qualified - are so disappointing and damaging. I know that many of you found the soundbite “too many are comfortable in the tepid bath of managed decline” particularly insulting.
It is perhaps all the more disappointing given that the Prime Minister is a former civil servant, so is aware of all of these complexities - as well as the inability of civil servants to respond publicly to those criticisms.
He also promised to govern differently. Many of you were heartened when he and his ministers took office and said that they would draw a line under the public criticism of the civil service endured over much of the last decade.
As I said yesterday on Newsnight, the Prime Minister has a responsibility, as Minister for the Civil Service, to show leadership. He could have praised the incredible work being done every day by civil servants - but challenge them to embrace the need for reform to help deliver the government’s challenging agenda.
Whatever the Prime Minister’s motivation for choosing those words, I doubt that he has understood how damaging they are. I have today written to him, asking him to reflect on their impact, intended or not, and seek to repair the damage urgently.
I will of course share any response that is received.
Dave Penman
FDA General Secretary
https://mcusercontent.com/365dd7fd25caa901b9c177c40/files/5a6af850-8468-da73-bec [Post edited 6 Dec 2024 14:12]
|
Starmer’s a dick. I’ve given the chap so much rope while discussing him on here, and while I’ve not defended his record I have defended his right to be given a lot more time to begin to sort out the mess the last lot made. But he keeps saying the wrong things and making bad choices. It doesn’t inspire confidence. Him and his team increasingly come across as unimaginative and not particularly competent. But I still think we have to give them more time. Given how bad the legacy they inherited, complete with a seismic shift in our relationship with Europe, they need at least a couple of years and probably a full term before being judged. |  |
| |
| Plan for change on 18:19 - Dec 6 with 1112 views | Churchman |
| Plan for change on 20:43 - Dec 5 by DJR |
As a former civil servant in Whitehall, I thought this part of the speech was a bit of an insult.
"Starmer accuses Whitehall of being comfortable with failure in landmark speech"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/05/starmer-accuses-whitehall-of-be
The situation we are in on so many fronts (record court backlogs, lack of prison spaces, record net migration etc) are not down to civil servants but are a direct result of government (especially Tory) policies. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 20:43]
|
As a former Civil Servant I found it insulting too. That they’re using the Tory tactic of blaming the CS after a pitiful five months is plain sad.
Governments set policy, the CSs job is to implement it and as a safety net challenge it sometimes. Truss disposed of the challenge bit, got the old fag packet out, cut ‘the red tape’ trashed the economy and cost us all £billions.
All perfectly avoidable had she used the resources at her government’s disposal. But nope, the witless hag knew best. Or didn’t. Please Sir Kier, don’t make the same mistake and be as thorough as you are securing those prime Arsenal tickets.
And while I am in rant mode, this stuff about £22bn hidden debt by the tories; not knowing the finances because ‘the books’ were hidden from them etc. I know that is absolute rubbish. I know through former colleagues Reeves and co were fully and accurately briefed and knew exactly the state of play before they were elected, as all prospective governments do.
Nobody is denying the mess the tories created in 14 years of gross misrule. They should be jailed for crimes against the state. But it really isn’t anyone else’s fault that Labour painted itself into a corner unnecessarily over tax and has been so chaotic in the first five months. What exactly is wrong with raising income tax anyway? Those who have more, pay more.
As my far left leaning sister pointed out on Tuesday, they had years to prepare and appear not to have bothered - it’s as if they didn’t believe they’d ever get elected. Let’s hope the next seven months of their first year is an improvement. |  | | |
| Plan for change on 18:24 - Dec 6 with 1100 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Plan for change on 18:19 - Dec 6 by Churchman |
As a former Civil Servant I found it insulting too. That they’re using the Tory tactic of blaming the CS after a pitiful five months is plain sad.
Governments set policy, the CSs job is to implement it and as a safety net challenge it sometimes. Truss disposed of the challenge bit, got the old fag packet out, cut ‘the red tape’ trashed the economy and cost us all £billions.
All perfectly avoidable had she used the resources at her government’s disposal. But nope, the witless hag knew best. Or didn’t. Please Sir Kier, don’t make the same mistake and be as thorough as you are securing those prime Arsenal tickets.
And while I am in rant mode, this stuff about £22bn hidden debt by the tories; not knowing the finances because ‘the books’ were hidden from them etc. I know that is absolute rubbish. I know through former colleagues Reeves and co were fully and accurately briefed and knew exactly the state of play before they were elected, as all prospective governments do.
Nobody is denying the mess the tories created in 14 years of gross misrule. They should be jailed for crimes against the state. But it really isn’t anyone else’s fault that Labour painted itself into a corner unnecessarily over tax and has been so chaotic in the first five months. What exactly is wrong with raising income tax anyway? Those who have more, pay more.
As my far left leaning sister pointed out on Tuesday, they had years to prepare and appear not to have bothered - it’s as if they didn’t believe they’d ever get elected. Let’s hope the next seven months of their first year is an improvement. |
Superb stuff! It’s good to rant and that’s all fully justified as far as I can see  | |
| |
| Plan for change on 11:18 - Dec 9 with 851 views | DJR |
How do they come up with this crap? If the policy isn't thought through properly it ain't going to work, as evidenced by all the half-baked stuff that the Cameron government forced through (failing Grayling anyone?). At the end of the day, start ups generally have a blank canvas, many fail and if they do, they do not have implications for the country (as does, say, the complete dog's breakfast the Tories have made of the criminal justice system).
This from the Guardian.
If the overnight press briefing is anything to go by, this will be bad news for civil servants who enjoy writing erudite policy documents. The Cabinet Office says:
‘Crack’ teams of problem solvers will be deployed to improve public services and support delivery of the Plan for Change. Made up of a mix of people working in partnership to drive change - with data and digital skills, policy officials, and frontline workers, they will be given the freedom to experiment and adapt - adopting the ‘test and learn’ mindset of Silicon Valley.
Instead of writing more complicated policy papers and long strategy documents, the government will set the teams a challenge and empower them to experiment, innovate and try new things.
In his speech McFadden will say he wants civil servants to adopt a “test and learn culture”. Explaining what this means, McFadden will say:
Test it. Fix the problems. Change the design. Test it again. Tweak it again. And so on, and so on, for as long as you provide the service. Suddenly, the most important question isn’t, ‘How do we get this right the first time?’. It’s ‘How do we make this better by next Friday?
That’s the test and learn mindset, and I’m keen to see where we can deploy it in government. Where we can make the state a little bit more like a start-up. [Post edited 9 Dec 2024 11:33]
| | | |
| Plan for change on 14:46 - Dec 9 with 718 views | Europablue |
| Plan for change on 20:43 - Dec 5 by DJR |
As a former civil servant in Whitehall, I thought this part of the speech was a bit of an insult.
"Starmer accuses Whitehall of being comfortable with failure in landmark speech"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/05/starmer-accuses-whitehall-of-be
The situation we are in on so many fronts (record court backlogs, lack of prison spaces, record net migration etc) are not down to civil servants but are a direct result of government (especially Tory) policies. [Post edited 5 Dec 2024 20:43]
|
The civil service is a hydra and it will not let anyone reform it without a fight.
The function of the civil service is just to carry out the necessary admin for the sitting government. They are not supposed to be political.
The first priority of any government employee is to cover their behind, the second priority is to hit targets and thus avoid any friction. Improving the lives of people who need the service doesn't seem to come into it. | | | |
| Plan for change on 14:52 - Dec 9 with 693 views | Europablue |
| Plan for change on 17:47 - Dec 6 by Swansea_Blue |
Starmer’s a dick. I’ve given the chap so much rope while discussing him on here, and while I’ve not defended his record I have defended his right to be given a lot more time to begin to sort out the mess the last lot made. But he keeps saying the wrong things and making bad choices. It doesn’t inspire confidence. Him and his team increasingly come across as unimaginative and not particularly competent. But I still think we have to give them more time. Given how bad the legacy they inherited, complete with a seismic shift in our relationship with Europe, they need at least a couple of years and probably a full term before being judged. |
There are different things you can judge the ruling party on. The tone they set at the start is one thing and you can often see if what they are doing is working.
In an extreme case like Liz Truss, the public (technically the MPs, but the MPs will be following public sentiment) lose confidence in the leader and they need to be changed.
It is very much like a football manager. We didn't need to keep on Paul Hurst for a couple of seasons before we judged him. | | | |
| Plan for change on 15:16 - Dec 9 with 630 views | DJR |
| Plan for change on 14:46 - Dec 9 by Europablue |
The civil service is a hydra and it will not let anyone reform it without a fight.
The function of the civil service is just to carry out the necessary admin for the sitting government. They are not supposed to be political.
The first priority of any government employee is to cover their behind, the second priority is to hit targets and thus avoid any friction. Improving the lives of people who need the service doesn't seem to come into it. |
Thanks for the insult. | | | |
| Plan for change on 16:40 - Dec 9 with 587 views | Churchman |
| Plan for change on 14:46 - Dec 9 by Europablue |
The civil service is a hydra and it will not let anyone reform it without a fight.
The function of the civil service is just to carry out the necessary admin for the sitting government. They are not supposed to be political.
The first priority of any government employee is to cover their behind, the second priority is to hit targets and thus avoid any friction. Improving the lives of people who need the service doesn't seem to come into it. |
Which government departments have you worked for? What was your experience of them? I ask given your description of what you think the CS is and what you describe them as doing.
Since I’ve asked you, after a career in the private sector, including time working as a project manager for online services at the dawn of the internet (1999 - 2003) I spent the rest of my career working for the Civil Service. For a good chunk of it I worked on cross-government projects, including a well known one, and for another chunk of it working for HMRCs Central Policy.
I have a decent understanding of how it was working before I left; its strengths and weaknesses. The problem of HMG generalising it is just that. Labour know, as the Tories did, that anyone who has not seen it or worked within it has no idea what people do. That makes it a convenient easy target when things go wrong.
I just thought they’d wait a little longer than five months to wheel it out. Attached is the PCS response which rightly points out that Civil Servants are an easy target because they cannot answer back.
https://www.pcs.org.uk/news-events/news/pcs-responds-pms-criticism-civil-servant | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
