UK Politics Thread X: Boris party report released

[Great Britain eke Northern Ireland]

I am of the opinion that civil servants should not be allowed to strike over policy, and if they do then they should just be fired. The alternative is allowing elected governments to appoint civil servants.

Hear, hear.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Placeholder title because i forgot to change it earlier after the ni election wrapped.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Starmer leads Sunak by 8%, his largest lead since 12 March.

At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (28 May)

Keir Starmer 42% (+4)
Rishi Sunak 34% (–)

Changes +/- 21 May

[Clussy Paradise]

Starmer leads Sunak by 8%, his largest lead since 12 March.

At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (28 May)

Keir Starmer 42% (+4)
Rishi Sunak 34% (–)

Changes +/- 21 May

Yup sounds about right.

[Bahrimontagn]

Starmer leads Sunak by 8%, his largest lead since 12 March.

At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (28 May)

Keir Starmer 42% (+4)
Rishi Sunak 34% (–)

Changes +/- 21 May

King Charles entering Westminister and beheading every MP and Lord with a rapier would be a better option at this point.

[Ifreann]

Home Office staff could strike if forced to implement ‘unlawful’ Rwanda asylum plan

There are civil servants in the Home Office with a conscience? Shocking.

Has there ever been a time when members of Civil Service department went on strike? Do Civil Servants have the right to strike?

It would be the latest in a string of strikes by civil servants, with 130,000 people walking out of 132 government departments last month over pay and conditions.

---

I am of the opinion that civil servants should not be allowed to strike over policy, and if they do then they should just be fired. The alternative is allowing elected governments to appoint civil servants.

That would presumably require giving civil servants broad immunity from liability for breaking the law. Can't be putting people into a position where they either have to break the law or lose their job. 'Qualified immunity', as the Americans call it. Causes them a lot of problems.

[Celritannia]

I am of the opinion that civil servants should not be allowed to strike over policy, and if they do then they should just be fired. The alternative is allowing elected governments to appoint civil servants.

Hear, hear.

Firing a large portion of civil servants puts the entire function of government to a standstill. Not a good idea.

And governments appointing their own civil servants is an even worse idea. The whole point of the Civil Service is to be independent. The moment elected Governments appoint their own civil servants is the point where the civil service is politicised. You also remove the civil servants being able to function due to longevity when there are no elected governments and lose the established expertise.

[Hirota]

Hear, hear.

Firing a large portion of civil servants puts the entire function of government to a standstill. Not a good idea.

And governments appointing their own civil servants is an even worse idea. The whole point of the Civil Service is to be independent. The moment elected Governments appoint their own civil servants is the point where the civil service is politicised. You also remove the civil servants being able to function due to longevity when there are no elected governments and lose the established expertise.

I disagree with "independent" and suggest "nonpartisan" instead.

But I'd much rather they were independent than selected.

[Fartsniffage]

Firing a large portion of civil servants puts the entire function of government to a standstill. Not a good idea.

And governments appointing their own civil servants is an even worse idea. The whole point of the Civil Service is to be independent. The moment elected Governments appoint their own civil servants is the point where the civil service is politicised. You also remove the civil servants being able to function due to longevity when there are no elected governments and lose the established expertise.

I disagree with "independent" and suggest "nonpartisan" instead.

But I'd much rather they were independent than selected.

You would want a Civil Service filled with extreme centrists?

[Celritannia]

Firing a large portion of civil servants puts the entire function of government to a standstill. Not a good idea.

And governments appointing their own civil servants is an even worse idea. The whole point of the Civil Service is to be independent. The moment elected Governments appoint their own civil servants is the point where the civil service is politicised. You also remove the civil servants being able to function due to longevity when there are no elected governments and lose the established expertise.

I disagree with "independent" and suggest "nonpartisan" instead.

But I'd much rather they were independent than selected.

Well, I did say they are supposed to be, rather than they are.
But either way, we both agree selecting civil servants is a bad idea.

[Hirota]

I disagree with "independent" and suggest "nonpartisan" instead.

But I'd much rather they were independent than selected.

You would want a Civil Service filled with extreme centrists?

I ideally want a civil service filled with people who do not have their private opinions influence their ability to do their work and may lead them to obstruct the policies of the democratically elected government on the basis of their personal morality - hence the "nonpartisan."

Right now, as demonstrated by the examples I cited regarding Benn and Corbyn, and experienced with this proposed strike action, we have an aggregate of civil servants sitting somewhere around the center who can sometimes curb the policies of the elected government (for good or ill) through action or inaction. I personally find that less desirable, but it's the reality of the situation at the moment, and they are not picked by the government - hence the "independent"

I personally don't want selected civil servants.

I can't make it much clearer than that. If you think any of that equates to "extreme centrism" that's your opinion, not mine.

[Celritannia]

You would want a Civil Service filled with extreme centrists?

I ideally want a civil service filled with people who do not have their private opinions influence their ability to do their work and lead them to obstruct the policies of the democratically elected government simply on the basis of their personal morality - hence the "nonpartisan."

Right now, as demonstrated by the examples I cited regarding Benn and Corbyn, and experienced with this proposed strike action, we have an aggregate of civil servants sitting somewhere around the center who can sometimes curb the policies of the elected government (for good or ill). I personally find that less desirable, but it's the reality of the situation, and they are not picked by the government - hence the "independent"

I personally don't want selected civil servants.

I can't make it much clearer than that. If you think any of that equates to "extreme centrism" that's your opinion, not mine.

I think the only time the Civil Service has the right to refuse the plans of an elected government is when they have the evidence to back up the impracticality of those policies, especially if they tried it before and it did not work.
Which is why having an experienced civil service is essential.

[Ostroeuropa]

Mildly disagree Celrit. The job of the civil servant is to inform the government what you expect the proposed action will cause based on your experience. If they disagree with you, then you say "We'll see" and then enact it anyway. Only the most obstinate idiots will continually ignore that advise after that happens a few times, at which point they start dragging their feet a little (Which I disapprove of).

The biggest problem is the principle-agent dilemma where a politician is so inexperienced they can't even come up with specific instructions.

"I want you to shoot Mrs Miggins in the head with a shotgun"

"That will kill her."

"No it will not, it will fix our nursing shortage."

*Sigh* *racks shotgun* "Yes boss.".

VS

"I want you to fix our nursing shortage."

"Oh. Okay. Um. Yeah I can maybe do that."

<does stuff aimed at fixing the nursing shortage>

"What are you doing! Who told you to do that?"

"...You did?"

"I never said to do that!"

"You told me to fix the nursing shortage."

"Well I don't like the way you've done it!"

"...Okay. I'll do something else then."

"Yes, do it goodly not badly.".

"...Okay..."

The latter is ten thousand times more tedious and likely to lead to resignations, and I suspect it's how this Tory government tends to operate. At some point they sit there seething that you "Aren't doing anything" because any action you take that might fix the problem they told you to fix, they hit the roof over and say its unacceptable, but they refuse to actually tell you specifically what to do.

So they come in and start mouthing off and say we're doing it on purpose to fuck them over, and if you just straight up tell them this that's way too explicitly political and you're basically saying "You are too much of an incompetent idiot to be in politics and that is why your civil servants can't function. You are unfit for this role." so you just have to dance around it.

Example:

There is a table with some stuff on it. The Tory enters the room and tells you "Clear the table.". You nod, and begin to remove the items. They scream and start hurling abuse at you for doing it in the wrong order. Eventually you learn that no matter which object you touch first, the Tory ends up seething and commanding you to stop. So you just sit there picking your nails and smiling at co-workers 9-5. The Tory eventually comes in and gives everyone a bollocking that the table still isn't clear and accuses everyone of being some kind of activist. Some people resign because they can no longer hold back from saying (in their resignation letter) "You are a fucking idiot and your party is not capable of governing the country.".

[Celritannia]

Mildly disagree Celrit. The job of the civil servant is to inform the government what you expect the proposed action will cause based on your experience. If they disagree with you, then you say "We'll see" and then enact it anyway. Only the most obstinate idiots will continually ignore that advise after that happens a few times, at which point they start dragging their feet a little (Which I disapprove of).

And if they are trying to enact something where the evidence shows it is unfeasible, taxpayers' money is wasted.

[Ostroeuropa]

Mildly disagree Celrit. The job of the civil servant is to inform the government what you expect the proposed action will cause based on your experience. If they disagree with you, then you say "We'll see" and then enact it anyway. Only the most obstinate idiots will continually ignore that advise after that happens a few times, at which point they start dragging their feet a little (Which I disapprove of).

And if they are trying to enact something where the evidence shows it is unfeasible, taxpayers' money is wasted.

That's what elections are for.

[Fartsniffage]

You would want a Civil Service filled with extreme centrists?

I ideally want a civil service filled with people who do not have their private opinions influence their ability to do their work and may lead them to obstruct the policies of the democratically elected government on the basis of their personal morality - hence the "nonpartisan."

Right now, as demonstrated by the examples I cited regarding Benn and Corbyn, and experienced with this proposed strike action, we have an aggregate of civil servants sitting somewhere around the center who can sometimes curb the policies of the elected government (for good or ill) through action or inaction. I personally find that less desirable, but it's the reality of the situation at the moment, and they are not picked by the government - hence the "independent"

I personally don't want selected civil servants.

I can't make it much clearer than that. If you think any of that equates to "extreme centrism" that's your opinion, not mine.

You're asking for half a million people who want to work in the government to have no strong political opinions.

Never going to happen.

[Celritannia]

And if they are trying to enact something where the evidence shows it is unfeasible, taxpayers' money is wasted.

That's what elections are for.

Which can be too late to remove the problem or the same party gets elected for an extended period of time in which the governing party has absolute control of the legislature.
Elections are not the be-all-end-all. If something is unfeasible, it should be mentioned as such and then try and find a new way of approaching the situation.

[Ostroeuropa]

That's what elections are for.

Which can be too late to remove the problem or the same party gets elected for an extended period of time in which the governing party has absolute control of the legislature.
Elections are not the be-all-end-all. If something is unfeasible, it should be mentioned as such and then try and find a new way of approaching the situation.

You can absolutely tell your boss that you think their plan isn't going to work and caution against it, as well as give your reasoning why. But they are the peoples representative and ultimate decider. It would be wildly inappropriate to just tell them "I don't like what you're doing so i'm not going to do it.". I think pretty much the only time i'd say that reaction is appropriate is when they order an illegal action, including under international law.

[Celritannia]

Which can be too late to remove the problem or the same party gets elected for an extended period of time in which the governing party has absolute control of the legislature.
Elections are not the be-all-end-all. If something is unfeasible, it should be mentioned as such and then try and find a new way of approaching the situation.

You can absolutely tell your boss that you think their plan isn't going to work and caution against it, as well as give your reasoning why. But they are the peoples representative and ultimate decider. It would be wildly inappropriate to just tell them "I don't like what you're doing so i'm not going to do it.". I think pretty much the only time i'd say that reaction is appropriate is when they order an illegal action, including under international law.

I never said the civil service would take over the jobs of the elected government. I am saying that the civil service should point out the flaws in the policy as unfeasible, and then work a way around it with the Minister.

Although, I am opposed to the Westminster Parliamentary System.

[Ostroeuropa]

You can absolutely tell your boss that you think their plan isn't going to work and caution against it, as well as give your reasoning why. But they are the peoples representative and ultimate decider. It would be wildly inappropriate to just tell them "I don't like what you're doing so i'm not going to do it.". I think pretty much the only time i'd say that reaction is appropriate is when they order an illegal action, including under international law.

I never said the civil service would take over the jobs of the elected government. I am saying that the civil service should point out the flaws in the policy as unfeasible, and then work a way around it with the Minister.

Although, I am opposed to the Westminster PArliamentary System.

You can point out the flaws in the policy but if they just command you to do it anyway, that's that. If they say "Oh, how could we avoid those flaws?" then that's the ideal situation.

[Celritannia]

I never said the civil service would take over the jobs of the elected government. I am saying that the civil service should point out the flaws in the policy as unfeasible, and then work a way around it with the Minister.

Although, I am opposed to the Westminster PArliamentary System.

You can point out the flaws in the policy but if they just command you to do it anyway, that's that. If they say "Oh, how could we avoid those flaws?" then that's the ideal situation.

It is the ideal situation, but not always the case.
Again, the Civil Service, through experience, should be able to say something is unachievable.

[Ostroeuropa]

You can point out the flaws in the policy but if they just command you to do it anyway, that's that. If they say "Oh, how could we avoid those flaws?" then that's the ideal situation.

It is the ideal situation, but not always the case.
Again, the Civil Service, through experience, should be able to say something is unachievable.

This is where carefully worded replies come in.

"I want you to grow GDP by 1 billion percent."

"You want me to focus on growing GDP until we've grown it by 1 billion percent? Did i hear that correctly sir?"

"Yes."

VS

"No I asked you to just straight up grow it by that much. Just do it."

"I don't know how to do that. Perhaps you can tell me."

"What are you some kind of idiot? Do X!"

"Okay. I will do X, but I do not think this will do what you think it will."

VS

"Just grow the GDP by 1 billion percent."

"I don't know how to do that. Perhaps you can tell me."

"Its YOUR job to figure out how!"

"Okay sir. I will research our options."

"Good."

*plays solitaire 9-5 and listens to economics podcasts*.

----

There's always options beyond usurping the ministers power.

[Fartsniffage]

It is the ideal situation, but not always the case.
Again, the Civil Service, through experience, should be able to say something is unachievable.

This is where carefully worded replies come in.

"I want you to grow GDP by 1 billion percent."

"You want me to focus on growing GDP until we've grown it by 1 billion percent? Did i hear that correctly sir?"

"Yes."

VS

"No I asked you to just straight up grow it by that much. Just do it."

"I don't know how to do that. Perhaps you can tell me."

"What are you some kind of idiot? Do X!"

"Okay. I will do X, but I do not think this will do what you think it will."

VS

"Just grow the GDP by 1 billion percent."

"I don't know how to do that. Perhaps you can tell me."

"Its YOUR job to figure out how!"

"Okay sir. I will research our options."

"Good."

*plays solitaire 9-5 and listens to economics podcasts*.

----

There's always options beyond usurping the ministers power.

Can you two just get a room?

[Ostroeuropa]

Can you two just get a room?

Genuinely though, managing upward is a vital skill for a civil servant. I do understand Celrits frustration and his perspective, but it's not really best practice in my opinion.

[Fartsniffage]

Can you two just get a room?

Genuinely though, managing upward is a vital skill for a civil servant. I do understand Celrits frustration and his perspective, but it's not really best practice in my opinion.

You should talk to GVH. He just got a job in the probation service.