In response to our article regarding the retirement of Ian Watmore from the Civil Service (see Ian Watmore retires from Civil Service), we received a very thought-provoking comment from John Suffolk. Suffolk was UK Government CIO from 2006 until November 2010 (see John Suffolk to leave Government CIO post), when he was replaced by Joe Harley (who has subsequently been replaced by Andy Nelson).
During his tenure, Suffolk developed the UK Government ICT Strategy, and also played a key role in contract negotiations with suppliers, the enforcement of the ICT moratorium, and project reviews. Suffolk has since moved to China to take the position as Huawei’s Global Cyber Security Officer (GCSO) – see John Suffolk accepts position with Huawei) - but still keeps a keen eye on developments in UK Government. He writes:
“I think Government is now at a crossroads. I am not sure why Ian has left but there are substantial rumours that the civil service (not necessarily Ian) are beginning to conflict with Ministers – Ministers want to be more radical – and the natural defences of the Civil Service are giving the impression they do not.
The reality is the Civil Service and the Public Sector must change dramatically – the ICT strategy is just a microcosm of the challenge. There is nothing in the ICT strategy that I developed that is not common sense, is not eminently sensible or achievable – but let us be honest it is a small tip of the change agenda and if we cannot deliver this then one must question the delivery of the overall government economic agenda.
It is right for Ministers to think radical and bold – should the civil service be cut by 70%; should policy development be outsourced?; should the current departmental structure be swept away? Should Permanent Secretaries be put on fixed term contracts? And the list goes on.
My view is all these are valid options and whilst we should not jump to solutions until we know what we are trying to achieve it is a bad sign when the civil service gives the impression that they do not want to at least discuss radical transformation options – where the ICT strategy is just one element.
We should not forget that Permanent Secretaries are quick to say that “Ministers run the department” when things go wrong, so Permanent Secretaries must also accept that Ministers can make decision on what departments, exist, what they do and how they do it.
But one word of caution – we do not wish to see the civil service more politicised than it is today – there has to be a balance and Ministers must protect the pseudo independence of the Civil Service in whatever changes it implements but Ministers must not shy away from dramatically changing Whitehall.”
We felt compelled to ask Suffolk if we could publish his comment in full. We have before expressed our view (for example, in ‘What needs to change in UK Government?’) that a radical overhaul of the way Government functions would be necessary for many of the objectives of the UK Government ICT strategy to be achieved.
Suffolk confirms that while Ministers desire such change, civil servants are putting barriers in the way. As Suffolk highlights, this isn’t just about the ICT strategy, there are many valid options open to UK Government that could dramatically change, and one would hope improve, the way the Public Sector functions. Unfortunately bold Ministerial thinking shows little sign of turning into bold actions.