Civil Service in the news

Protecting Civil Service values

Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill - the second Public Administration Select Committee evidence session.

The second evidence session on the Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill was held on 29 April by the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC). Ed Miliband, Minister for the Cabinet Office, and Sir Gus O'Donnell, Cabinet Secretary, were up in front of the Committee to answer questions on the Bill and the role and values of the Civil Service. Then Michael Wills, Minister of State, answered questions on the 'prerogative powers' of government in relation to war decisions and on whether notions of Britishness should be enshrined in a 'Bill of Rights'.

The Constitutional Renewal Bill is the first step of a wider project of constitutional reform and seeks to put the Civil Service on a statutory footing, increase the powers of parliament to hold government to account and make clear the relationship between citizens, parliament and government.

During questioning by the Committee, both Ed Miliband and Sir Gus O'Donnell agreed that there should be a Civil Service bill, as long its provisions were simple and value driven. Ed Miliband said that, 'It is most important that the Bill doesn't preserve the Civil Service in aspic' as this would stunt its ability to adapt and evolve with the times.

Sir Gus O'Donnell told the Committee that he agreed with the values outlined in the Northcote-Trevelyan report of 1854, which recommended an independent apolitical Civil Service that made appointments on merit. 'All the top 200 roles are now through open competition. It's regulated under our standard employment methods. We're particularly doing well in terms of adversity groups in comparison to the private sector, especially in relation to women.'

On the question of whether MPs should be accountable to the bill too, neither Ed nor Sir Gus was in favour. Ed said, 'MPs should be held accountable to parliament, not the courts.' Gus said, 'I came to this as Head of the Civil Service and see the Bill as about what the Civil Service should do. There's a ministerial code for what ministers should do.'

The issue of special advisors, discussed at some length in the previous session, was brought up again. The Committee were concerned that not mentioning of the role of special advisors and specifying a cap on their numbers in the Bill could negatively impact the work of the Civil Service, allowing ministers to extend the scope of special advisors and populate key roles with them.

However, neither Gus nor Ed would be pushed on putting a cap on their numbers. Ed believed that it was 'very unlikely to happen' that special advisors would colonise the Civil Service. Gus felt that, with half a million civil servants and 4,000 senior civil servants, there was a disproportionate amount of concern about the 70-80 special advisors. He saw that, rather than being a cause for concern, political advisors had an important role to play, so that the Civil Service aren't asked to 'fill that vacuum' and advise ministers on policy.