Opinion: Radical Reform of the Public Sector – John Gelmini

English: brief diagram comparing the role of c...

English: brief diagram comparing the role of civil servants in the UK and US constitutions. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Dr Alf is right in his response to the Economist lead article , and yes, civil servants need to be motivated and reformed.

However, if one looks at the way Government operates in the UK, for example, one can see that as compared with other countries, the UK is very inefficient and that value per taxpayer pound is one-third of Singaporean levels.

Since 1885, the height of British Imperial power, the number of civil servants has grown from 15,000 to the largest employer by far in Britain.

The NHS is the largest employer in Europe, yet produces the worst health outcomes and has the lowest cancer survival rates,the worst heart attack survival rates and the lowest lifespan.

UK woman are walking barrage balloons, the fattest woman in Western Europe; dementia is set to explode as is diabetes.

Through all of this, the Department of Health is content to issue guidance about the hot weather, along the lines of “Drink lots of water”, “Wear light, loose-fitting clothing and open windows”.

The people responsible for this gratuitous nonsense are civil servants and their political masters.

Look at defense, where we have a Tri Forces of 83,000 people, just 17 escort vessels for our ships, no coastal protection vessel, aircraft carriers without aircraft.

As an island, not-self sufficient in food and with 3% spare generating capacity and needing to export to survive, it does not take a genius to see that this puts us in danger and is strategically foolhardy.

What the MOD civil servants actually do?

In my lifetime, they have never got a single piece of procurement right, nor completed a single project on time nor to budget. This despite Prince 2 project tolerances being 6% to 8%.

The Home Office is almost as dysfunctional in that it allows 250,000 illegal immigrants to enter the country each year and presides over a system where 19 million more NI numbers than there are people in the workforce, exist. These numbers can allegedly and are being bought and sold in down market pubs, used by people to gain fake identities, claim benefits and steal money from taxpayers and financial institutions.

The response of successive Government Ministers and civil service Mandarins is to do nothing.
Frank Field brought in by Tony Blair to “think the unthinkable”, suggested the system be scrapped and was sacked for his trouble.

Looking at local Government, things are worse.

We have county councils, unitary authorities, mid county councils, metropolitan borough councils,London Borough Councils and city councils. Then below the county councils, we have districts and boroughs.
In addition, we have duplication via outsourced services but with no reduction in the number of paid for service directors.

Police and Fire commands are based on county councils and both police and fire have separate call/dispatching centres as does the ambulance service and county councils, unitary authorities and some district councils.

Purchasing by and large is conducted separately as well resulting in more poor value for money.

Adult Social care resulting from poor public health education, sedentary lifestyles and a laissez-faire approach to potential benefit recipients has resulted in a situation where 55% of county council and unitary authority budgets are consumed by a vociferous minority of usually old but always demanding Adult Social Care recipients.

County Councils get half their money from the taxpayer through central government but the obvious solution of merging Adult Social Care into the NHS, early prevention and a tougher approach to health including variable tax on foods is not applied.

This too can be laid at the feet of Ministers and civil servants.


Dr Alf’s processes cannot be faulted but as a small country with too many people and too many civil servants we need to tackle both structure and numbers taking care to retain bright people who get it and removing those who don’t, the dishonest, the mendacious, the complacent, the stupid, the greedy and the incompetent.

To my mind, that means reducing overall civil service numbers to 15,000, reducing councils to 15 for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, abolishing districts and boroughs and outsourcing all the services that districts and boroughs used to perform.

Police and Fire commands need to be reduced to 15 for the whole country and the multiplicity of call centres, dispatching centres and ambulance dispatching operations reduced to 4 large shared service centres with backup provision.

Purchasing should be centralised but provision split between a rotating panel of providers and tenderers under rigorous arrangements.

Public sector trades unions should be de-recognised and all staff and civil servants sackable for poor performance.

The NHS which is beyond reform should be abolished and replaced with a German/French type system,people should be made personally responsible for their own health with variable taxes on foods applied immediately.

John Gelmini

Turkey’s Premier Tries to Keep Power, as President – NYTimes.com

Territorial changes of the Ottoman Empire

Territorial changes of the Ottoman Empire (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is an outstanding, MUST-READ article from the New York Times published just ahead of today’s presidential election in Turkey. Check it out!

via Turkey’s Premier Tries to Keep Power, as President – NYTimes.com.

After reading the NYT article, I did some further research and was particularly impressed with the scope of the NYT article. Many argue that under the leadership of Prime Minister, Erdogan (now seeking the presidency) Turkey has shifted towards a policy of Neo-Ottomanism. Neo Ottomanism is a political ideology promoting greater political engagement of the modern Republic of Turkey  within regions formerly under the rule of the Ottoman Empire. This is a departure from previous westward policy towards Europe. The previous Ottoman Empire included the Balkans, the Middle East, most of North Africa and the Caucasus. Many in the West see Turkey’s foreign policy as having drifted from the West towards the Middle East and Asia.

Traditionally, Turkey has been a strategic partner for the US, originating from the common desire to limit the power of the former USSR. Turkey is still an important partner in NATA with the second largest army after the US. But in recent times, Turkey has strongly diverged from US foreign policy – most particularly in relation to Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Israel. The NYT article alludes to loose border controls contributing to the development of ISIS.

It looks like Mr. Erdogan will try to create an executive presidency, similar to Mr. Putin’s Russia. With Israel and Cyprus developing offshore oil and gas fields, plus political risks in the Middle East, relations with Turkey will continue to be challenging.

Let me turn this to an open question:

How could Turkey’s executive presidency, with a shift to Neo-Ottomanism impact global geo-politics?

Any thoughts?