Jun 2009 09

Brown's new cabinet … not much real world experience8

As Brown's new Cabinet settled down to their first meeting this morning, Liam Byrne may have joked that for a board of directors, few of them – himself included – really know much about their portfolios. Andy Burnham, who until recently was in charge of the rag tag department for culture, media and sport, is now responsible for one of the biggest employers in the world, the NHS. Lord Adonis, a former education minister, is now in charge of transport.

Unfortunately for Mr Byrne (the new chief secretary to the treasury), his joke probably fell flat. Not just because it's not funny  – it's more tragic if anything – but rather because few around the Cabinet table even know what a board of directors is supposed to look like. The private sector experience between them is impressively low. Indeed experience of a life outside politics is fairly limited.

Ex-journalists and policy advisers in the main, the Cabinet is not lacking in intellect. But besides Liam Byrne and few others (out of 20 plus Cabinet attending ministers) none of them has any experience of what it's like to run a business in Britain, or even be employed by a regular SME. While management of the departments can be farmed out to civil servants – which in itself is highly problematic, as such officials are not only hidden from public scrutiny, but also unaccountable to them – policy is still being written by people who don't fully appreciate the 'on the ground' implications. Politics comes before knowledge, and policy is often much worse for it.

Not that the shadow cabinet is much better. Nor the House of Commons as whole. As a TPA report explored last year (see here), working knowledge of the private sector is remarkably low among politicians. As we look to build a better politics, one key part of must be to bring into it more people who understand how policy impacts on people beyond focus groups and consultations.   

Related Posts

  • Hardeep Singh

    Shouldn’t surprise anyone the objective here is political survival at the expense of the country. It’s our fault for thinking that these so called appointments are for our sake I must disagree. Modern day ministers are nothing more than Westminster bodyguards to take a bullet for the dear leader and do his bidding without question, at least the mafia have some form honour if this sorry bunch of dictators don’t …. As for Alan “union leading postie” Johnson well what can I say are you serious this is like pouring petrol onto a raging inferno! We need a little less of the union clap-trap please and more of the practical arguments of how to work our way out of this mess. Celeb names and photo friendly smiles don’t cut it with the international bond markets!

  • Steve Robson

    On the other hand, you at the TPA have no experience of anything (possibly apart from private education) and yet you don’t let it stand in your way of being right about everything and advising all and sundry, including Permanent Secretaries, how they could do their job much better.
    Based on your model, knowing nothing is a good thing as long as you are sufficiently arrogant and preferably from a priveleged background.

  • Hardeep Singh

    I think such a response is arrogant Steve, is there any need for this type of mud slinging it’s so very monotone and tiresome. Many at the TPA may or may not have had private education is that such a bad thing, there are members of my family that are from both sides of the fence and no one batters an eyelid, so what…? Could you use that same argument in a job interview why wouldn’t they want the guy with experience? Would you apply for the Heart Surgeon’s job without relevant experience? Experience trumps even education as the latter is nothing more than a starter kit for those without experience. It appears that privilege is something to be sneered at, well that’s your choice and I’m not going to impede you from making those. However there are many who have worked and sacrificed damned hard but shouldn’t be confused with ‘privilege’.
    The TPA don’t claim some exclusive opinion unlike our dear leaders who seem to know what’s best for all of us. The TPA like any organisation, group or individual merely express an opinion and with some vigour which is also fine.

  • Steve Robson

    Actually they express opinions extremely arrogantly, with very little regard to the facts and even less to the truth.
    I know that is because their aim is not to establish truth, but to lower taxes through a smaller public sector irrespective of the consequences. However, I suspect their private educational backgrounds helps their arrogant approach. And actually I just like to point it out because they pretend to represent “ordinary people” when really, like Cameron and the Tories, they represent the elite. if they succeed in their campaign, ordinary people will suffer, while the rich get ever richer (which is why the rich back the TPA).
    Its all very simple really Hardeep, whichever way you look at it. The TPA exists to preserve and promote wealth and privilege.

  • Hardeep Singh

    Okey Dokey Steve my old friend.

  • http://www.taxpayersalliance.org/ Clifford Singer

    I guess the Cabinet just couldn’t afford the really leading private sector talent, so had to give way to Boots:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1191963

  • Steve Robson

    its ok though because he’s only getting £800K pa, whereas these greedy public sector fat cats are taking home three times that amount (admittedly over a 40 year career, but lets not let a minor detail like that spoil a nice public sector bashing comparison)!

  • Paul

    This demonstrates one of the fundamental problems of having career politicians. The only way to solve this is to have term limits as are common in America.