At the start of the seventies the relationship between top civil servants and minsters remained one of fusion but civil servants had the slight upper hand because of their permanence. However it became more common for top civil servants to withdraw from cabinet to allow minsters to discuss political questions. In addition to this ministers started to use special advisers more frequently for advice on policy making.
The influence of senior civil servants was weakened further in 1979 by Margret Thatcher’s who had a distrust of civil servants over past failures and what she believed was an unworkable system. She took an interest in choosing the most senior civil servants. She also begun to make civil servant positions open to everyone which was continued by later governments. Thatcher believed in ‘conviction politics’, this meaning she had no time for the old civil service tradition of deliberation, consultation and trying and adjusting policy to achieve consensus (Foster, C. D. (2000). Instead she wanted things done quickly. From about 1983 most government department would consult outside interest groups first and top civil servants no longer knew most information. Ministers still listened to the advice which civil servants gave them but they where more likely than ever to not follow it. Minsters also felt that civil servants acted to slowly. For example Michael Heseltine a Tory MP at the time believed getting something right did not matter as much as getting something half right quickly and changing it later if need be.
The next steps programme also had a role in reducing top civil servants influence. It wanted to separate steering from the rowing. This meant decision making on policy was to be separated from the implementation and administration of policy. It resulted in the formation of executive agencies headed by a chief executive. These agencies where placed responsible for delivery of targets and where more business like.(Jones, B. et al. (2007). p.538-540) As a result the size of the civil service fell by between 20-25% this resulted in a dilution in the quality of information they provided and many expert sources of information where lost. This caused civil servants to be less useful than they once where and as well as this junior and senior civil servants where encouraged to send their advice straight to ministers unchallenged by other civil servants (Foster, C. D. (2000). This meant minsters where often handed information which was wrong and the reputation of the civil service was brought into question. Minster where also increasingly looking for civil servants to implement policy quickly rather than to offer advice.
At the same time of the implementation of the next steps programme minsters where increasingly busy with the media, making speeches to outside bodies and increasingly their constituencies, which they where forced to spend more time on – over 35 hours a week in many cases (Budge, I. et al. (2007). This meant they had less time to spend in their departments and could not spend as much time with senior civil servants. Policy was made with less and less consultation between ministers and officials, increasingly there was more separation than fusion
Under the Blair government senior civil servants influence was decreased further, there was a large increase of special advisers Under Major’s government there was around 45 special advisers however this increased to over 75 during Blair’s time in office. There are two types special adviser, policy experts who have specialised knowledge of a subject e.g. a scientist and political advisers who offer general political tactics, strategy and media handling for ministers (Jones, B. et al. (2007). p.518) Special advisers give the government a greater range of advice and more freedom of action over top senior civil servants. Thus senior civil servants are consulted less and have less influence in policy making.
Another change which has reduced the concern about the influence of top civil servants in the policy making process is the growth of task forces, ad hoc advisory groups and review bodies. Members of the bodies are usually people in public, business and professional life, who are appointed for their specialist knowledge (Budge, I. et al. (2007) p.136). Such groups can ignore traditional civil servants approach to problems in making policy by getting outside information to search for new solutions to problems. Some say these groups undermine the policy advice role of civil servants and that it is difficult to keep track of accountability.
Although there has been a reduction in the influence which top civil servant have, there are new concerns over the influence which special advisers have in the policy making process. They are typically fresh, talented graduates who are appointed by the Prime Minister or other members of the government. Their loyalty is with the minister which the work for and this allows them to get close and have an increasing amount of influence (Jones, B. et al. (2007) p.518). Unlike top civil servants they are not always concerned about facts and instead their number one priority is sometimes party and minister image. This can have an effect on the reliability of information which the public receives, for example Alistair Campbell and the sexing up of the ‘Arms in Iraq’ document. However Gordon brown has already said that no special adviser will be able to overrule civil servants, which in theory should restore reliability.
In conclusion I believe there is less concern about the influence that top civil servants have in the policy making process. This is due to reduction in size, new political style of getting things done quickly, minsters being busy and the loss of fusion, and the increase in use of special advisers and outside bodies. Although the concern about the influence of top civil servants has all but vanished there is now growing concern over the influence which special advisers have in the policy making process. It will be interesting to see if special advisers continue to be consulted more often and before top senior servants with regards to policy.
.
Bibliography:
Budge, I. et al. (2007). The New British Politics (4th ed.) UK: Longman
Foster, C. D. (2000). The Civil Service Under Stress: The Fall in Civil Service Power and Authority. Blackwell Publishers. Date viewed 01/10/07 <>
Jones, B. et al. (2007). Politics UK (6th ed.). Essex, UK: Pearson Education Limited.
