Thread by @jillongovt

Some thoughts on the Cameron/Greensill/Crothers affair.. we have focussed a lot on ministers and civil servants. The rules clearly need tightening up - but at least there is a semblance of rules - but there is a grey area.

One of the Maude/Crothers reforms of the Cabinet Office was to bring in a lot of business expertise.. give them desks in govt -- and a role advising on managing contracts with strategic suppliers

Here's the most recent (?) list of the current "Crown Representatives" helping out the crown commercial service assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…

and here is a very bouncy announcement of the appointments back in 2014 including - er - Lex Greensill gov.uk/government/new… - an appointee of - er - Bill Crothers

This was all part of the Maude initiative to improve the quality of public procurement (he also commissioned a review of efficiency from - er - Sir Philip Green - can't win them all) gov.uk/government/pub…

Another Maude reform was to introduce beefed up "departmental boards" with - guess what - a lot of business people on boards to help ministers run their departments better gov.uk/government/col…

John Browne was the first "lead non-exec" (and indeed probably helped bring in a lot of ex-BPers into govt inc peopel like John Manzoni - who ran the Major Projects Authority and then was the Cab office perm sec who signed off Crothers double hatting (afaik)

and here is the current list of non-execs on the Cabinet Office board (actually assume Simone Finn has probably stepped down - but she is still on the website) gov.uk/government/new…

of course there are huge advantages in government being able to get commercial nous into govt.. there are def things govt has done better with a smarter approach as @AlexGAThomas has pointed out..

but in extremis departmental non-execs can also recommend to the Secretary of State that the permanent secretary has to go assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…

side thought.. maybe this should work both ways, and they should be used be able to advise the PM that a Secretary of State or a junior minister is not up to it and should go....

This is the role that Nigel Boardman of independent review fame plays... but his reappointment will be down to Kwasi Kwarteng....

BUT -- and very big but.. these appointments don't seem to fit anywhere in our systems.. no sign of regulation. It is possible to apply to be on a dept baord - but these are not regulated by the Commissioner for Public Appointments

and then we get into the 2020 ad hoc appointments.. Harding, Bingham etc. I have a friend I prepared earlier. Clearly a need to shortcut the normal recruitment process. But needs safeguards too.

of course everyone should adhere to the Nolan principles. but is that tested objectively in any interview process? or are these just ministerial chums.

So -- upsum. The first wave of the drive to bring in commercial experience involved formal recruitment into public appointments/ civil service roles. All regulated and peopel's obligations on their new roles made clear.

very much an end career but of giving back in most cases - in some a refuge from business failure. But in general a useful influx of talent (though could have been better managed).

Under Maude it seems to have become an un (or at least) underregulated Wild West - not even of revolving doors.. Double/treble/multiple hats abound. Now we have proliferation of ad hoc appointees.

on what terms are they appointed? under what rules -- here are the rather flimsy safeguards on board conflicts - talk about marking your own homework

In the words of Butch Cassidy (or was it the Sundance Kid) who are those guys? and what system do we need to ensure that these appointments deliver public benefit not private advantage.

I think we should be told..................