Not quite "us and them"

I think that is fair to say that prior to being elected, and particularly during the election campaign the 'administration' (also known as public servants, officials or 'them') came in for a fair amount of criticism.  A number of councillors from the old council made it sound as if there was a power struggle between the public service and LegCo. That the public service was out to thwart the councillors at every twist and turn.

This has not been the case as I have experienced it since joining LegCo as we seem to have a good working relationship with officials. (I don't really like the term but it is the one that is used most often)

Indeed last week when the fiasco of the asphalt plant was put in the public domain I was very clear when asked that there was not any resistance from the public service to publishing this information once we had requested that a press release be issued.

Like most things it is about building relationships and I know from experience how officious councillors can be from my former life as a public servant. I have had several unpleasant experiences where the main purpose, as I saw it, behind being summoned to a committee meeting was to be humiliated. 

So it was interesting to read a report from the Institute for Government, 'Civil Service Accountability to Parliament'. The report is actually about the role of public servants when called to give evidence at select committees.  We do not have select committees or a ministerial form of government but I found the report very informative and there are lessons for us to learn as councillors.

It would seem that the UK has similar issues and some interviewed in the report recognized the need engage with staff

"So if we don’t speak to the front line staff, we don’t get the full picture, all we’re getting is policy, and 

aspiration and things, but we need real people to be telling us what their real experience is…"

We had an experience recently where we had discussion papers and stakeholder reports but despite some of the front line staff being present at the meeting we did not have their views.  One of my colleagues asked the member of staff for their opinion and though this person at first seemed reluctant to speak, with encouragement this staff member was able to talk openly and this had a significant effect on the discussion.  This is as it should be.

Another point made in this report is that the distinction between policy and operations is not always clear cut.  This was something we discussed in public meetings prior to the election as again members of the old council did seem to struggle with this.

I like the following quote from the report as it introduces the concept of 'joint accountability' which is something that I had not considered before

"In practice, however, it may not be particularly straightforward to draw such a clear-cut line 

between a minister’s responsibilities and an official’s responsibilities. One senior official 

explained: ‘I’m not sure you can divorce policy from delivery... I’m not sure that there’s a point 

where you’d say ‘well, that’s down to the minister, and that’s down to the senior civil servant’, I 

think inevitably you’re bound together in your joint accountability"

As stated before we do not have ministers and the system is not as complex as the UK but joint accountability does break down the 'us and them' mentality.  

Ultimately one would hope that we are all working toward the goal of improving the lives of Saints.  We may have different ideas as to how this should be achieved but if we can maintain a relationship built on trust and joint accountability, or perhaps joint responsibility, then I am sure that we will achieve our goals.