Mmmm….. we can ask similar questions of the skill development of members of the “expert civil service”an administrative service , a huge bureaucratic function.
As far as I know very clever people are recruited straight from University and progress their career development within the Civil Service.
It is not clear to me how this would help develop the wider experience, insight and organisational skills that most of us would recognise & be impressed by.
Should Britain continue to rely primarily political experience and academic study as preparation for high office, or should future ministers undergo structured preparation for the executive responsibilities they may one day assume?
Every profession has a route to competence.
Engineers train before designing bridges.
Doctors train before treating patients.
Military officers train before commanding troops.
Airline pilots train before carrying passengers.
Yet Britain entrusts leadership of one of the most complex organisations in the World - the State - to people whose primary qualification is that they are accepted by their local, largely amateur, councillors.
Lots of people would agree with you. But it is difficult to see a way around that in a democracy where ultimately leaders are chosen in an election not appointed for their skills. That's why we try to surround ministers with an expert civil service. It can work but in practice doesn't always...
+5
Matt Goodwin recently argued that the UK government has spent the last 30 years presiding over "managed decline," chaos, and cultural fragmentation.
What else could you expect?
“Expert Civil Service”…… in any statistical population less than 20% will be expert.
Obviously 50% will be average and of those 50% will be totally inadequate.
Mmmm….. we can ask similar questions of the skill development of members of the “expert civil service”an administrative service , a huge bureaucratic function.
As far as I know very clever people are recruited straight from University and progress their career development within the Civil Service.
It is not clear to me how this would help develop the wider experience, insight and organisational skills that most of us would recognise & be impressed by.
Should Britain continue to rely primarily political experience and academic study as preparation for high office, or should future ministers undergo structured preparation for the executive responsibilities they may one day assume?
Every profession has a route to competence.
Engineers train before designing bridges.
Doctors train before treating patients.
Military officers train before commanding troops.
Airline pilots train before carrying passengers.
Yet Britain entrusts leadership of one of the most complex organisations in the World - the State - to people whose primary qualification is that they are accepted by their local, largely amateur, councillors.
Lots of people would agree with you. But it is difficult to see a way around that in a democracy where ultimately leaders are chosen in an election not appointed for their skills. That's why we try to surround ministers with an expert civil service. It can work but in practice doesn't always...
+5
Matt Goodwin recently argued that the UK government has spent the last 30 years presiding over "managed decline," chaos, and cultural fragmentation.
What else could you expect?