Politicians and subject matter...

[slightlyoldgit]

Off the back of Sajid being made Health Secretary - 20 ish years at Deutsche bank etc.

How can this really work - why is the Heath Secretary position not requiring a background in Health Care, how can we really accept a Chancellor that has not been a successful CFO/CEO, secretary of Education having at least been a teacher etc etc etc.

How the hell did we get to the point where our leaders are just "anointed" and this is not a red and blue thing so sod off with your tie colour.

I am a Cx Technology person and I have a very good track record, I would never be even considered for a CFO or CRO or CMO but in politics this just seems to get lost.

Why?

[Johnnytheboy]

Unelected technocracies don't generally end well.

[p4cks]

Presumably they don't make many decisions of their own, so effectively they just become a spokesperson

[slightlyoldgit]

p4cks said:

Presumably they don't make many decisions of their own, so effectively they just become a spokesperson

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

[p4cks]

slightlyoldgit said:

p4cks said:

Presumably they don't make many decisions of their own, so effectively they just become a spokesperson

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

Absolutely not, I think it's an awful idea but I don't run the country so can't make the decisions.

In comparison, MH flip flopped departments in the government before finding himself as Health Secretary having done a couple of years as Secretary of State of Health and Social Care. Prior to that he was Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport and before that in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills as the Minister of State for Skills and Enterprise.

An SME in health, he was not.

[Phud]

give your challengers a job where success is not really possible and remove him from the game

[slightlyoldgit]

p4cks said:

slightlyoldgit said:

p4cks said:

Presumably they don't make many decisions of their own, so effectively they just become a spokesperson

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

Absolutely not, I think it's an awful idea but I don't run the country so can't make the decisions.

In comparison, MH flip flopped departments in the government before finding himself as Health Secretary having done a couple of years as Secretary of State of Health and Social Care. Prior to that he was Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport and before that in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills as the Minister of State for Skills and Enterprise.

An SME in health, he was not.

But you have to think that if you are someone made accountable and responsible for something - then some experience in that area is required no?

I mean in the "real world" that is how it works.

[ninja-lewis]

slightlyoldgit said:

p4cks said:

Presumably they don't make many decisions of their own, so effectively they just become a spokesperson

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

The CEO of a government department (Accounting Officer in civil service terminology) is the Permanent Secretary. Ministers are chairman of the board in a sense and are there to do the politics. The skillset needed isn't Subject Matter Experts but the ability to oversee the department and align it with Parliament.

[slightlyoldgit]

ninja-lewis said:

slightlyoldgit said:

p4cks said:

Presumably they don't make many decisions of their own, so effectively they just become a spokesperson

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

The CEO of a government department (Accounting Officer in civil service terminology) is the Permanent Secretary. Ministers are chairman of the board in a sense and are there to do the politics. The skillset needed isn't Subject Matter Experts but the ability to oversee the department and align it with Parliament.

Thank you Sir Humphrey (need to be of a certain age) you have just described what is wrong with the whole process today.

[2xChevrons]

slightlyoldgit said:

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

But the roles and responsibilities of a business' CFO and the Chancellor of the Exchequer are very different. The Chancellor (like all departmental ministers) is really more of a project manager, responsible for enacting government policy - policies which will have been thought up by think tanks and party policy wonks, and which will be brought to reality by civil servants.

Their job is to represent the department and its activities to parliament and the public and take broad top-level decisions from options and advice provided by party and civil service advisors. They don't need to be subject matter experts and there are lots of good arguments that in fact the very last thing the NHS (for example) needs is a doctor or a hospital manager behind the big desk in Whitehall.

Across the various jobs I've had over the years I've had managers who have specific field expertise and those which came from 'outside'. There was no correlation between expertise and effectiveness - good leaders can absorb information and listen to those with expertise. Bad leaders are bad leaders, regardless of how expert they are in the field.

[slightlyoldgit]

2xChevrons said:

slightlyoldgit said:

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

But the roles and responsibilities of a business' CFO and the Chancellor of the Exchequer are very different. The Chancellor (like all departmental ministers) is really more of a project manager, responsible for enacting government policy - policies which will have been thought up by think tanks and party policy wonks, and which will be brought to reality by civil servants.

Their job is to represent the department and its activities to parliament and the public and take broad top-level decisions from options and advice provided by party and civil service advisors. They don't need to be subject matter experts and there are lots of good arguments that in fact the very last thing the NHS (for example) needs is a doctor or a hospital manager behind the big desk in Whitehall.

Across the various jobs I've had over the years I've had managers who have specific field expertise and those which came from 'outside'. There was no correlation between expertise and effectiveness - good leaders can absorb information and listen to those with expertise. Bad leaders are bad leaders, regardless of how expert they are in the field.

I do not disagree for the most part.

But do you want a CFO that does not understand a balance sheet or a CMO that does not know what a go to market strategy is?

We have dumbed it down and we accept less than we deserve.

Our Chancellor should be someone like Rishi, Heath needs to be run by a Dr and Education needs a teacher and Home Secretary a PC-.Chief Constable Police Office, Defence needs to be someone that has 2 decades at least in the UK military.

It isn't hard - these people exist.

[p4cks]

slightlyoldgit said:

p4cks said:

slightlyoldgit said:

p4cks said:

Presumably they don't make many decisions of their own, so effectively they just become a spokesperson

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

Absolutely not, I think it's an awful idea but I don't run the country so can't make the decisions.

In comparison, MH flip flopped departments in the government before finding himself as Health Secretary having done a couple of years as Secretary of State of Health and Social Care. Prior to that he was Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport and before that in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills as the Minister of State for Skills and Enterprise.

An SME in health, he was not.

But you have to think that if you are someone made accountable and responsible for something - then some experience in that area is required no?

I mean in the "real world" that is how it works.

Slightlyold git, we are not disagreeing in any way. In fact I whole-heartedly agree with the sentiment in your opening post.

All I was elluding to was that maybe government works differently than other sectors which require you to have the skills, knowledge and experience which results in you being considered an SME in that area resulting in you being capable of doing a job.

[Ian Geary]

slightlyoldgit said:

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

Splutter

In local government (some multi billion turnover, some a few million) the CFO must by law be a qualified accountant.

Seems sensible, and I'd be surprised if this was different in central government. I've worked with some chief execs and Members who are fiends for financial details, but others who are, er, not really numbers people.

So, onto the question. What is the secretary of state there to do?

Tell the doctors how they should be making people better? And know how many times a day you should take xyz medicine?

No.

He's there to lead, shape policy, and be the bridge between a huge executive branch of government, and parliamentary accountability.


He needs to understand the brief definitely, but the civil servants and officers do the heavy lifting. Elected leaders and paid officers trying to occupy the same space is dangerous..been there, done that: didn't work.


And the next inevitable question is: what is the point of government ministers then?

What do they do, other than carry out the policies from number 10 and the manifesto?

(Apart from provide numerous examples of them not being fit to hold public office of course)

[glazbagun]

I think the clue is in the name Minister. Their job is to report to a higher power and do what was needed by government. Government is about wielding power and ruling more than it is dilligently managing things with competence.

So you have machine politicians like Henry Dundas who were great at keeping government in power but rubbish at their formal role and some who were great at their role but rubbish at staying in power.

[Otispunkmeyer]

ninja-lewis said:

slightlyoldgit said:

p4cks said:

Presumably they don't make many decisions of their own, so effectively they just become a spokesperson

I don't know where you work - but do you think that is a good idea.

Your CFO is all about the marketing and not a qualified accountant...

The CEO of a government department (Accounting Officer in civil service terminology) is the Permanent Secretary. Ministers are chairman of the board in a sense and are there to do the politics. The skillset needed isn't Subject Matter Experts but the ability to oversee the department and align it with Parliament.

This makes sense to some extent. But at the end of the day I think you need to have some understanding of what your experts are telling you. You don't need to be expert yourself, but you need to know something so that you can at least fend off being hoodwinked.

I think some of this has definitely happened with covid and the restrictions. They've not known enough themselves to really question properly what they're being told.