Minister ‘reversed flexible work support’

Unions have accused United Kingdom Minister for Efficiency, Jacob Rees-Mogg of chasing cheap headlines with his push for Public Servants to return to the office, pointing out he had previously supported flexible working as part of efforts to minimise the need for office space.

Head of the FDA union, Dave Penman said Mr Rees-Mogg had written in support of the 2018 Estate Strategy, which set out plans to reduce the size of the Government estate to free up public land for housing, including by promoting "smarter working" and "working in ways that minimise our need for office space".

Mr Penman also referenced a 2019 essay co-written by Mr Rees-Mogg that encouraged the Government to accelerate the plans and appoint a senior Cabinet Minister responsible for identifying and releasing public land for housing.

This is in stark contrast to Mr Rees-Mogg's recent efforts to push Public Servants to return to the office.

Mr Penman said the contrast proved "just how poorly thought through his comments on hybrid working are".

He said it demonstrated the Cabinet Minister had "no idea how modern workplaces operate and is basing his decisions on blind ideology instead of reality".

Meanwhile a Department for Education order for workers to spend 80 per cent of their time in the office has led to chaos.

The Department has twice as many staff as desks, as even before the pandemic about 60-to-70 per cent of staff had worked flexibly.

Officials working in cramped corridors or sharing desks have led to protests from unions to Secretary of Education, Nadhim Zahawi (pictured), who last month ordered an end to home-working after pressure from Mr Rees-Mogg.

Public Servants said the first week of the new policy had resulted in staff milling around trying to find space with some trying to work amid diners in the canteen.

One described the situation as like “a tube station in rush hour”.

More Public Service News at World PS News | PS News

Newsrooms reopen on university campuses

A United Kingdom publisher has reached a deal with three universities that will see its newspapers re-open newsrooms in the areas they serve.

In a move that might be a model for similar partnerships in Britain and internationally, journalists on the Leicester Mercury, Lincolnshire Echo and the Teesside Gazette will work from offices provided on campus by the University of Leicester, the University of Lincoln and Teesside University respectively.

The universities all run degree courses for trainee journalists, and in return for the accommodation senior editors from the publisher, Reach plc. will provide a program of lectures, job-shadowing and mentoring opportunities for the students.

This reverses a trend where Reach has been closing many of its offices in a cost-saving move, planning to run its nationwide operations from just 15 major centres and leaving most of its regional titles without bases in the areas they serve.

Both partners are enthusiastic about the deal. Leicester, Coventry and Northamptonshire Editor for Reach, Adam Moss, said there were huge mutual benefits.

“We’re really looking forward to getting to know all the students on the journalism course, doing some guest lectures and giving them some real-life vocational experience of real-life journalism to go alongside their academic course,” Mr Moss said.

Associate Dean for Learning and Teaching in Teesside University’s School of Arts and Creative Industries, Clare Fletcher, said the move was an extension of a long-standing, collaborative relationship with Reach.

“It is fantastic to welcome reporters from Teesside Live to campus and we look forward to seeing how this developing partnership will progress moving forward,” Professor Fletcher (pictured) said.

As someone who entered journalism towards the end of the golden age of newspapers, I have also been witness to their decline, to the point where all the titles I have worked for over more than 40 years have either disappeared or are in much-reduced circumstances.

Mistakes were made at the dawn of the internet era and those of us who love the crafting of words have had to live with them. However, creative thinking such as that outlined above may help keep the production of responsible journalism alive, possibly even reversing its decline.

Canadian officers ‘afraid to tell hard truths’

A new report has revealed that Canada’s Public Service leaders have a problem telling the truth to their political bosses.

The report, Top of Mind, says leading bureaucrats feel ill-equipped to gather evidence for policy advice, especially in a world where facts are distorted and drowned out by disinformation, polarisation and hyper-partisan politics.

To make matters worse, they appear afraid to tell their political masters the hard truths when they do find them.

Getting back to the basics in policy-making and execution are among the top worries that senior bureaucrats raised in the Top of Mind study into the state of the Public Service in Canada.

Launched in the middle of the pandemic, the study was aimed at understanding the challenges executives faced when doing their jobs.

It was based on interviews with 42 senior leaders from all levels of Government and a survey of 2,355 Public Servants in the same Departments and Agencies.

The big worries, which many felt were accelerated by the pandemic, included falling trust in Government, the decline in sharing ‘fearless advice’, and a hollowing out of policy capacity.

Also of concern was a post-pandemic economic reckoning, conflicts between different levels of Government, and the need for Public Service reform.

Stephen Van Dine, of the Institute of the Institute of Government, one of the think tanks involved in producing the report, said the responses painted a picture of a bureaucracy that was too isolated from Canadians and not independent enough from politics.

“Over the years, rules restricting travel and hospitality expenses put a damper on Public Servants’ ability to meet with Provincial counterparts, industry representatives and civil society,” Mr Van Dine said.

“They aren’t networking, developing contacts outside of Government, or educating Canadians about the factors at play in policy-making.”

He said this had isolated the Public Service and given the outside world the only door into Government through the Prime Minister’s Office or a Minister’s office.

More Public Service News at World PS News | PS News

Stalled Ukraine invasion a lesson for Beijing

The Russia-Ukraine War has produced a plethora of opinion on what it might mean for China’s long-standing ambition to reunite Taiwan with the motherland – by force if necessary.

There were those who believed that with Taiwan’s supporters distracted by the unfolding European crises, now might be an ideal time for Beijing to launch an invasion. Others that the failure of Russia to gain a quick victory against a supposedly much weaker opponent, would give China pause.

Nearly three months into Russia’s ‘Special Military Operation’ China has not shown its hand. Nevertheless, China watcher Neraj Singh Manhas believes the fact that no Western nation has intervened directly to help Ukraine might be an encouragement for Beijing. 

Manhas notes that China has grown its military to the point where it is capable of projecting and fighting wars beyond its borders and that its defence spending is now the world’s second largest (though still well behind that of the United States).

“China is also expanding its military infrastructure in the South China Sea and Tibet, indicating a more aggressive posture,” he says.

However, there are other lessons to be taken from Russia’s military adventure, which I am sure are exercising minds at the highest level in Beijing.

For years both Russia and China have gloried over displays of military might at their various celebrations of important anniversaries. We have become used to endless ranks of soldiers marching in perfect step; of sinister parades of tanks, missiles and other weapons of mass destruction.

However, this year’s Victory Day (marking the end of World War II) in Moscow, was not quite so impressive, largely because so many Russian troops were occupied in the trenches of the Donbas, while much of its military machinery was rusting on roads around Kyiv.

While not yet quite a Vietnam-type quagmire, Putin’s original boast of being “in Kyiv in 72 hours” has definitely come back to bite him.

I believe the Russian leader has been left with two choices – put his nation on a total war footing; or seek some form of compromise, which at best, would return the situation to what it was before his February invasion.

Either one would be an admission that his original aim of sweeping all before him in a grand revival of the Russian Empire, was nothing more than an ageing leader’s pipe dream.

Taking all this into consideration, China’s military planners can see parallels. Just as Russia was able to get away with its aggression in Georgia, meddling in Syria and the annexation of Crimea, China has managed to assert itself in Tibet, bully India along its borders and establish island bases in the South China Sea, all with minimum interference from the West.

However, just as Ukraine has been a step too far for Moscow, so could Taiwan be for China. It involves a sea-born invasion across the 150-kilometre Taiwan Strait to meet an opponent that is likely to be just as determined to resist as the Ukrainians have proved.

While the West’s response is unlikely to be as unified as it has been over Ukraine, there is little doubt that at least the US would be ready with supplies of military hardware and other assistance.

In addition, while China’s forces look impressive on the parade ground. They have not fought a major war in more than 40 years.

On a broader issue, Ukraine is proving that massive World War II-style movements of men and machinery to achieve strategic objectives may have had its day. Whatever the outcome of this war, Russia will emerge with its reputation and standing in the world severely reduced. 

History may look at it as the last gasp of a failing world power – and that is one path that China does not want to tread.

 

Officials ‘tried to derail trade deal’

A former Australian diplomat has accused United Kingdom Public Servants of resisting trade negotiations with Australia because of their “anti-Brexit stance”.

George Brandis, who left his role as High Commissioner to the UK last month, said officials in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and other Departments did everything they could to place roadblocks to the deal.

He said the default position from Public Servants during the UK-Australian trade negotiations was “horror at Brexit”.

Mr Brandis described this as “reluctance bordering on hostility” in some Departments — most notably the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, which is responsible for British farming.

“It was kind of like a cringe or a crouch, recoiling and willing it not to happen. Or being in denial that it was happening,” Mr Brandis said in a magazine interview.

A Government spokesperson responded: “Civil Servants deliver Government policy with honesty, integrity, objectivity and impartiality, and we are continuing to maximise the opportunities of leaving the European Union through a new Brexit Freedoms Bill.”

Trade negotiations between the UK and Australia began in June 2020 amid a reported Cabinet dispute over the impact tariff-free imports of Australian lamb and beef would have on British farming.

Secretary for the Environment, George Eustice and then-Secretary for Trade, Liz Truss were said to be locked in an “absolutely ferocious” row a month before negotiations began over the farming concerns.

Then-Minister for the Cabinet Office, Michael Gove and Secretary for Business,  Kwasi Kwarteng reportedly backed Mr Eustice and then-Minister for Brexit, David Frost was on Ms Truss’s side.

The two countries agreed a deal in December, including tariff-free beef and lamb, which the Government said would boost trade between the two countries by £10.4 billion ($A18.4 billion)

Mr Brandis, who was High Commissioner to the UK throughout the talks, said he had to form an alliance with Ms Truss, who had “the political will… to drive and cut through the bureaucratic and institutional inertia and reluctance”.

He said it was a case of fighting with a “large element of the Whitehall establishment”.

More Public Service News at World PS News | PS News

Department fears flexitime plan

Ireland’s Department of Public Expenditure and Reform says a proposal for a pilot program of flexitime for Public Servants could have “serious implications for delivery of public services”.

The Department is in dispute with the Civil Service Staff Panel on the matter, which is currently being considered by the Civil Service Arbitration Board.

The disagreement centres on the structure for pilot programs for flexitime accrual as part of the new blended working framework.

Flexitime has been introduced as a means to allow office-based staff to stagger their start or finish times to suit their travel or home arrangements.

The Department put forward proposals to test out four different approaches for how flexitime could work when some workers are doing a mixture.

However, the Staff Panel said that while it was willing to consider a pilot, it could not agree to an “inconsistent” approach across the bureaucracy.

“If one organisation could introduce full flexitime and flexi accrual for all its staff, then there is no cogent operational reason why others couldn’t,” the Staff Panel has stated.

The Staff Panel said it had been proven that staff could be trusted to work remotely and productively during the pandemic.

“Access to flexi accrual for blended workers will not change this, nor is there evidence to support such a thesis,” the Staff Panel said in a statement.

“We are of the view that that the accrual of flexi leave would not result in operational problems or dilute necessary office attendance."

However, the Department maintained there was an absence of “real-world experience” for how flexitime accrual might impact operations when there was a mixture of staff working at home and in the office.

It said there were concerns that the introduction of flexitime accrual for blended workers “may create significant difficulty in rostering/scheduling staff cover in areas where a certain level of physical attendance on site is required”.

“Blended working alongside flexi accrual is a whole new way of working, and management need to be absolutely assured that, if it is to be deployed, it works for all stakeholders and not just employees,” the Department said.  

More Public Service news - World PS News | PS News

Minister demands pre-pandemic working

The United Kingdom’s Minister for Government Efficiency, Jacob Rees-Mogg has demanded that Public Servants be ordered to stop working from home so that offices can be restored to "full capacity" following the end of COVID-19 restrictions in England.

In a letter, to fellow Ministers, Mr Rees-Mogg (pictured) made it clear he was not in favour of the large-scale hybrid working experiments adopted in other countries and wanted to the Public Service to revert to pre-pandemic working.

He said in his letter that an average of 44 per cent of Public Servants were working from their Department’s offices on any given day.

“This number must increase to realise the benefits of face-to-face, collaborative working and the wider benefits for the economy,” the letter stated.

However, it is common for Departments not to have space for all of their employees to work in the office at once, and many had some hybrid working arrangements in place before the pandemic.

Unions have objected to Mr Rees-Mogg’s comments, with General Secretary of the FDA, Dave Penman saying they demonstrated the Minister was “less interested in productivity or delivery than in spending time counting Civil Servants in and out of buildings”.

Mr Rees-Mogg is one of several high-profile MPs who have called for an end to working from home.

Chair of the 1922 Committee of Conservative MPs, Sir Graham Brady said it was “time for the managers of the Civil Service to get a grip and do their jobs” by forcing staff to return to the office in greater numbers.

"It is simply unacceptable for so many of our Public Servants to continue sitting at home,” Sir Graham said.

“Working from your garden shed or spare room is simply harder. Productivity is reduced. Tasks take longer and work is often delivered when it suits the employee, not when the customer needs it.”

More Public Service News at World PS News | PS News