Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Jacob]

Nottingham is very important to the miniatures wargaming community.

Definitely. So many good things have come out of Nottingham.

[The Brain]

Are there descendants of Abnormal warlords in the UK?

[Sheilbh]

Are there descendants of Abnormal warlords in the UK?

That is the royal family

[Josquius]

I maintain (sadly) confident that the Japan example will prove relevant to the UK and that a shortage of workers will not lead to wage increases.

As much as the brexiters said it was simple supply and demand and getting rid of free movement would boost wages there was very little data showing much of a relation between the two and the result is unlikely to be so simply reached.

Wage increases from a shortage of workers in big employing low skilled fields like bar work, without government interference, will be a very slow and ponderous process if it ever comes at all.

More a problem for spoons I would imagine is the messed up universities meaning their usual source of quick turn over employees isn't where it usually is.

[Sheilbh]

Incidentally I am once again a Royalist for as long as we get extra bank holidays
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/02/queens-platinum-jubilee-to-be-marked-with-four-day-bank-holiday-in-2022

Though I am concerned that we'll have to wait another 20-30 years before we get any royal wedding bank holidays. This is bad and inconsiderate planning by the royals

[Valmy]

Are there descendants of Abnormal warlords in the UK?

That is the royal family

Well the Cavendishs don't have all their shit on blast all over the international media. They might be even more abnormal for all we know.

[Barrister]

Though I am concerned that we'll have to wait another 20-30 years before we get any royal wedding bank holidays. This is bad and inconsiderate planning by the royals

You'll probably get a Royal-related bank holiday much earlier than 20 years from now.

[Valmy]

Incidentally I am once again a Royalist for as long as we get extra bank holidays
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/02/queens-platinum-jubilee-to-be-marked-with-four-day-bank-holiday-in-2022

Though I am concerned that we'll have to wait another 20-30 years before we get any royal wedding bank holidays. This is bad and inconsiderate planning by the royals

Bring back the tradition of child betrothals!

[Syt]

I maintain (sadly) confident that the Japan example will prove relevant to the UK and that a shortage of workers will not lead to wage increases.

As much as the brexiters said it was simple supply and demand and getting rid of free movement would boost wages there was very little data showing much of an impact between the two and the result is unlikely to be so simply reached.

Wage increases from a shortage of workers in big employing low skilled fields like bar work, without government interference, will be a very slow and ponderous process if it ever comes at all.

More a problem for spoons I would imagine is the messed up universities meaning their usual source of quick turn over employees isn't where it usually is.

Clearly the solution is to cut benefits to force people to accept low paying jobs they otherwise wouldn't take. Gotta preserve those profit margins in those businesses.

[Tamas]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/wetherspoons-brexit-bars-eu-migration-b1858035.html


This is not as good as Farage asking for this, but almost.

I get the schadenfreude about Tim Martin in particular. But isn't this an example of an argument where Leavers/Brexiters were right (which I didn't expect)? Businesses that relied on free movement to fill low-paid jobs are facing labour shortages which, assuming the government doesn't give way, should drive up wages and improve conditions (and, they would add, middle class Remainers wanted to enjoy the perks of low labour costs) which is a good thing.

It's a bit like the updates on (increasing) non-European immigration which you see lots of Remain Twitter dunking on - and I feel like it's kind of playing into the Brexiter/Leave narrative/criticism of Remain and should maybe be avoided.

My hope is the government tells him no. Which I think is likely as there is very low public support for immigration into what are perceived as low-skilled/non-essential roles - basically private sector areas like hospitality and retail.

Well yes, but. It's not automatic, I am sure. Maybe the restaurant/hospitality sector has deep pockets, profits which were pocketed by owners and can now be given to workers. Or maybe not and they must raise prices, and the public will maintain the same amount of pubs and restaurants despite higher prices. Or businesses will just fail and there will be less jobs due to less people, and with less people there will be less people to service causing a loss of other jobs.

At the end, we'll just end up with a lot more Indian waiters and nothing will change.

[Sheilbh]

Nothing wrong with more Indian waiters - and it's good that apparently the government's close to agreeing a deal with India that will make it easier for Indian students to come here (as well as generally relaxing the rules on international students).

But I expect prices would rise. There's plenty of, in Duncan Weldon's phrase, mini-boom-y signs - except for wage pressure. But I think that will come and we need wage pressure and a little bit more inflation. Like the rest of Europe, we're still miles from what the US will see, but it's a start.

The really fucked bits of hospitality are the small/niche brands that got a lot of private equity investment (debt) to expand rapidly nationally. They were already in a challenging environment pre-covid. Then covid happened and they'll now be facing labour shortages and more expensive ingredients like everyone else - although I think the PE money often already ruined them because the first thing they do is cut the quality/cost of ingredients

[Sheilbh]

This is pitifully low:

Education recovery chief quits in English schools catch-up row
Sir Kevan Collins said to be dismayed that his long-awaited £15bn proposals were watered down to a £1.4bn package
Sally Weale Education correspondent
Wed 2 Jun 2021 17.54 BST

The government's education catch-up chief has resigned in protest over the prime minister's scaled-down recovery plan, warning it "does not come close" to meeting the needs of children whose education has been thrown into chaos by the pandemic.

In an emotional statement outlining why he could not remain in his post, Sir Kevan Collins said advising the government on the education recovery plan for England's pupils had been the most important task of his professional life.

But he said the government's catch-up offer – a £1.4bn plan announced hours earlier, which he said would mean the equivalent of just £22 per child in the average primary school – "betrays an undervaluation of the importance of education".

He added: "A half-hearted approach risks failing hundreds of thousands of pupils. The support announced by government so far does not come close to meeting the scale of the challenge and is why I have no option but to resign from my post."

Collins's resignation came after his proposals for a "landmark investment" of £15bn in teachers, tutoring and an extended school day to help children catch up were watered down to £1.4bnfor schools in England in an announcement by the Department for Education (DfE) on Wednesday morning.

Pulling no punches, Collins said the package of support fell "far short" of what was needed. "It is too narrow, too small and will be delivered too slowly," he said, adding that the average primary school will directly receive just £6,000 a year, equivalent to £22 per child.

Other countries are spending far more, including the US which is investing £1,600 per young person, or £2,500 a head in the Netherlands, according to figures provided by the Education Policy Institute.

Collins also said not enough was being done to help vulnerable pupils, children in early years or 16- to 19-year-olds. "Above all, I am concerned that the package announced yesterday betrays an undervaluation of the importance of education, for individuals and as a driver of a more prosperous and healthy society."

His resignation from the voluntary post is a blow to the government's post-Covid education plans, which appear to have been severely curtailed by the Treasury. Sources close to Collins said he was optimistic his ambitious programme would get the go-ahead after a series of positive meetings with the chancellor and the prime minister.

But about a month ago at one of the meetings, he was asked to leave the room, according to one source. "Suddenly the Treasury were not playing ball. They thought it was all too much."

The DfE attempted to persuade Collins to stay, promising more money in the months to come with the autumn comprehensive spending review on the horizon, but the dramatic downscaling of funding and ambition made left him believing he had little choice but to quit.

"You don't necessarily go into these things thinking you'll get everything you want," said one senior education figure. "But when the prime minister asks you to do something, then only delivers 10% of what's required, it's pretty difficult to take the process seriously."

In his resignation letter to the prime minister, Collins said it would be impossible to deliver a successful recovery without "significantly greater support" than the government has so far committed to.

"I am concerned that the apparent savings offered by an incremental approach to recovery represent a false economy, as learning losses that are not addressed quickly are likely to compound."

He went on: "The package of measures announced today provides valuable support, including important investment in teaching quality and tutoring. However ... I do not believe it is credible that a successful recovery can be achieved with a programme of support of this size."

A former teacher who went on to be the director of children's services and chief executive in Tower Hamlets, east London, Collins is one of the most well-respected figures in the world of education and his appointment to the role in February added significant credibility to the government's education recovery plans.

He was most recently head of the Education Endowment Foundation, which examines evidence for what works in education and is widely trusted across the sector.

Responding to his resignation, Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: "We know that Sir Kevan had much bolder and broader plans but that these required substantially more investment than the government was willing to provide. He's tried his hardest on behalf of children and young people, but, in the final analysis, the political will just wasn't there to support him."

A No 10 spokesperson said: "The prime minister is hugely grateful to Sir Kevan for his work in helping pupils catch up and recover from the effects of the pandemic. The government will continue to focus on education recovery and making sure no child is left behind with their learning, with over £3bn committed for catch-up so far."

The Treasury choosing a pennywise and pound foolish false economy?!

From Tom Newton Dunn (Political Editor for the Sun) this had the support of the PM and the DfE. It sounds like the Treasury/Sunak re-asserting control (and it sounds like his source is in the Treasury) and I feel like if Johnson can't be arsed to fight on this, then he will just end up being another austerity Tory PM. At the minute he is not seen as at all similar to Cameron-Osborne, about 50% of people don't think the Johnson government is similar to them and only 20% do. That will shift rapidly if he lets the Treasury gut everything:

Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
12h
A thread. What was the root cause of Sir Kevan Collins' resignation? A furious row with the Treasury on money as well as timing, which he (and it would also appear, the Prime Minister, for once) lost, Govt insiders tell me. The Collins catch up plan asked for three things (1)
They were: extending the school day by 30 minutes for 3 years, extra tutoring in small groups, and extra teaching hours through the day. The Treasury would only agree to the second, tutoring. Extending the school day was the main bulk of Collins' £15bn spending ask (2)
But the Chancellor argued 1. the evidence it works is "pretty thin" so far, 2. unclear it has buy in from teachers/parents, 3. no means to pay for it. Sunak instead pushed the decision into the Autumn, for more work and for it to be paid for in the Govt-wide Spending Review (3)
HMT insisted the door was not closed on longer school hours, if the Chx's 3 conditions are met. But the stalling effectively delays any hours increase by at least 6 months if not the full academic year. Collins believes this is precious time that cannot be lost, so he walked (4)
There is a wider political significance in the row. The PM once named education catch up as his biggest priority in office. But the Chx has forced him to wait for it, and potentially some time. Suggests Sunak is starting to win the battle to reimpose fiscal responsibility (5)
Sunak's allies point to a v precarious fiscal position for HMG, already sitting on £2.2tn of debt to service, if inflation continues to rise and pushes up interest rates. "Nobody bats an eyelid at £15bn in a covid world, but someone has to be the adult in the room", says one (6)
Another huge unanswered question is if the Spending Review does allocate £10-15bn for catch up, which HMT insists is still poss, how to pay for it? Just 2 options: tax rises or cuts elsewhere. It's going to be a very bloody Autumn. The Collins resignation is an earlier taster (7)

I would point out all of the Chancellor's arguments on this actual policy are pretty easy to rebut.

[Josquius]

Penny wise pound foolish is the unofficial slogan of the Conservative party.

[Sheilbh]

Interesting thread on a session with the former number 2 civil servant in the Treasury. I can't think of anything more British civil service than Treasury civil servants looking down on economists

A lot of this rings true from conversations with fast streamers I know who are about ten years into their career but have been in 4-5 different departments:

David Algonquin
@surplustakes
Unusually thoughtful and candid remarks on civil service reform by Sir John Kingman, former number 2 at the Treasury.

Some very serious cultural problems are identified and there a quite a few "robust" (in mandarin-speak)  quotes.

Summary THREAD
After a ritual disavowal of @dominic2306 and all his works and making the usual point that there is limit to what you can do without intellectually honest ministers, Kingman says that, in fact, solving many of the problems of the civil service is "wholly in the mandarins' gift".
E.g. Kingman did a review (with Bill Crothers!) of gov procurement. They found that departmental procurement functions are well-staffed by private sector standards but with "too many of the wrong people - too many junior process administrators with generalist backgrounds".
They recommended hiring more experienced private sector commercial types on high salaries and making the money back by having them slim down the teams under their command.

This was not well received by most perm secs. Why this was is interesting.
Kingman says that the civil service has a one-dimensional hierarchy. Well-payed people must:
- work closely with ministers
- manage a large number of people

People with valuable and rare expertise working further down the pyramid do not fit the model.
Worse, top civil servants saw procurement as "a bit like plumbing: necessary but not intrinsically very challenging or important".

The same attitude is applied to "great swathes of operational activity" including HR, IT and property.
Similarly, there remains "an excessively one-dimensional notion of the qualities expected of a successful senior civil servant."

What are those qualities?
- intellect
- the requisite deftness and to work with ministers, the ability "to turn on a dime"...
- ingenuity in solving tricky problems "even if only by drafting over the cracks"
- managing stakeholders "without putting a foot in it"
- in recent years, "the ability to manage people competently has rightly become much more important"   

A good list. But what's missing?
"A track record of ever having made anything happen as opposed to just keeping the plates spinning is seen at most as a nice-to-have.

Most oddly of all, substantial or deep domain knowledge is still not valued, at least in the higher reaches of the policy-making civil service."
"I'm not sure where this disdain for knowledge & expertise comes from but it is deep rooted"

E.g. Kingman reviewed the Treasury in 2003 for Gus O'Donnell. He concluded that complex areas like the energy market or corporate tax couldn't just be dealt with by "24yo generalists".
HMT should instead employ at least a few subject matter experts on high-ish salaries, who needn't necessarily manage all that many people.

This suggestion was met with "complete bemusement" and "proved too weird and counter-cultural" to be adopted.
This "indifference to expertise" is connected to the jobs "whirligig". There is "very little incentive to develop expertise in a particular area" and "an almost comic lack of serious attention to training".

He has "an unresearched hunch that the problem might have got worse".
E.g. looking at current perm secs, few had more than a couple of years of experience in their department prior to becoming its head. This fact is "spectacular". The picture 30 years ago would not have been so stark. 

Only a couple have any significant experience outside gov.
"This is a true lack of diversity and really quite extreme."

How likely is it that such people will reform the system in which they have flourished?

Furthermore the rather "dispassionate and resigned" personality type of senior civil servants does not lend itself to reform.
Pay is the "fundamental problem" but no one wants to talk about it. The pay for a grad entering management consultancy is around double that for an entrant to the Fast Stream (28k). 

The average London house price was 1.2 times grade 6/7 pay in 1970. It is now 8.4 times.
Pay is never going to equal the consultancy/banking sector, but the differential is now too large for the civil service to hire & retain people of a high enough quality, especially outside of the glamorous areas of private office or policy work.
A smaller, more elite civil service would be more efficient.

The current tendency is to "go for the Big Numbers model.... the problem with very large numbers of people is that they create work for each other, they have endless meetings and send emails and papers to each other".
"You have to have processes to vet all those things and before you know it you've created a very inefficient system."

Kingman is now chairman of Legal and General (a pension fund). He says staffing levels there are "miniscule" in comparison.
The top of the civil service "does not know what good looks like" when it comes to:
- Making things happen
- Use of tech
- Financial reporting
& many other things....

This is due to:
- lack of serious training
- insularity
- poor pay
"Looking back, I'm surprised by how little attention was given by the top of the machine to recruitment. I think that's mistake. It wouldn't be imaginable in the private sector. E.g. in banking senior staff spend a lot of time trying to attract new recruits."
"Bringing people in in mid-career is scandalously underdeveloped."

No thought has been given to training of ministers. When appointed, they are left alone with their private secretary and "some boxes full of paper".

Kingman met one ex-minister who didn't know what a gilt was.
Finally, and quite weirdly: "there was a time when economists were looked down on at the Treasury."

Apparently that's better now.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/events/civil-service-reform-john-kingman

Now I don't think that Cummings' has many solutions or real options for civil service reform - for someone whose analysis is almost all about systems his solution basically seems to be "hire better people" - but this does chime with a lot of his analysis of why the civil service isn't really fit for purpose any more.

Edit: And has he points out a lot of the critique by Cummings actually echoed the Fulton Report commissioned by Harold Wilson in 1968. The fact that substantially the same criticisms/analysis is being made of the same institution 50 years apart is in itself pretty suggestive.

In particular Fulton noted there were too many generalists; scientists, engineers and others with specific knowledge and experience were not given enough responsibility; there were too few skilled managers; and inadequate career/personnel planning/development. Plus ca change

[The Brain]

How does the civil service measure efficiency and what is the trend?