Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Jacob]

"no compromise with the electorate!" 

[crazy canuck]

Sheilbh, the difficulty in separating the research universities from the undergraduate degree granting institutions is the undergrads then don't get the chance to interact with researchers during their formative years.


A lot of students enter their MA/PhD  years because of a connection they developed with a PI during undergrad.  The student might not work for that PI directly but that is how they got their start and developed their interests.

[Sheilbh]

I think my thought - which is shaky at best and something I just thought of on the hoof ) - is that it would be in a way perhaps a bit like the US state system (I know nothing about this) or a 21st century OxBridge (or maybe like a 21st century University of London) college model or maybe a bit like the French system (don't know how it works but you think of the numbered Paris universities).

Regional universities offering undergrad courses - as well as further education, short courses, work in the community - but made up of constituent (perhaps specialised) research colleges/universities with post-grads.

So academics would still be teaching undergrads - and engaging with the wider community they live in. My thought is that it would help remove the marketisation element in undergrad education (for domestic and international) where I think broad access (including to those academics) matters more. But it would retain the post-grad research and grant funding sector and hopefully they'd reinforce each other.

[Zoupa]

Incredibly rare Brexit win:

UK law to ban live animal exports clears parliament

[Josquius]

It hasn't been too heavily reported oddly. I mentioned it the other week but China hacked the MOD.
Saw this online demonstrating the state of the UK in one set of numbers....

You cannot see attachments on this board.

[The Brain]

Seems like a broader and more senior position in a bigger and more global organization. Plus it's in infamous hellhole LA rather than London. You have to have good teeth and shit.

[Tonitrus]

If they're going to keep the pay at the miserly level, they could at least give the occupant one of those quaint British titles:

- Knight Commander of the Order of the Router?
- Lord High Steward of the Matrix?
- The Hacker Royal?
- First Cyber Lord?

[Valmy]

If they're going to keep the pay at the miserly level, they could at least give the occupant one of those quaint British titles:

Maybe a ceremonial hat and a robe he can wear. All his co-workers must call out "Hail to your most Esteemed Cyberness" while doing a ceremonial bow with a heel click.

I would like to see TikTok compete with that.

[Josquius]

If they're going to keep the pay at the miserly level, they could at least give the occupant one of those quaint British titles:

- Knight Commander of the Order of the Router?
- Lord High Steward of the Matrix?
- The Hacker Royal?
- First Cyber Lord?

 
I do actually rather like these.
Work on two levels of pandering to traditionalists whilst mocking them.

Seems like a broader and more senior position in a bigger and more global organization. Plus it's in infamous hellhole LA rather than London. You have to have good teeth and shit.

But thats precisely the problem really. Well, except the LA wages one, that's another problem.
The head of cyber security for the treasury of a G7 nation being  a semi-decent salaried mid-level job rather than the top paying, super senior, lets attract some of the world's best, position it should be.

[Syt]

Yes, but it will attract the enthusiastic idealists for whom the service to King and Country is it's own reward, I'm sure.

[Sheilbh]

I think I've mentioned this problem before and it's not just cybersecurity.

You've got fairly strict civil service grades = x salary (with or without a London extra of a couple of grand). The civil service that doesn't really like having anyone outside that grading, but also the civil service doesn't really respect or see that specialists might be different.

It's all designed around generalists who move across departments and focused on policy. If you're not moving around then you're not moving up. I've mentioned before someone I know in the civil service who's never been in a role for more than three years and - off the top of my head has been in Health, DWP and the Home Office. Which clashes with areas where you need deep specialist knowledge who should, perhaps, be paid more. So for example the person running say, energy markets and relationships with those regulations is more likely to be someone in their late twenties who'll do that for a couple of years (probably on somewhere around £40k a year) than someone with sector experience.

I know people here will hate mentioning him but it is also something Dominic Cummings bangs on about particularly with the vaccines - where I think he's totally right. His evidence has been that they explicitly set up the covid vaccine unit outside of the Department of Health (but reporting into it) and brought in someone from the life sciences venture capital world to run it. That obviously worked very well. That unit was intended to keep going basically for vaccine procurement but also funding more broadly - as he points out, needless to say it has since been brought fully into the Department of Health and I imagine is now headed by a PPE grad in their late 20s running it for a couple of years before moving onto their next department.

It's a problem (and one that people have been banging on about for about 60 years ) - I think it's a big issue on the commercial/procurement side too. They do often have pretty excellent lawyers in my experience but I think they often recruit from law firms with people who have been on a very good salary and basically pitch it as generally a better work/life balance and the most interesting work they'll ever get to do.

But I'd add that my experience of senior civil servants is that they are the poshest people I've ever met - and I went to a university filled with Oxbridge rejects

[Josquius]

I have noticed with the civil service a few years ago it seemed like a decent career option, I interviewed for a few positions in my time (recently learned you always need 5 years continuous residence or you fail their security checks and are rejected, something which they never said outright, which makes me feel a bit better about them).
But as I've progressed a bit more I've noticed they've stayed the same, and would now be quite a salary drop if I were to go down that path.

I also know they make heavy use of contractors rather than directly employed people...which doubtless costs them a lot more.

[crazy canuck]

Yep, much better to be a consultant to government than an employee.

[Sheilbh]

Yep, much better to be a consultant to government than an employee.

Yeah - again Cummings had a really interesting idea and set up a Crown Consultancy Service (a bit like Government Legal Service, Government Digital Service and Crown Commercial Services).

The idea was set up a separate career path for consultants to government that is owned and funded by government, but not part of the civil service that all government departments could use (like the way they do for legal, digital and procurement). Ultimately, hopefully, reducing the (massive) amount of money government spends on consultancy to do it in house but still get the benefits of consultants - ideally ones who do loads of government and would hopefully be really skilled.

Needless to say it has since been swallowed by the civil service and recently shut down. Similarly I've heard that GDS which was once very good has been pretty serially downgraded. I know that the Crown Commercial Service struggle. The Government Legal Service is still very good. But I think the civil service struggles with metabolising anyone (particularly anyone senior) who is not within their structure and their pyramid with their incentives.

Separately I think the revolving door of government, consultancy and vendors would be where I'd say there's most corruption of a kind.

I have noticed with the civil service a few years ago it seemed like a decent career option, I interviewed for a few positions in my time (recently learned you always need 5 years continuous residence or you fail their security checks and are rejected, something which they never said outright, which makes me feel a bit better about them).
But as I've progressed a bit more I've noticed they've stayed the same, and would now be quite a salary drop if I were to go down that path.

Yeah I think the same. I remember looking at civil service when I graduated and I think it seemed like a decent career option the pay was about the same as other graduate schemes - not top end but solid - and then seemed to progress pretty well.

It doesn't look like it's moved at all and I know there have been pay freezes but at a certain point, especially for an organisation with lots of people renting in London, you need to keep pace with reality.

[Josquius]

Yes, GDS used to be brilliant. Not just for government brilliant, but actually brilliant-brilliant. It set a lot of standards which became the norm across the field.
And yup...they decided penny pinching was the way forward and now bring on consultants for thrice the price on isolated projects, not continuously building and being engaged in something.