Ministers ‘need more training’, think tank says

Policy Exchange report says courses would give ministers a “better understanding of the implications of policy options”. By Beckie Smith

Ministers should be made to undergo training as part of a number of wide-ranging reforms to how Whitehall and the civil service works, a leading think tank has recommended. Government must do more to attract and retain talented staff, Policy Exchange’s Reform of Government Commission said – but the civil service is not the only place where roadblocks to progress lie. The commission’s recent report, which was endorsed by Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove, argued civil service reform must be accompanied by measures addressing ministerial skills and churn if departments are to achieve their long-term policy priorities.

In particular, ministers should undergo policy and deliveryorientated training covering areas including procurement, digital delivery, stats and data, and practical skills like better decision making and chairing meetings, according to the think tank, while prospective ministers should be better prepared for jobs.

“Greater ministerial training in such areas will help to ensure that, when policies are designed, ministers have a better understanding of the consequences and implications of different policy options,” the report said.

The government’s recent push for ministerial training

“Ministers must use ODPs to hold their own department to account and there must be serious consequences for failure to deliver them”

– under which every minister with major infrastructure spending responsibilities must sit a specific course

– should be “encouraged, expanded and continued”.

Training should be modelled on the infrastructure-focused course set up with the Infrastructure and Projects Authority and the Said Business School at Oxford University, the report said.

Similar courses would help politicians “understand the tradeoffs and difficulties of other areas”, according to the think tank.

It stressed that training programmes should be available to junior ministers – who are “often the engine room of government” – and not just secretaries of state.

And they must also be available to prospective ministers, given that those in post will have little time to complete multiple training courses. That should be just one way the government and political parties should work to establish a “pipeline of political talent”, Policy Exchange said – noting that this additional support should be provided for both backbench MPs and opposition spokespeople.

Such training would help to equip new ministers to handle the crises they are often faced with upon arriving in office, the report said. However, it argued that turnover among ministers must also be reduced.

“At present, ministerial reshuffles are too frequent and ministers are overstretched by competing and contradictory expectations,” it said.

Better preparation and support for ministers would ensure they have “both the incentive and the capacity to tackle long-term policy problems”, it said.

The report also called on the government to restore Extended Ministerial Offices – and make them simpler to set up – to improve access to expert advice.

Better-equipped ministers should set out their priorities to departments in a clearer way through “comprehensive and accountable frameworks” – and permanent secretaries must be held to account for delivering them, the report said.

Ministers should set clear targets for departments and issue

“letters of strategic priorities” to perm secs, the think tank said.

Renewal of perm secs’ contracts should then be conditional on meeting these targets and on their “track record for reform”, according to the report. Since 2014, perm secs have been appointed for five-year, fixed-term contracts.

The report also called for ministers to have “active involvement” in departments’ Outcome Delivery Plans, which will be introduced later this year.

“Ministers must use ODPs to hold their own department to account and there must be serious consequences for failure to deliver them. ODPs should be published in their entirety (with the usual exemptions for commercially or security sensitive information),” the report said.

“There should also be a clear and transparent way for observers to monitor the progress of departments against these plans,” it added.