Why is every British public service seemingly in disarray? The answer lies in a lack of leadership. The recent appointment of Grant Shapps to his fifth cabinet position in just one year is reminiscent of a farcical comedy. Is it truly serious that crucial departments such as home affairs, transport, energy, and now defense have all required Shapps’ attention for a mere month or two before moving on?
This may be the consequence of Boris Johnson’s ill-advised decision in July 2019 when he dismissed the six most capable members of his cabinet to secure his own position. Margaret Thatcher never made such a mistake.
Power in British politics revolves around the management of a parliamentary club. Weak leaders maintain their positions by constantly reshuffling their teams, assessing loyalties, and balancing support between the front and backbenches. When they miscalculate, they fall. Any consideration of effective governance takes a backseat in this game.
Shapps rose through the ranks of politics by skillfully utilizing club loyalty. Once in office, he showcased the qualities essential for a modern minister: the ability to craft attention-grabbing headlines and project media credibility.
It was once believed that no minister could competently lead a Whitehall department in less than two years. Shapps, on the other hand, has mastered the new-style approach, accomplishing it in just two days. As the British government continues to squander billions on healthcare, pensions, and vanity projects, everything else is subject to budget cuts. Enter Shapps, the perfect smooth talker and glorified communications manager.
British ministers are often compared to child monarchs, there to be patted and pampered but useless when it comes to making tough decisions. The reason for this is their lack of long-term responsibility. Is Shapps to blame for not canceling HS2 during his tenure in transport any more than he is responsible for the exorbitant spending on two impractical aircraft carriers stationed off Portsmouth? These carriers devour funds that should be allocated to our soldiers.
One lesson we can glean from the Shapps saga is that relying exclusively on the House of Commons for leadership in government is a risky endeavor. Perhaps the House of Lords should be utilized as a source of experience and competence in high-ranking positions. Regardless, new ministers should undergo weeks of basic training before assuming their roles. The alternative is chaos, exemplified by individuals like Nadine Dorries. Departments should not be led by those whose primary aim is not efficient governance, but rather securing their next job.
Another fundamental flaw in the British political system is its overwhelming centralization. In a well-structured democracy, current disputes over infrastructure, hospital waiting times, environmental pollution, housing statistics, or refugee accommodations would fall under the purview of local or regional government. In Britain, however, these matters have dominated the headlines over the past month, orchestrated with staggering incompetence by Rishi Sunak’s press office.
The government in Whitehall now resembles that of Northern Ireland, with few proper ministers and a flurry of civil servants running around aimlessly, waiting anxiously for the eventual arrival of a Labour government or the inevitable crash of a coalition. I have little sympathy for London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s Ultra Low Emission Zone initiative (Ulez), but I applaud his democratic response to a genuine problem. When the Westminster establishment, spanning both Tory and Labour, criticized and questioned his authority to govern London, he simply shrugged it off. I cheered. Good for him.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
