Downing Street Criticised for Lack of Control Over Whitehall, Experts Say
Former adviser Paul Ovenden has argued that Downing Street lacks effective control over Whitehall, attributing this to a political perma-class and the dominance of a stakeholder state that diverts government focus towards regulators, campaign groups, and other networks. Ovenden highlights the Alaa Abd el-Fattah case as an example of how the government becomes distracted and spends time on fringe issues rather than on core decision-making.
He describes a coalition of campaign groups, regulators, litigators, trade bodies, and well-networked organisations as hollowing out decision-making power within Whitehall. Meanwhile, Downing Street has acknowledged frustration with regulations, consultations, and arm's-length bodies that delay the delivery of policy.
Institute for Government analyst Alex Thomas identifies the root problem as a weak centre in a highly centralised state complicated by civil service churn and poor performance management. Thomas suggests that sustained political agency is necessary for improvement. Dave Penman of the FDA notes that ministers have the ability to change the system if they choose to, pointing out that the civil service did not create the current structures and that reforms depend on ministers' will.
Former Labour advisers John McTernan and Tom Baldwin argue that policy missteps are the responsibility of No 10 and the Treasury rather than Whitehall alone. They also caution that reform efforts would be challenging and potentially distracting.
Paul Ovenden resigned in September after sending inappropriate messages about Labour MP Diane Abbott, and the government declined to comment on his remarks.
