It’s a tense time for the country’s civil servants. Just last week, the prime minister publicly admonished them before a significant speech at Reckitt Benckiser’s facility in Kingston upon Hull. I hadn’t come across this place either, but it turns out to be a British manufacturer responsible for brands like Durex, Nurofen, and Dettol—key products that have somehow held together the austerity-bound UK.
The choice of venue for the speech spoke volumes. Using tones reminiscent of an experienced obstetrician, Cabinet Office Minister Pat McFadden had, on March 9, prefaced Keir Starmer’s upcoming address by explaining the impending cuts to the civil service, emphasizing the need to get “more bang for our buck.”
This set the stage for Starmer, who appeared before an unusually eager Hull audience to advocate for “project chainsaw.” He reassured them with a metaphor likening the process to a quick visit to NHS England: with some painkillers and disinfectant, they’d hardly feel a thing.
If it seems like I’m exaggerating, perhaps I am just a bit. Nonetheless, crafting symbolism is becoming second nature for Starmer as he builds his personal brand. Whether it’s sporting a casual look before an election or choosing significant venues for his speeches, Starmer’s actions often mirror his ambitions for the state. He even shared his vision in a recent News Agents podcast, where he stated, “I believe in the state. I think it should be active. I think it should be sleeves rolled up. It should be on the pitch, making a difference.” The message was clear: this vision aligns with his beliefs.
The challenge, however, is not with the message itself—it’s with how it’s communicated. The once-effective tactic of borrowing from other political figures is perhaps losing its charm. Starmer, in a mimicry of certain overseas leaders, has been adopting a bold stance, akin to “build, baby, build.” But as civil service union leader Dave Penman noted, scapegoating public servants might make for splashy headlines, yet it doesn’t lay the groundwork for meaningful reform.
It seems Starmer is grasping this reality, aided by warnings from former Cabinet Secretary Gus O’Donnell and the Institute for Government. Their advice suggested that an adversarial relationship wasn’t the way forward. A recent heartfelt letter from Starmer to civil servants emphasized their value, reading: “Your talent has been constrained for too long … we are proud of what you do and thank you for your continued dedication.”
These sentiments are lovely, but having witnessed attempts by leaders to reform government machinery since Tony Blair, I hope Starmer doesn’t have to learn this lesson repeatedly. Because one thing’s for sure, reforming the civil service is no easy feat. Even with Starmer’s zealous approach, in its relatively short span, his administration has had to create over 20 new bodies since taking office, including the Office for Value for Money headed by Rachel Reeves.
It’s easy for politicians to overlook continuing reforms: today’s civil service is markedly different from the one I encountered in the early 2000s. It’s more diverse, largely decentralized, and significantly tech-savvy, employing over 100,000 digital experts. While longstanding issues remain—HMRC still handles 100,000 calls daily, and the Department for Work and Pensions processes 45,000 letters—don’t buy into the narrative that civil servants are obstructive detractors of democracy.
More than anything, the prime minister must recognize that civil servants are invested in reforming the state. We strive daily to improve access to GPs, understand firsthand the intricacies of the benefits system, and share the prime minister’s frustrations with bureaucratic hurdles. Despite recent rhetoric dampening morale, we’re prepared to tackle the challenges head-on. Let’s move beyond conflict; it’s time for collaboration.
