While flicking between channels on the TV today, I came across the evidence given by Lord Birt to the Parliamentary COmmittee on Good Government. This was a bit shocking.
One of the things which he said that struck me was that apparently the Prime Minister (I think he must have been referring to Tony Blair) was all in favour of reforming the drugs laws a few years back, but was unable to do so because of the coalition of civil servants that opposed him. Birt's words were that the civil service just had too much invested in the status quo.
My conclusion was that in essence the elected government of this country was unable to achieve its aims because the civil service did not accept its proposals.
The question then is, who exactly is in charge? Does it actually make no difference at all who the electorate choose as its government? Do we simply get what the civil service wants us to have?
Those of us who were avid fans of Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister would not find the above to be particularly surprising. Fucking irritating, yes: surprising, no.
Might I point out then, that when your humble Devil finally takes his rightful place as Prime Minister (or Grand High Dictator. Whatever) of this currently benighted country, he will make it a personal mission to sack every single Civil Servant in the highest three grades.
All of them will go—without exception. It is intolerable that this country should be ruled by unelected bureaucrats (whether here or in Brussels). And who knows, perhaps that will be an added incentive for all of those who believe that the Civil Service is a job for life...