Dominic Cummings and Michael Gove had made their intention clear to 'revolutionise' the civil service. They intend to do three things.
First, to install Brexit-supporting officials (e.g. Sir David Frost) in key positions.
Second, to recruit more scientists (unlike Cummings and Gove, who, respectively, read History and English).
Third, to recruit more innovative 'risk takers'.
They hope that, as a consequence, British government will be able to do things which it cannot do at the moment, because civil servants are unimaginative wet blankets who consistently point out the drawbacks to ministers' bright ideas.
It does not take a Machiavelli to recognise that there are clear contradictions in these stated aims. As I have pointed out in a previous blogpost, 'Some historical reflections on ministers, civil servants, and 'special advisers' (May 26th), it has been a constant complaint of certain politicians, located at various points on the political spectrum that the civil service is too independent, and points out potential obstacles to a minister's pet projects rather than being blindly enthusiastic for them. (Perhaps that is what Cummings and Gove mean when they talk of 'risk taking.') The whole point of the British Civil service, since the Northcote-Trevelyan reforms of the 1870s, has been that it is independent. To make it anything else would not be to reform or revolutionise it, but to abolish it. I wonder what Cummings and Gove think what science is if they think that scientists would be more amenable to their pet projects. Scientists, with their regard for evidence, might be even less. It is worth pointing out that the civil service has dutifully carried out the projects of successive governments, even 'outsourcing' and privatising parts of itself, and has often taken the blame when ministers have been too cowardly to do so. (This was one of the reasons for the departure of Sir Mark Sedwill, the other being that he had two roles, and had far too much to do).
Cummings appears to think that he can change the civil service by force of will: this will result in damage, but not many constructive results. Successive would-be reformers of the civil service at No. 10 have been frustrated because the body of personnel at No. 10 is too small to undertake this task.
Even if Cummings and Gove were to achieve their dream of a civil service staffed entirely by zealous Brexit-enthusiast physicists, their intended consequence would not come to pass. Why ? Because, for years, central government has divested local government of powers, attempted to do too much, in a 'command and control' fashion ; and then, in the pursuit of efficiency, has outsourced its services to monopolistic providers (Group 4, Serco, Capita), who (surprise, surprise) charge the price that the market will bear.
It is reported that Cummings models himself on Bismarck. It is worth pointing out that the enemies which Bismarck fought (France ; the Catholic Church in Germany ; the German Social Democrats) survived and flourished ; and that the unified German Empire which emerged in 1871 was a markedly decentralised political entity, with important parts such as Bavaria continuing their distinctive identity (the Nazi era being, in this respect, as in others, exceptional in German history). And, of course, the conclusion of Bismarck's career was not his own choice.