Civil service Commissioners
a n n u a l r e p o rt 2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 5
Supporting an effective
and impartial Civil
Service for 150 years
1
18551856185718581859186018611
8621863186418651866186718681
86918701871187218731874187518
76187718781879188018811882188
3188418851886188718881889189
01891189218931894189518961897
18981899190019011902190319041
905190619071908190919101911191
2191319141915191619171918191919
20192119221923192419251926192
71928192919301931193219331934
19351936193719381939194019411
9421943194419451946194719481
94919501951195219531954195519
56195719581959196019611962196
Civil Service Commissioners
31964196519661967196819691970
Supporting an effective and
197119721973197419751976197719
impartial Civil Service for 150 years
78197919801981198219831984198
51986198719881989199019911992
1993199419951996199719981999
200020012002200320042005
REPORT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSIONERS
TO HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN FOR THE PERIOD
1 APRIL 2004 TO 31 MARCH 2005
150 Years 1855-2005
Contents
Foreword
2
What we do
6
Who we are
8
The year in brief 14
Aims and progress 18
The Government’s draft 28
Civil Service Bill
Evidence to Public 32
Administration Select Committee
Civil Service Commissioners’ 34
150th anniversary
Links with other governments 40
Appendix A 42
Civil Service Commissioners’
responsibilities and costs
Appendix B 43
Approval of appointments through open
competition to the Senior Civil Service
Appendix C 47
Interpretation of selection on merit and
fair and open competition
Appendix D 49
Our role in senior competitions
Appendix E 50
Exceptions to selection on merit on the
basis of fair and open competition
Appendix F 51
Freedom of Information Act
Appendix G 52
Documents
Annual Report 2004-2005
1
Foreword
Rosemary Oduntan-Oke
Executive Officer
Human Resources
Food Standards Agency
2
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
Foreword
The First Civil Service Commissioner
The year 2005 marks the 150th anniversary of the Civil
Service Commissioners. They were first appointed in 1855
following recommendations in the Northcote-Trevelyan
Report of 1854. This was a watershed in the history of
government in this country and marked the beginning of the
modern Civil Service, with its commitment to appointment on
merit and a culture of loyal but impartial service to the
government of the day. We commemorate these 150 years
in this report with a timeline showing how the
Commissioners’ work has developed. We have also
commissioned a publication, Changing Times, in which
distinguished public figures give their perspective on the Civil
Service in the 21st century and its enduring values. This
publication, which is designed to encourage and contribute
to a public debate about the service, will be launched at our
150th anniversary celebration on 29 June.
What made the Northcote-Trevelyan proposals a turning
point was that they led to a service in which integrity, honesty,
impartiality, objectivity and appointment on merit became
enduring values. This was a decisive legacy. One hundred
and fifty years later, the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, in a speech
to civil servants on 24 February 2004 at an event entitled
Civil Service reform – delivery and values, said:
Northcote and Trevelyan saw themselves responding to
what they described as ‘the great and increasing
accumulation of public business, and the consequent
pressure on the government’. Since their time the pressure
has multiplied many times over. No government owns the
Civil Service. It belongs to the public that it serves. For the
British people, a Civil Service that can deliver, adapt and
innovate is a hugely valuable asset. Our duty, and the duty
of any government, is to leave it in better shape than we
found it and, as far as possible, prepared to meet whatever
challenges the future may bring. I am confident that,
through the reforms proposed today and those that will
follow, we can ensure that happens.
Over the years the Civil Service has evolved and it continues
to do so to meet changing demands. But at a time of
enormous change, when there is a pressure on the service
radically to transform itself, the core values can be perceived
by some as a hindrance to speedy reform and there is a
temptation to circumvent processes which are designed to
maintain these values and are in the interest of the
government of the day and of good governance. This
perception is unfortunate, given the importance of these
values for proper conduct. It is therefore crucial that everyone
grasps the challenge of reforming the Civil Service and
sustaining the values.
A fast-changing environment inevitably throws up new
challenges for the elected Government and the Civil Service,
and the Government will, from time to time, wish to make
changes to the rules of governance. It is, however, important
that we create an environment and machinery of
government in which these issues are considered holistically
and against first principles – merit, impartiality, transparency
and accountability – rather than in ad hoc fashion. The
Committee on Standards in Public Life made a substantial
contribution to this debate in its Ninth Report, Defining the
Boundaries within the Executive: Ministers, Special Advisers
and the permanent Civil Service (Cm 5775, April 2003). Its
recommendations were based on these first principles and
still provide a very useful benchmark for discussion.
A fast-changing environment inevitably
throws up new challenges for the
elected Government and the Civil
Service, and the Government will, from
time to time, wish to make changes to
the rules of governance. It is, however,
important that we create an environment
and machinery of government in
which these issues are considered
holistically and against
first principles – merit, impartiality,
transparency and accountability
– rather than in ad hoc fashion.
Annual Report 2004-2005
3
Foreword
The Civil Service is a national asset and needs to remain fit
for purpose. It is, therefore, everyone’s responsibility to
ensure that it is valued and reformed in the public interest
and that its values are preserved. Every Minister, every
Permanent Secretary, every single civil servant has that duty
and responsibility, as has Parliament. It is not just the
responsibility of the Civil Service Commissioners, although
we have our part to play. We have worked with the Civil
Service to ensure that the objectives of the reform agenda
are achieved without compromising the values. We have
done this by:
• encouraging innovation and rigour in recruitment and
selection;
• encouraging professionalism in recruitment by
departments;
• supporting the use of the most reliable, validated
techniques for recruiting and selecting staff at all levels;
• commissioning an evidence-based review of assessment
techniques and working with departments to apply these
in practice;
• introducing a new system of audit compliance monitoring;
• developing a series of measures to help ensure the
effective promotion of the Civil Service Code;
• maintaining a regular dialogue with departments;
• raising awareness of our work;
• contributing to public debate;
• giving evidence to relevant Select Committees;
• actively promoting the need for a Civil Service Act;
• ensuring that the way we operate as a regulator
encourages the adoption of good practice.
4
Civil Service Commissioners
There is still a great deal to do. We should continue to
challenge the myth that the enduring Civil Service values
stand in the way of the reform of the service. At the same
time, while we understand the pressure on civil servants to
develop a ‘can do’ mentality, this should not be interpreted
as a lessening of the requirement on them to offer objective
and impartial advice. And, with an increase in external
recruitment into the service at senior levels, there is a greater
need than ever to promote the Civil Service Code and the
Code of Conduct for Special Advisers. Furthermore, there is
a need for the values to be entrenched in legislation and for
Parliament to be given an oversight by introducing a Civil
Service Bill. The Government’s commitment to legislation
appears to be lukewarm, but legislation along with active
promotion of the Civil Service Code and the Special
Advisers’ code are essential if we are to keep the values alive
and breathe new life into them. This should not be done
begrudgingly but with commitment and enthusiasm as all
political parties are committed to maintaining an impartial
Civil Service.
This is my last report as First Civil Service Commissioner. It
has been my privilege to be able to play a part over the past
five years in helping to maintain these values. I take this
opportunity to thank the Commissioners who have served
with me for their wise advice as well as their hard work in
carrying out the duties of Commissioners. What they have
brought to the role has, I believe, done much to develop the
focus of our work as Commissioners in line with the needs
created by the major changes that have been taking place in
government. They have wide experience from many
backgrounds and have contributed insights from the world
outside the Civil Service. At the same time, they have been
150 Years 1855-2005
fully committed to the public service and to the values of the
Civil Service. Effective relationships have been established
with Permanent Secretaries and other senior figures. There
has been a keenness to innovate in the selection process to
help to improve the results. They have done much to raise
the profile of what the Commissioners stand for at a time
when there has, I believe, been a risk of losing sight of the
service’s enduring values. And throughout they have worked
together to great effect as a team. I wish to thank in particular
James Boyle and Geraldine Peacock, who concluded their
time as Commissioners during 2004-2005, and Geoffrey
Maddrell, who will do so later in 2005. I am delighted to
welcome seven new Commissioners who joined us in March.
Finally, I would like to record my appreciation of the working
relationships I have had with Sir Andrew Turnbull, the Cabinet
Secretary and Head of the Home Civil Service, his
predecessor, Lord Wilson of Dinton, and Permanent
Secretaries, Human Resource Directors and other staff in
departments, as well as my deep gratitude to the staff of the
Office of the Civil Service Commissioners for their loyal,
committed and expert support. I would also like to thank
those outside the Civil Service who have served on selection
panels for their willing and valued contribution to the senior
appointments process.
There is still a great deal to do. We
should continue to challenge the myth
that the enduring Civil Service values
stand in the way of the reform of the
service.
Baroness Prashar CBE
First Civil Service Commissioner
June 2005
Annual Report 2004-2005
5
What we do
Christopher MacDougall
Meteorological Observer
Met Office
6
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
What we do
The Commissioners oversee Civil Service appointments
and standards.
We contribute to the development of an effective and
impartial Civil Service and support its core values by giving
an assurance that appointments into it are made on merit
on the basis of fair and open competition and by advising
on the promotion of the Civil Service Code and hearing
appeals under it.
The core values are integrity, honesty, impartiality, objectivity
and selection on merit. Everything the Commissioners do
is directed at upholding them.
We are, above all, members of the general public. We are
recruited on merit after open advertisement. From our
different careers and interests, we bring experience of the
public, private and voluntary sectors. This, we believe,
gives us insights into how the Civil Service can best serve
the public and earn their confidence.
We operate alongside departments, the Cabinet Office and
Ministers. But we are independent of them. We are
appointed by Order in Council under the Royal Prerogative.
The First Commissioner works for four days a week and
the other Commissioners for two to eight days a month.
We approve appointments at the most senior levels.
Departments must follow our Recruitment Code at all levels.
We contribute to the development
of an effective and impartial Civil
Service and support its core values
by giving an assurance that
appointments into it are made on
merit on the basis of fair and open
competition and by advising on the
promotion of the Civil Service Code
and hearing appeals under it.
We encourage the use of appropriate and innovative
selection methods. Our collective knowledge of good
practice outside the Civil Service is of particular value here.
Since 1996, we have also had an important role in helping
to uphold the service’s standards of conduct and propriety.
Under the Civil Service Code, a civil servant who believes
he or she is being required to act improperly should report
the matter within the department. But civil servants who
believe the response is not reasonable may report the
matter to us. In 2003 we were given further responsibilities
to work with departments to promote the understanding of
the Code by civil servants and to ensure its effective
operation.
At all times, we try to be practical and approachable. We
know that fine words are meaningless without the constant
hard work, discussion and common sense that make them
a reality.
See Appendix A: Civil Service Commissioners’ responsibilities
and costs.
Annual Report 2004-2005
7
Who we are
Who we are
Baroness Prashar CBE
Peter Bounds
Sir David Bell
Usha Prashar has been the First
Civil Service Commissioner since
August 2000.
Peter Bounds was Chief
Executive of Liverpool City
Council from 1991-1999. He has
wide experience of public-service
and community leadership.
David Bell, Chairman of the
Financial Times Group, has been
a Director of Pearson since 1996.
He was previously Chief
Executive of The Financial Times.
In 1998 he was appointed
Pearson’s Director for People.
She is also Chancellor of De
Montfort University, Chairman
of the Royal Commonwealth
Society, a Governor of the
Ditchley Foundation and a
non-executive director of ITV.
She was previously Chairman
of the Parole Board for England
and Wales, Chairman of the
National Literacy Trust, Director
of the National Council for
Voluntary Organisations and
Director of the Runnymede Trust.
Usha Prashar became a life
peer in 1999.
8
Civil Service Commissioners
He holds leading positions in
church and arts organisations
and in regeneration partnerships.
He is a consultant on governance
and conduct issues in local
government and a Patron of the
Centre for Tomorrow’s Company,
a think tank and catalyst for a
new agenda for business.
He is a non-executive Director of
Vitec Group and the Windmill
Partnership; Chairman of the
Millennium Bridge Trust,
Common Purpose Europe, Crisis
and the International Youth
Foundation; a Patron of the
Ambache Chamber Orchestra;
and a member of the
Development Board of the
National Theatre.
150 Years 1855-2005
Baroness Prashar CBE Peter Bounds
Sir David Bell Baroness Fritchie DBE
Professor Edward Gallagher CBE
Baroness Fritchie DBE
Rennie Fritchie has been the
Commissioner for Public
Appointments since 1999,
regulating ministerial appointments
to some 12,000 public bodies.
She is also Pro-Chancellor of the
University of Southampton and
Vice Chair of the Stroud and
Swindon Building Society. Rennie
Fritchie was previously Chair of the
South and West Regional Health
Authority and the Home
Secretary's representative on the
selection panel for independent
members of the Gloucestershire
Police Authority. She has also
worked as an independent
consultant in the training and
development field. Rennie Fritchie
became a life peer in 2005.
Professor Edward
Gallagher CBE
Edward Gallagher was Chief
Executive of the National Rivers
Authority and later of the
Environment Agency. He
previously held director-level
positions in industry in the UK
and the USA and is currently
Chairman of Enviro-Fresh.
He is also Vice President of the
Council for Environmental
Education, a Council Member of
English Nature, Chairman of the
Pesticides Forum, Chairman of
energywatch and a nonexecutive director of ECUS.
Annual Report 2004-2005
9
Who we are
Hamish Hamill CB
Bronwen Curtis
Alastair Macdonald CB
Geoffrey Maddrell
Hamish Hamill was a career civil
servant who headed a number
of Scottish departments before
devolution and was the first
Head of the Scottish Executive’s
Justice Department.
Bronwen Curtis is Chairman of
the Northampton Hospital NHS
Trust and the Home Secretary’s
representative on the Police
Authority Selection Panel. She
was previously Vice President of
Human Resources for Avon
Cosmetics.
Alastair Macdonald spent several
years in journalism, on The
Spectator and The Financial
Times, before becoming a career
civil servant. He worked for the
Ministry of Defence and for the
Department of Trade and
Industry where he became
Director General for Industry.
Geoffrey Maddrell is Chairman of
UNITE, a specialist in student
and key-worker accommodation
services; Westbury, a national
housebuilding company; LDV,
the specialist light commercial
vehicle manufacturer; BuildStore,
a service provider to the selfbuild market; and the Ivory and
Sims ISIS Trust. He was formerly
Chairman of the whisky company,
Glenmorangie, and Chief
Executive of the Tootal Group.
Geoffrey Maddrell set up
ProShare, a charity which
supports private individuals and
employees in equity markets. He
is Chairman of Airborne Forces
Charities, UNIAID and iART.
He has wide experience of
appointments to senior positions
in Government, nondepartmental public bodies, the
National Health Service and the
judiciary.
He is Chairman of the Fire
Service Research and Training
Trust and a Member of the
Scottish Records Advisory
Council.
10
Bronwen Curtis has held board
positions in strategic planning,
business development,
manufacturing and human
resources. She has been a nonexecutive Director and Chair of
Two Shires Ambulance NHS
Trust and a member of the
National Manufacturing Council.
Civil Service Commissioners
Alastair Macdonald was
President of the British Computer
Society in 2000-2001. He is a
non-executive Director of Parity
Group (an IT services provider)
and a member of the Design
Council and of charitable trusts
including the Chatham Historic
Dockyard Trust.
150 Years 1855-2005
Hamish Hamill CB Bronwen Curtis
Alastair Macdonald CB Geoffrey Maddrell
Maggie Semple OBE Gerard Lemos CMG
Maggie Semple OBE
Gerard Lemos CMG
Maggie Semple is Chief
Executive of The Experience
Corps, a company involved in
regenerating communities
through volunteering. She was
previously Director of the
Learning Experience for the New
Millennium Experience Company,
Director of Education and Training
at the Arts Council of England, a
schools inspector and a deputy
head teacher. She is a board
member of a number of arts and
educational organizations,
including the National Youth
Music Theatre, Brit School,
Rambert Dance Company and
Sadler’s Wells Theatre, and has
served on education-related
government task forces.
Gerard Lemos, a partner at
social researchers
Lemos&Crane, leads
researchers investigating social
policy issues including race
equality and the needs of
vulnerable people. He is the
author of many reports and
books on social policy.
Gerard Lemos is also Deputy
Chair of the British Council, an
Audit Commissioner, a member
of the British Council’s Board of
Trustees, Deputy Chairman of
the Banking Code Standards
Board, a regulator of the retail
banking industry and Chair of the
Akram Khan Dance Company.
Annual Report 2004-2005
11
Who we are
Commissioners appointed
on 22 March 2005
Christopher Stephens
Elizabeth McMeikan
Dame Alexandra Burslem
Richard Ayre
Christopher Stephens is a nonexecutive director of WSP, a
global engineering consultancy.
Elizabeth McMeikan is a nonexecutive director of J D
Wetherspoon and a Steering
Board Member of The
Insolvency Service at the DTI.
Alexandra Burslem has been
Vice-Chancellor of Manchester
Metropolitan University since
1997. She was formerly Dean of
the Faculty of Community
Studies, Law and Education and
Deputy Vice-Chancellor.
Richard Ayre was a BBC
journalist for 30 years. He was
the corporation’s Controller of
Editorial Policy and Deputy Chief
Executive of BBC News. He is
now a management consultant
and commentator on media
ethics and campaigns for open
government and freedom of
expression.
Until 2004, he was Group
Human Resources Director of
Exel, the international logistics
company. He is now Chairman
of the Exel Foundation, which
supports the education and
development of disadvantaged
young people around the world.
He has lived and worked
extensively abroad. He is a
trustee of the Foundation for
Church Leadership.
12
Her earlier career, spanning
manufacturing and retailing,
started at Colgate-Palmolive
before a move to Tesco in 1989.
She has held a number of
director-level positions in buying,
marketing, human resources
and change management. She
led the creation of Tesco Express
and gained international
experience running Catteau in
northern France.
Civil Service Commissioners
Other academic appointments
include Deputy Chair of the
Learning and Skills Council,
Chair of UKCOSA, Chair of the
Universities UK Standards and
Quality Group, Member of the
HEFCE Quality Assurance
Learning and Teaching
Committee, Chair of the QAA
Quality Assurance Framework
Review and Member of the
Lifelong Learning Sector Skills
Council Shadow Board.
He is Freedom of Information
Adjudicator for the Law Society
and has been a founder Board
member of the Food Standards
Agency since its inception
in 2000.
150 Years 1855-2005
Christopher Stephens Elizabeth McMeikan
Dame Alexandra Burslem Richard Ayre
Stella Pantelides John MacAuslan
Mary Jo Jacobi
Stella Pantelides
John MacAuslan
Mary Jo Jacobi
Stella Pantelides is a Director of
Lysis Consulting Services, a firm
specialising in organisational
consultation and executive
coaching.
John MacAuslan has been
Director of Administration at the
National Gallery since 1994.
Mary Jo Jacobi is Vice President
Group External Affairs for the
Royal Dutch/Shell Group. She
has been a senior adviser to two
US Presidents and an executive
of several major corporations
including HSBC Holdings and
Lehman Brothers.
She has over 20 years’
experience in human resources
management and consulting,
including senior in-house roles at
ABN AMRO, Barclays, Bank of
America and PWC. Until 2004,
she was Linklaters’ Global HR
Director and an executive
member of the firm’s European
Committee.
He previously worked in HM
Treasury in a wide range of roles,
including the planning of public
expenditure, labour market
issues, human resources and
corporate development.
He has also worked in product
development for a highperformance materials company
and as trustee for various
charities.
She is a member of the Wilton Park
Academic Council, the UK-US
Fulbright Commission, the
Executive Committee of the
Industry and Parliament Trust, the
Marketing Society, the International
Women’s Forum and the advisory
boards of the Association of MBAs
and the Saïd Business School,
Oxford. She is a Visiting Fellow of
the University of Leeds.
Our website explains our role
and presents key documents:
www.civilservicecommissioners.
gov.uk/.
We are supported by a small
team: the Office of the Civil
Service Commissioners (OCSC).
OCSC
35 Great Smith Street
London
SW1P 3BQ
Telephone: (020) 7276 2617
e-mail: ocsc@civilservice
commissioners.gov.uk
Annual Report 2004-2005
13
The year in brief
Gaynor Wong and Leo
Detector Dog Handler
HM Revenue & Customs
14
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
The year in brief
Developing our role
Transfers from other public bodies
We developed the ways we carry out our role in a number
of new directions.
As we recorded in last year’s report, we have agreed to
greater flexibilities under our principles in allowing the
experience and skills of staff in organisations with close
links to the Civil Service to be brought into it.
We see several of these as important in further
implementing Civil Service reform.
Recruitment techniques
In support of our aim of working with departments to
appoint the best available people at the most senior levels,
we commissioned an evidence-based review of the most
reliable, validated techniques for recruiting and selecting
staff at senior levels.
We are discussing with departments on a case-by-case
basis how the findings can be applied in practice.
Audit
We have introduced a new system of recruitment audits
– to be known as Recruitment Compliance Monitoring –
following a review in 2003-2004 of our approach to audit
and the re-tendering of the audit contract.
The previous audit procedure involved periodic scrutiny of
the recruitment systems of each department and agency.
The new framework will require each organisation to
declare annually the extent of its compliance with our
Recruitment Code. Over the following year, a number of
checks will be carried out to validate these declarations.
We believe that placing greater emphasis on self-audit and
on departments’ responsibilities for compliance with our
principles will improve the effectiveness of our scrutiny,
encourage flexibility in approaches to recruitment
consistent with our principles and help to provide examples
of good practice which can be shared with others.
The Cabinet Office has been discussing with departments
an overall framework for transfers. In the meantime, we
have agreed with a number of departments arrangements
allowing transfers on a case-by-case basis.
Civil Service Code
As part of our role in upholding the core Civil Service
values, we have been developing our enhanced role in
ensuring the effective operation of the Civil Service Code.
This includes:
• working with departments to promote the code;
• reporting on matters formally raised under the code;
• liaising with nominated officers in departments who can
be approached for impartial advice by staff with
concerns relating to the code.
As part of our role in upholding the
core Civil Service values, we have
been developing our enhanced role
in ensuring the effective operation
of the Civil Service Code.
Annual Report 2004-2005
15
The year in brief
Core values and our role
We continued to comment in public discussion on the core
Civil Service values and the implications for our role.
We participated in the Government’s consultation on a draft
Civil Service Bill, in which our role featured prominently.
We also gave evidence to the House of Commons Public
Administration Select Committee in response to its inquiry
into Civil Service effectiveness.
As part of the marking of our 150th
anniversary, we have sponsored a
publication, Changing Times,
consisting of contributions by
distinguished commentators and
public figures giving perspectives
on the Civil Service in the 21st
century and its enduring values. We
shall launch the publication in June
with a panel discussion featuring
some of the contributors.
16
Civil Service Commissioners
As part of the marking of our 150th anniversary, we have
sponsored a publication, Changing Times, consisting of
contributions by distinguished commentators and public
figures giving perspectives on the Civil Service in the 21st
century and its enduring values. We shall launch the
publication in June with a panel discussion featuring some
of the contributors.
150 Years 1855-2005
Carrying out our responsibilities
To fulfil our legal obligations, we:
• approved 91 appointments at the most senior levels of
the Civil Service following fair and open competition;
• approved 29 appointments as exceptions to fair and
open competition;
• carried out eight audits of departments’ recruitment to
ensure compliance with our Recruitment Code based on
the previous audit arrangements and another five while
piloting the new compliance monitoring approach.
To further the effective understanding of the principles the
Commissioners uphold, we:
• held 14 seminars in departments about the role of the
Civil Service Commissioners;
• contributed to four seminars organised by Westminster
Explained;
• contributed to meetings of the Civil Service Recruitment
Network co-ordinated by the Cabinet Office;
• discussed with departments a wide range of issues and
queries relating to the implications of our recruitment
principles in particular circumstances and the effective
application of them in a changing Civil Service;
• worked with the Treasury Solicitor’s Department on
establishing guidelines on the legal implications of the
principles and where some amendment of the
Recruitment Code might be appropriate;
• held open meetings in Edinburgh, Cardiff and London in
July in conjunction with the publication of our 2003-2004
annual report.
Freedom of Information Act
An important development for the Civil Service and other
public authorities has been the coming into full operation
on 1 January 2005 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
We support the spirit of openness represented by the Act,
while recognising that there are aspects of our work,
particularly in the area of senior recruitment, where it is
essential to maintain confidentiality.
During 2004-2005 we responded to one request for
information under the Act.
Annual Report 2004-2005
17
Aims and progress
Gary Nicholls
Second Secretary Political/Economic
Press and Public Affairs
British High Commission, Accra, Ghana
18
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
Aims and progress
The Commissioners contribute to the development of an
effective and impartial Civil Service and support its core
values by giving an assurance that appointments are made
on merit, by advising on the promotion of the Civil Service
Code and by hearing appeals from civil servants under
the code.
The principles of selection on merit on the basis of fair
and open competition do not vary over time. Nor do the
Civil Service’s core values of integrity, honesty, impartiality
and objectivity. But they need to be interpreted in a
modern context.
In doing so, we combine firmness of principle with flexibility
of practice.
Specifically, we aim to:
• provide a Recruitment Code that underpins an effective
and flexible approach to recruitment at all levels;
• ensure compliance with the Recruitment Code;
• chair and oversee the process for selecting senior civil
servants to ensure the best person available is appointed
on merit;
• work with departments to promote greater awareness
and understanding by civil servants of the Civil Service
Code and to investigate appeals from civil servants
under the Civil Service Code and the Code of Conduct
for Special Advisers;
• work with departments to ensure the recruitment
principles we uphold are understood and effectively
applied;
• share good practice and encourage innovation to
support the Civil Service modernisation programme.
An effective and flexible approach
to recruitment
Recruitment is the responsibility of individual departments.
Our role is to provide a framework based on the Civil
Service recruitment principles.
That framework must be flexible at a time when the service
is seeing many changes, through the current reform
programme as well as the continuing need for new skills
and competencies. But it must still ensure the principles
are clearly understood and give full assurance they are
being met.
Recruitment Code
Our report for 2003-2004 recorded that we had produced a
new Recruitment Code.
We issued it in March 2004 and published it electronically
through our website.
As well as making some changes of substance, the new
version aims to make the code more accessible, userfriendly and focused on principles. It also gives guidance
on the practical application of the principles to encourage a
flexible approach to selection processes.
The new code has been well received by departments.
We shall keep the code under constant review, taking
account of feedback from our seminars, our audit work and
the general flow of queries from departments and agencies.
In the light of legal advice, we are reviewing certain aspects
of the code’s provisions and of the Civil Service Order in
Council 1995 which forms the code’s legal basis. In
particular, we are considering with our legal advisers the
legal implications for an appointment if it is made in a way
that does not comply with the Order in Council.
The new Recruitment
Code is so much better
than the old version. It’s
straightforward and
easier to find your way
around. I particularly
like the way each part sets out the
legal context first before getting
down to the nitty gritty of how
we can apply all this in the real
day-to-day situations. It’s very
refreshing to see a dose of
flexibility and good old common
sense in the guidance and advice
being offered.
Malcolm Bridger
HR Business Partner
DCMS
Annual Report 2004-2005
19
Aims and progress
Transfers from other public bodies
Exceptions to the recruitment principles
Steps have been taken to implement our agreement in
2003-2004 to flexibilities allowing the experience and skills
of staff in organisations with close links to the Civil Service
to be brought into the Civil Service without their going
through a formal external competition.
We recognise that in some circumstances it is right to allow
appointments to be made without following the procedure
of selection on merit on the basis of fair and open
competition, provided doing so does not undermine these
fundamental principles. These are mainly short-term
appointments – for example, secondments – which will
help departments to meet their objectives.
The Cabinet Office consulted departments and linked
organisations about an overall framework for transfers. We
considered that transfers would meet the requirements of
our principles provided that:
• we could be satisfied that the individual had been
originally recruited by an open and structured
competitive process aimed at selecting fairly and on
merit;
• the appointee’s merit for the Civil Service appointment
had been established by a trawl of other potential
appointees or was demonstrable if a formal competitive
process had not been used.
The issue facing the Cabinet Office and departments has
been what changes should be made to the current trawling
arrangements, which do not extend to organisations
outside the Civil Service. Provided agreement is reached
on such arrangements, we envisage that an amendment
will be made to our Recruitment Code which will enable
departments to arrange transfers in accordance with the
criteria above. We would also cover the use of the provision
in our audit.
In the meantime, we have agreed arrangements with a
number of individual departments allowing transfers on a
case-by-case basis. These have related to one or more
specific bodies with close links to the department. We have
satisfied ourselves that the normal recruitment procedures
of those bodies meet our general standards for selection
on merit on the basis of fair and open competition.
Provided it is confirmed that an appointee was recruited
under those procedures and that the transfer to the
department was on merit, we shall agree to the
appointment. The cases approved to date are shown in the
next section.
20
Civil Service Commissioners
Under the Recruitment Code, departments may in most
cases apply the exceptions themselves. Our approval is,
however, required for very senior appointments and in
some special circumstances at lower levels. We may also
approve appointments under the provisions in the Orders
in Council in circumstances not covered by the
Recruitment Code.
We approved 29 appointments as exceptions:
• two short-term secondments;
• nine extensions of secondments beyond five years;
• two conversions of secondments to fixed-term
appointments and one to a permanent appointment;
• three short-term appointments requiring a highly
specialised mix of skills and experience;
• 12 transfers from other public bodies with close ties with
the Civil Service under the arrangements set out above in
Transfers from other public bodies.
This compares with 20 appointments approved as
exceptions in 2003-2004. The increase reflects the 12
transfers from other public bodies.
See Appendix E: Exceptions to selection on merit on the basis of
fair and open competition.
150 Years 1855-2005
Ensuring compliance with the
Recruitment Code
New approach to audit
Under the Civil Service Order in Council, the
Commissioners have a duty to audit departments’
recruitment systems and practices to establish whether
the departments, as the appointing authorities, are
observing our Recruitment Code. The function is
contracted out, on clearly defined terms and under close
supervision by the Commissioners.
Recruitment Compliance Monitoring
The new approach is called Recruitment Compliance
Monitoring. We shall in future use this term in referring to
our audit responsibilities (see Appendix A: Civil Service
Commissioners’ responsibilities and costs).
It is founded on our belief that departments and agencies
are best able to appoint the staff required to meet their
defined needs through effective yet flexible recruitment
processes which are consistent with the principles set out
in the Recruitment Code.
Following a review, we are introducing new arrangements
which will place a greater emphasis on self-audits by
departments and agencies.
Review of the audit system
The recruitment audit was previously based on a rolling
programme of sampled data checks leading to written
reports that included recommendations for remedial action
where necessary.
While this process-driven approach met the
Commissioners’ responsibilities under the Order in
Council, we thought the audit could provide departments
and agencies with more value, particularly through being
informed of good practice in recruitment. We also wanted
it to encourage greater engagement by senior
management in recruitment issues and standards. In
many cases, recruitment responsibilities appeared to rest
largely at comparatively junior levels.
We decided to carry out a thorough review of the audit
arrangements in consultation with departments and
agencies. A user-group of Commissioners and
departmental representatives was set up in early 2004 to
agree on the principles of the new system and to place a
contract with an external auditing practice. The group
examined the respective requirements of Commissioners
and departments. It also considered proposals on audit
processes that emerged from interviews with short-listed
tenderers for the contract.
In June a revised contract was awarded to KPMG, which
subsequently joined the user-group.
After a pilot with a selection of departments and agencies, a
new approach is being applied with effect from 1 April 2005.
At Ordnance Survey we
recently underwent a
compliance visit as part
of the pilot group for the
new process. Despite
the pre-visit nerves, the
general consensus was that it was
much more ‘department friendly’ than
before. The emphasis on managing
risk as opposed to checking
paperwork was especially appreciated
and we picked up some actions which
will help us to improve our processes.
It was particularly gratifying for me,
having been involved in the project
from its inception as a departmental
representative, to get positive
feedback on the process from my
team – who, after all, have to make it
work. I am confident that the new
system will quickly realise benefits for
departments and enable the sharing
of best practice across the user
community.
Jan Hutchinson
Director of Human Resources
Ordnance Survey
Annual Report 2004-2005
21
Aims and progress
The monitoring approach is based on key elements:
An emphasis on self-monitoring. The heart of the new
system is the requirement for departmental self-monitoring.
At the end of each accounting period (the financial year),
departments and agencies will be required to lodge a
submission on a secure website. This will include the
department’s or agency’s assessment of perceived risk
against a set of key indicators and controls at various stages
of the recruitment process, as well as the findings of its own
internal checks and the action plan for addressing any risks.
On-site compliance checks based on risk. Rather than
visiting departments and agencies in a rolling programme,
KPMG will propose a series of on-site compliance checks
based on its assessment of the submissions. If an
organisation’s internal systems are found to be sufficiently
robust, the frequency of checks should be kept to the
minimum consistent with the Commissioners’ obligations
under the Order in Council.
Communication of best practice. KPMG, as part of its
overall assessment, will identify areas of good practice. The
Commissioners will ensure that mechanisms are in place
to enable good practice to be widely communicated.
Recruitment Compliance Monitoring Committee. A
committee of representatives of the Commissioners and
departmental and agency Human Resources
representatives has been formed. It will advise us on the
design and operation of the process. It will also consider
regulatory issues and good practice points to be pursued
during the year. The engagement of all key stakeholders at
an early stage in the annual cycle (and, indeed, throughout
the process) will help to build wider ownership.
Permanent Secretary and Chief Executive statements
of compliance. To underpin the new system, every
departmental submission will include a compliance
statement signed at Permanent Secretary or Chief
Executive level. This will confirm that the necessary controls
are in place to ensure adherence to the Recruitment Code.
If this assurance cannot be given, the reasons and plans
for addressing the issues will be provided.
In short, Recruitment Compliance Monitoring is specifically
designed to provide assurance, to add value and to
minimise the workload involved.
22
Civil Service Commissioners
During the year we carried out eight audits based on the
previous audit arrangements and a further five while
piloting the new compliance approach.
We record here that it was found in one organisation that a
permanent post had been filled without full and fair open
competition. This appointment was therefore in breach of the
Commissioners’ Recruitment Code and unlawful. The
department concerned moved promptly to rectify the
situation. We were satisfied that this was a genuine error and
that the necessary corrective action was subsequently taken.
Complaints
Individuals can complain if they believe the principles in the
Recruitment Code have been breached.
They should first complain to the department or agency
concerned. If they are not satisfied with the response, they
can raise the matter with the Commissioners.
If we uphold a complaint, we shall make recommendations
to guard against future breaches of the code.
Last year our Office received 11 complaints under this
arrangement (14 in 2003-2004).
One was an allegation that appointments had not followed
merit order. A large recruitment exercise had been halted
because of a recruitment freeze following a decision to
make a significant reduction in staff numbers. Some
appointments had been made, but there were no longer
appointments available for many of the other candidates
who had been found suitable. One of these complained
that this had resulted in a failure to appoint on merit
because appointments had been offered first to
candidates who were already serving in the areas where
there were vacancies, rather than on the basis of merit
order. The department confirmed that this had happened.
It is considering the legal implications.
The other complaints were not upheld. Some related to
matters that did not concern the Recruitment Code, such
as pre-appointment checks on character or internal
promotion. In other cases, we did not find any evidence
that the handling of the competition had in any way
breached the Recruitment Code. Several complainants
had not been through the departmental procedures and
were advised to pursue this course first.
150 Years 1855-2005
The best person for the job at the
most senior levels
Active involvement
The Commissioners are actively involved in the selection
process at the most senior levels to make sure the best
available person is appointed.
See Appendix C: Interpretation of selection on merit and fair and
open competition.
Departments make the appointments. But we ensure that the
principles of selection on merit on the basis of fair and open
competition are followed. And the appointments must be
approved by us.
Our involvement not only safeguards the recruitment
principles, but also gives candidates, the Civil Service and the
public the assurance that they have in fact been upheld.
See Appendix D: Our role in senior competitions.
We are grateful to departmental and agency managers and
our own Office for their help and courtesy as we carry out our
responsibilities for recruitment. We would also like to thank
those outside the Civil Service who have served on selection
panels for their willing and valued contribution to the senior
appointments process.
Summary of appointments
During the year, there were 91 appointments through open
competition to the Senior Civil Service which required the
Commissioners’ approval (this does not represent all open
competition recruitment to the Senior Civil Service as our
approval – since July 2002 - is not required for most
appointments at its lower levels). They were filled as follows:
• 37 (41 per cent) by civil servants;
• 17 (19 per cent) by candidates from elsewhere in the
public sector;
• 35 (38 per cent) by candidates from the private sector;
• 2 (2 per cent) from other sources (World Bank and
Rockefeller Foundation).
Nineteen were appointments at the top of the Civil Service
that fell within the remit of the Senior Leadership Committee
(SLC), which reviews whether the appointments should be
filled through external recruitment. The committee, which the
First Commissioner attends, is chaired by the Head of the
Home Civil Service.
Improving the assessment
of merit at senior level
During the year we commissioned Clive Fletcher,
Professor Emeritus of Occupational Psychology at
Goldsmiths College, University of London, to undertake
a literature review of the most reliable, validated
techniques for recruiting senior staff in the private,
public and voluntary sectors, with particular reference
to effective selection interviewing, the use of
assessment centres and psychological and
psychometric testing. He augmented this with an
examination of current practice in a number of public
and private-sector organisations.
At the heart of this initiative was
the Commissioners’
responsibility for maintaining the
principle of appointment on
merit. We have long recognised
that identifying the best
candidate – essential at all
Clive Fletcher
levels – can be especially
difficult at more senior levels. We want to play an
effective part in helping departments ensure that
every effort is made to identify the lead candidate on
the basis of valid and relevant information and
appropriate assessment techniques.
Professor Fletcher recommended that the current
approach to making senior appointments in the Civil
Service should be developed to increase its potential
validity and that this should principally involve:
• a more refined and systematic way of describing the
job and the person specification, at least
partly in terms of the relevant competencies;
• the use of assessment devices other than just the
interview – specifically psychometric measures and,
possibly, work sample tests;
• including a more structured, behaviourally-focused
approach to at least part of the interview;
• devoting more time to the interviewing;
• training for interviewers in any new approach adopted.
We have distributed Professor Fletcher’s report to all
departments and will work with them to apply these
recommendations to future competitions.
See Appendix B: Approval of appointments through open
competition to the Senior Civil Service.
Annual Report 2004-2005
23
Aims and progress
There were a further four posts not listed in Appendix B
where no appointment was made following open
competition. In two cases no suitable candidates were
identified. We provide below the specific circumstances in
which no appointment was made in the other two cases.
Comparison with 2003-2004
The overall number of appointments increased by two from
last year’s figure of 89. Appointments at the top of the Civil
Service (SLC posts) were down two from 21. The main
change was the growth in candidates recruited from the
private sector – up by 11 from 24. Offsetting this, the
number filled from the Civil Service reduced by six from 43;
from elsewhere in the public sector by two from 19; and
from other sources by one from three.
Revision of senior recruitment guidance
We have consolidated our procedural note Guidance on Senior
Recruitment and the associated Aide-Mémoire for Board
Members Involved in Senior Recruitment into a single document,
Civil Service Commissioners’ Guidance on Senior Recruitment.
It is a step-by-step guide to the issues that departments
should have in mind when arranging a senior competition
which is to be chaired by a Civil Service Commissioner. In
particular, we highlight the importance of involving the
Commissioners at an early stage and the need to plan
ahead and allow time to encourage and identify the best
possible field. We want to establish an approach in which
departments view each competition as a project to be
planned and managed proactively.
Thank you very much
indeed for your help in
selecting a Director for
one of the key roles in
the Shareholder
Executive. It has been a
pleasure to work with someone who
is both extremely efficient and
sensibly pragmatic.
Richard Gillingwater
Chief Executive
Shareholder Executive
24
Civil Service Commissioners
To raise the guide’s profile and make it more accessible,
we have posted it on our website:
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/publications_and_for
ms/senior_recruitment/index.asp
Director of Communications, Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and
Permanent Secretary, Department of Trade and
Industry
We record here two competitions in which the candidate
recommended by the panel was not appointed.
In one, for the Director of Communications, Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, we considered,
collectively, and for the first time under the revised
arrangements which came into effect on 1 April 2004, a
request by the selection panel that the appointment should
be made other than in the merit order that had been
originally determined by them.
The candidate they had initially recommended was not
acceptable to the Secretary of State. Having considered
the matter further, members of the panel were of the view
that their assessment (and the order of merit) had not taken
into account the emphases that were to be given to the job
by the Secretary of State, which had been expressed at a
very late stage in the competition. They considered that, if
they had done this, they would have placed the second
candidate ahead of the first.
Our conclusion was that as the panel had not carried out a
rigorous assessment of the candidates against the
Secretary of State’s particular emphases, they could not be
sure that the ‘second’ candidate fully met the requirements
of the job. We did not therefore approve the appointment of
the ‘second’ candidate and no appointment was made
from the competition.
In the other competition, for the Permanent Secretary,
Department of Trade and Industry, the panel agreed an
order of merit and recommended the leading candidate for
appointment. The Government – as it is entitled to do –
declined to make an appointment, saying the appointment
would be reconsidered later in the year, following a number
of retirements.
150 Years 1855-2005
Civil Service Code
The Commissioners help to maintain impartiality and
standards of conduct and propriety in the Civil Service by
hearing appeals under the Civil Service Code and the
Code of Conduct for Special Advisers. Last year, we were
also given the responsibility of hearing appeals arising
under the Diplomatic Service Code of Ethics.
Following the publication in September 2003 of The
Government’s Response to the Ninth Report of the
Committee on Standards in Public Life, we have the further
roles of working with departments to promote the Civil
Service Code and helping to ensure its effective operation.
We welcome this as we have been concerned that many
staff apparently lack awareness of the code. The
importance of its effective operation continues to be
underlined by well-publicised issues relating to the duties
and standards of conduct of civil servants.
During 2004-2005 we sought to establish foundations for
this wider role by taking forward the various points of the
Government’s response as follows.
Government response:
The Government should actively establish a register of
departmental nominated officers to whom any civil servant
may go if he or she believes that he or she is being
required to act in a way that is inconsistent with the Civil
Service Code.
The Civil Service Commissioners should keep in touch
with the departmental nominated officers.
We consider these measures to be crucial in establishing a
framework which will enable civil servants with concerns
relating to the Civil Service Code to get advice on how to
raise them and which will reassure them they will not be
penalised for doing so. It will be important for departments
to give effective publicity to the nominated-officer
arrangements, which should in turn also help ensure that
all civil servants are properly aware of the Civil Service
Code and its implications.
Civil Service Code:
Nominated Officers
Core role
The Government has agreed that arrangements should be
put in place to help to ensure that civil servants who may
have concerns relating to the Civil Service Code (see Annex
A) are able to receive impartial advice from someone outside
their management chain, should they wish it. Permanent
Secretaries in each department have now nominated certain
staff to act in this capacity in addition to their normal duties.
They will be directly responsible in this role to the Permanent
Secretary, and will act with his or her authority. The
Nominated Officers for [name of department] are [names].
Nominated Officers will, as needed:
• advise individual members of staff on the interpretation
and implications of the Civil Service Code;
• advise individuals on steps that might be taken to
resolve a concern relating to the code;
• advise on how to take such a concern forward through
the departmental procedures should the individual wish
to do so;
• if requested, pass the concerns on to the appropriate
point within the department if they are satisfied that the
matter may fall within the code.
Their role will be that of an impartial intermediary between
the individual raising the concern and any other parties.
They will, however, wish to be satisfied that due process is
followed by those handling the concern. Should the need
arise, they will consult the Permanent Secretary. They will
also be able to advise on the procedure for appealing to
the Civil Service Commissioners.
The Cabinet Office established a register of nominated officers.
Our Office held preliminary discussions with a selection of them
on how they saw their role. In November 2004, we and the
Cabinet Office ran three seminars for nominated officers where
issues were identified and discussed. The First Commissioner
introduced one of these and the Cabinet Secretary and Head
of the Home Civil Service another.
Annual Report 2004-2005
25
Aims and progress
These discussions led to the agreement and introduction of
a job description for nominated officers and arrangements
for reporting to the Commissioners on their activity.
Departmental websites are reproducing the job description
(see box preceding page). We shall be keeping the new
arrangements under review in the light of nominated
officers’ reports and through regular liaison with them.
Government response:
The Civil Service Commissioners should advise
departments on their promotion of the Civil Service Code
and report on their induction and training activities in their
annual report.
Departments should report the number of formal appeals
they handle under the Code to the Civil Service
Commissioners so that the Commissioners can publish
figures in their annual report.
The First Commissioner wrote to all Permanent Secretaries
in July 2004 seeking information on what their departments
were doing to promote the Civil Service Code.
While steps are being taken to publicise the code through
induction programmes and training activities, we believe
more needs to be done to ensure that it is a living
document which informs how all civil servants see their
work and issues related to it. We have put proposals to the
Cabinet Office about how this could be taken forward.
Arrangements for reporting formal appeals to us will be
established to cover the year 2005-2006.
We need to raise awareness of the Civil
Service Code and make it a truly living
document. I therefore welcome the
involvement of the Civil Service
Commissioners in advising departments
on the promotion of the Code and their
work with nominated officers. These are
positive steps which will help to raise
awareness of civil servants’ rights and
responsibilities under the code.
Sir Andrew Turnbull, Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Home
Civil Service, addressing a nominated officers’ seminar
26
Civil Service Commissioners
Appeals
As in 2003-2004, we did not hear any appeals under the
Civil Service Code during the year. Nor did we receive any
approaches under the Code of Conduct for Special
Advisers or the Diplomatic Service Code of Ethics. One
approach was received which needed to be taken up first
within the department.
Approaches unrelated to code
Our Office from time to time receives approaches about
personnel management issues, such as discipline and
dismissal. These do not fall under the Civil Service Code
and we are therefore unable to consider them. Ten such
approaches were made in 2004-2005 (six in 2003-2004).
Five approaches were also made from outside the Civil
Service about behaviour by civil servants (one in 20032004). Our Office explained that the code provides for
appeals only from serving or former civil servants and
suggested other channels through which the matters might
be pursued. One approach about behaviour by civil
servants was also received from an individual who was a
civil servant but whose concern was a personal matter and
did not relate to his duties as an official. We could not
therefore consider it.
150 Years 1855-2005
Working with departments and
sharing good practice
The Commissioners work with departments to:
• ensure the principles we uphold are understood and
effectively applied;
• share good practice and encourage innovation to support
the Civil Service reform programme.
Seminars
Fourteen seminars entitled Understanding the Work of the
Civil Service Commissioners were presented to HR staff in
departments and agencies nationwide.
We maintain a dialogue with departments at all levels on
how the principles are best applied in the light of current
business objectives and operational circumstances. We aim
to make the lessons of good practice more widely shared.
They covered the legal framework governing Civil Service
recruitment, including the Civil Service Order in Council
1995 and the Civil Service Commissioners’ Recruitment
Code. The Commissioners’ role in relation to recruitment
and the Civil Service Code was also explained. The
feedback from participants indicated a greater awareness
of the Commissioners’ role and the importance of adhering
to the Recruitment Code and the Civil Service Code.
We encourage and support innovation where it is needed.
Discussion of current issues
We promote awareness and understanding of our work,
particularly in departments but also in wider circles.
Our Office also:
• contributed to meetings of the Cabinet Office’s
interdepartmental Recruitment Network;
• held meetings with individual departments on how to
handle particular issues they faced in connection with the
principles in the Recruitment Code, including flexibilities
in procedures within the framework of our principles;
• gave advice to departments in response to telephone
queries and e-mails (often several a day and several
hundred over the year) about the implications of the
Recruitment Code for the way they handle their
recruitment or particular issues that have arisen and
about the use of the permitted exceptions to selection on
merit on the basis of fair and open competition.
Linked Commissioners
Commissioners are linked to one or more main
departments. Each year they meet the Permanent Secretary
and sometimes the departmental HR Director. These
meetings explore current issues, review the Commissioners’
role and discuss ideas for development.
During this year’s round of linked visits, Commissioners
discussed their role in senior recruitment competitions and, in
particular, the importance of involving them at an early stage,
the use of different assessment tools in the recruitment
process, the revised Commissioners’ Recruitment Code,
promotion of the Civil Service Code and the introduction of
the new Compliance Monitoring audit system.
Some reactions to our seminars about our work
“Nice to see the OCSC getting out to meet people”
“It was informative and thought-provoking without being too heavy”
“Thoroughly enjoyable. Did not appreciate what the OCSC did and
how important they are in ensuring we employ the best candidates
available”
“Enjoyed the session, lively presentation with good participation”
“Thank you for an extremely interesting, informative and wellpresented seminar”
“I learnt a lot and feel this will help me within my role”
Annual Report 2004-2005
27
The Government’s draft Civil Service Bill
Veronica Palmer-Davies
Policy Communications Officer
Department of Health
28
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
The Government’s
draft Civil Service Bill
In February 2005 we gave our response to the
Government’s consultation document inviting comments
on a draft Civil Service Bill.
We reiterated our full support for legislation by Parliament
enshrining the constitutional position of the Civil Service
and the core values which underpin it, as we had already
made clear in our evidence to the Committee on
Standards in Public Life in May 2002 and to the Public
Administration Select Committee in July 2003. We gave our
view that at a time of rapid change, which might bring
unintended consequences, there is a need, more than
ever, to ensure that core values are not eroded. We did not
consider that a narrowly defined Act, along the lines of the
draft Bill, would inhibit the evolution and organisational
development of the Civil Service. Rather, it would aid it.
We also gave views on the content of the draft Bill.
We commented on some points of detail in the draft Bill
concerning the staff to be covered by it and the
Commissioners’ role in relation to:
• the reappointment of former civil servants;
• complaints relating to the Commissioners’ Recruitment
Code;
• a power for the Commissioners to approve
appointments retrospectively where someone has
inadvertently been employed through a procedure that
failed to meet our requirements;
• the need for the framework of exceptions to selection on
merit on the basis of fair and open competition to be
able to accommodate the current provisions for shortterm appointments for New Dealers and the appointment
of disabled persons, as well as those where the
appointments are ‘justified by the needs of the civil
service’.
We also suggested that some thought should be given to
providing some independent oversight of the principle of
appointment on the basis of merit considerations in the
case of promotions and lateral transfers.
With regard to the draft Bill’s provisions relating to the Civil
Service Code, we:
• noted that there was an opportunity to reinforce the duty
and responsibility of Ministers not to ask civil servants to
act in any way which would conflict with the Civil Service
Code;
• advocated the inclusion of our new further responsibilities
to advise departments on the promotion of the code, to
liaise with the nominated officers in departments advising
staff on the code and to report on activity relating to the
code (see Aims and Progress: Civil Service Code);
• reiterated our view that we should be able to initiate
enquiries without having to be approached by a civil
servant with a complaint, although we welcomed the
draft provision which would allow civil servants to
complain to us direct if they considered that they would
be subject to a detriment if they raised the matter
internally;
• proposed that it should be made clear that complaints
could cover cases where a civil servant becomes aware
of a breach of the code in work not directly related to
their own.
Annual Report 2004-2005
29
The Government’s draft Civil Service Bill
On Special Advisers, we expressed
concern about the proposition that
they should be able, on behalf of
their appointing Minister, to
commission work from civil
servants.
On Special Advisers, we expressed concern about the
proposition that they should be able, on behalf of their
appointing Minister, to commission work from civil servants.
Although this may be consistent with the current Special
Adviser Model Contract and Code of Conduct, we
consider that it would confuse the respective roles and
would in effect result in Special Advisers’ giving instructions
to civil servants. We would prefer the Bill to include the
terms of the existing Order in Council under which Special
Advisers are appointed ‘for the purpose only of providing
advice to any Minister’ and to alter the Model Contract and
Code of Conduct so that they comply with this provision.
We consider that, when a Minister wishes to commission
work, it should be done through his or her Private Office.
While we noted that the draft Bill reduces the number of
Special Advisers who may have executive powers over civil
servants from the current three to two, we remain of the
view that there should not be any who have such powers.
30
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
We also made a number of points of detail on the
constitution and operation of the Civil Service Commission
as described in the draft Bill:
• Commissioners should continue to be appointed by the
Crown rather than by Parliament. The arrangements
proposed for consultation over the appointment of the
First Commissioner should provide adequate assurance
about the political independence of anyone appointed to
this post.
• The distinctive role of the First Commissioner could be
reflected in the Bill.
• We do not see it as necessary or practical for there to be
a requirement for leaders of the devolved Administrations
to be consulted about the appointment of
Commissioners to take a particular interest in Scotland
and Wales. There are operational needs for flexibility in
the way that Commissioners are deployed to work with
departments. The flexibility also helps to ensure that they
are perceived to be independent.
• Our view is that Commissioners should be appointable
for longer than the three years envisaged in the draft Bill.
We proposed an initial three-year appointment,
extendable by agreement for a further two or three years.
• We welcomed the provision for laying the annual reports
of the Commission before both Houses of Parliament.
This should facilitate examination by the appropriate
Select Committees and thereby ensure that any issues
raised by the Commissioners are fully and properly
considered.
Annual Report 2004-2005
31
Evidence to Public Administration Select Committee
Ian Shepherd
Policy Analyst, Police and Communities
Her Majesty’s Treasury
32
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
1855
150 Years 1855-2005
Links with other governments
150 Years 1855-2005
Evidence to Public Administration
Select Committee
1854
First three Commissioners are
appointed, not by Act of
Parliament as NorthcoteTrevelyan recommended but
under Order in Council by
Queen Victoria (Commissioners
are still appointed this way).
Commissioners, assisted by a
Secretary, run their first exam
– for men only.
Presentation to Parliament of
Northcote-Trevelyan Report on
the Civil Service which calls for
‘a proper system of examination,
for the supply of the public
service with a thoroughly
efficient class of men’.
A Civil Service Commission will
be set up to run the exams.
We gave evidence to the House of Commons Public
Administration Select Committee’s inquiry into the
effectiveness of the Civil Service.
Announcing its inquiry, the committee said it would be
asking ‘whether today’s civil servants have the right skills to
deliver public services, and whether wider use of new
technology, relocation outside London and more devolution
to local bodies will help strengthen the performance of the
service’. In particular, it would seek views on questions that
had emerged from a number of recent initiatives, including
the Government’s proposals for Civil Service reform, the
Gershon review of public-sector efficiency, the Lyons review
of relocation and the Government’s aim of increasing the
diversity of the Civil Service. The committee’s Chairman, Dr
Tony Wright MP, said its work on a draft Civil Service Bill had
brought into focus the need to bolster, with Parliament’s
close involvement, the vital Civil Service principles of political
neutrality and objectivity. But it was absolutely vital that civil
servants had the capacity and support to do the job
effectively. The committee, he said, wanted ‘to assess
whether government plans in this area are well thought-out,
and whether there is a danger that such reforms might
undermine the long-standing strengths of the Civil Service’.
Representatives of Public Service
Commissions with Baroness Prashar
at a seminar in November
Stafford Northcote
Annual Report 2004-2005
37
With our responsibilities for recruitment and the Civil
Service Code, we have a vital role to play in both the
effectiveness and propriety of the Civil Service. As
Commissioners, we have worked together for four years.
Our evidence to the committee was based on this
experience. We also drew on our wider career experience
of working in and with a range of organisations, including
the Civil Service.
A summary of our comments to the committee is
as follows:
• The question of the Civil Service’s effectiveness can be
addressed successfully only if there is clarity and
understanding about its role and purpose.
• The existence of a permanent Civil Service – which is
there to offer honest and impartial advice to Ministers
and to provide them with all the information and support
they need to reach a decision and achieve their
objectives – is essential to the form of government that
has evolved in this country and its effectiveness.
• There is a need for greater clarity about the respective
roles and responsibilities of Ministers and Permanent
Secretaries in the management of departments. We
would argue that Permanent Secretaries should have full
responsibility for ensuring that their departments have the
capability and the capacity to respond to and deliver
Ministers’ policy objectives.
• The Civil Service needs to place greater emphasis on the
development of its staff if departments are to develop
that capability and capacity.
• There is no inherent tension between the core values of
the Civil Service – integrity, honesty, impartiality, objectivity
and appointment on merit – and its effectiveness. Rather,
as in any organisation, the promotion of and adherence
to a set of values and standards of behaviour is key to
the running of an effective business.
• The Civil Service needs to do more to promote the Civil
Service’s core values.
Charles Trevelyan
Annual Report 2004-2005
35
40
Civil Service Commissioners
Annual Report 2004-2005
33
Civil Service Commissioners’ 150th anniversary
150 Years 1855-2005
Pensions are payable only
to civil servants who have
the Commissioners’
‘certificate of qualification’.
This makes the
Commissioners’ approval
much more important.
Commission is now chaired
by a ‘First Commissioner’.
It has 17 staff.
All entrants to main government
departments must now pass open
competitive exams. Post Office
employs the first female civil servants.
18561857185818591860186118621863186418651866186718681869187018711872
1873187418751876187718781879188018811882188318841885188618871888
1889189018911892189318941895189618971898189919001901190219031904
19051906190719081909191019111912191319141915191619171918191919201921
19221923192419251926192719281929193019311932193319341935193619371938
19391940194119421943194419451946194719481949195019511952195319541955
19561957195819591960196119621963196419651966196719681969197019711972
19731974197519761977197819791980198119821983198419851986198719881989
1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005
l
Job candidates:
38,223
Commissioners
get a telephone.
Recruitment of more women
is approved, but they must be
kept ‘in separate rooms under
proper female supervision’.
Job candidates: 64,828
Interviews of candidates are
introduced. Competitive
interview will remain a key part
of the appointments system.
Second World War forces
another big Civil Service
expansion, including many
temporary officials.
Civil Service Selection Board is set up to run
modernised recruitment, involving exams,
psychological tests, oral and written exercises, and
interviews. Commissioners’ oversight continues.
Commissioners’ oversight is extended to fixedterm as well as permanent appointments.
The first woman Commissioner is appointed.
Civil Service reorganised
into four ‘classes’:
Administrative, Executive,
Clerical and Typing.
Intelligence tests are
introduced.
First World War greatly
expands Civil Service.
Many new staff are women.
Post-war reconstruction
imposes major new tasks on
Civil Service. Commission
staff soars from 320 in 1946
to just over 1,000 in 1948.
Commission staff is
reduced to 400.
Job candidates: 61,000
Outside educational
Commission staff return to qualifications start to
peacetime levels at 544. replace Civil Service exams.
Recruitment to junior grades is
transferred to departments.
Commissioners begin
Commission staff is cut to 284. delegating clerical recruitment
Order in Council says recruitment to departments.
must be on merit after fair and
open competition. This will
remain the guiding principle
and the Commissioners will
ensure it is applied.
Civil Service ‘classes’ are
merged.
Civil Service exams are
abolished.
Civil Service shake-up begins after committee chaired
by Lord Fulton calls for changes including a unified
grading structure and major changes to recruitment
involving more delegation to departments.
Commissioners are
enabled to contract out
their monitoring role. They
now have only eight staff.
2005 is the 150th anniversary of the
establishment of the Civil Service
Commissioners. Here we show how
we have adapted to the challenges
of constantly changing times.
34
Civil Service Commissioners
Order in Council again changes
the Commissioners’ role. They
now concentrate on recruitment
to the more senior appointments.
They also get a legal duty to
advise the Civil Service Minister
on rules governing departmental
recruitment and to monitor their
application. Civil Service
Commission becomes Office of
the Civil Service Commissioners
(OCSC). Its staff is reduced to 22.
Commissioners
buy a typewriter.
Senior Civil Service is
established. Commissioners
are responsible for
appointments to it. Other jobs
are handled by departments.
Order in Council requires
Commissioners to publish a
Recruitment Code which
departments must follow.
Commissioners operate
contracted-out audit of Civil
Service recruitment.
First Commissioner is
appointed following open
competition and is no longer a
serving civil servant.
Commissioners’ work now
largely consists of approving
senior appointments after
ensuring they are made on
merit following fair and open
competition. A Commissioner
often chairs the panel.
Commissioners get new role
to hear appeals from civil
servants under Civil Service
Code which covers general
standards of conduct and
propriety.
Civil Service Reform
Programme is launched.
Senior appointments
approved: 107
Senior appointments
approved: 158
Senior appointments
approved: 202
Commissioners limit their
power of approval to most
senior posts (Pay Band 2
and above, plus some
others).
‘Next Steps’ plan for parts of the Civil
Service to become free-standing
‘agencies’ will transform many civil
servants’ working lives.
Nearly 150 years after
Northcote-Trevelyan called
for a Civil Service Act,
Committee on Standards
in Public Life also
recommends one. It wants
the Commissioners to
have a more active role in
upholding appointment on
merit and new powers to
ensure observance of
Civil Service Code.
Commons Public
Administration Committee
also calls for Civil Service
legislation.
Commissioners get new
responsibility of working with
departments to promote the
Civil Service Code.
Private Members’ Bills in
Commons and Lords
unsuccessfully seek to
introduce a Civil Service Act.
Senior appointments
approved: 89 (following the
raising in July 2002 of the
level requiring approval).
First Commissioner Baroness
Prashar says: “What made
the Northcote-Trevelyan
proposals a turning point was
that they led to a service in
which integrity, honesty,
impartiality, objectivity and
appointment on merit
became enduring values. We
have worked with the Civil
Service to ensure that the
objectives of the reform
agenda are achieved without
compromising the values.”
Senior appointments
approved: 91
Annual Report 2004-2005
39
150 Years 1855-2005
1855
150 Years 1855-2005
Links with other governments
150 Years 1855-2005
Evidence to Public Administration
Select Committee
1854
First three Commissioners are
appointed, not by Act of
Parliament as NorthcoteTrevelyan recommended but
under Order in Council by
Queen Victoria (Commissioners
are still appointed this way).
Commissioners, assisted by a
Secretary, run their first exam
– for men only.
Presentation to Parliament of
Northcote-Trevelyan Report on
the Civil Service which calls for
‘a proper system of examination,
for the supply of the public
service with a thoroughly
efficient class of men’.
A Civil Service Commission will
be set up to run the exams.
We gave evidence to the House of Commons Public
Administration Select Committee’s inquiry into the
effectiveness of the Civil Service.
Announcing its inquiry, the committee said it would be
asking ‘whether today’s civil servants have the right skills to
deliver public services, and whether wider use of new
technology, relocation outside London and more devolution
to local bodies will help strengthen the performance of the
service’. In particular, it would seek views on questions that
had emerged from a number of recent initiatives, including
the Government’s proposals for Civil Service reform, the
Gershon review of public-sector efficiency, the Lyons review
of relocation and the Government’s aim of increasing the
diversity of the Civil Service. The committee’s Chairman, Dr
Tony Wright MP, said its work on a draft Civil Service Bill had
brought into focus the need to bolster, with Parliament’s
close involvement, the vital Civil Service principles of political
neutrality and objectivity. But it was absolutely vital that civil
servants had the capacity and support to do the job
effectively. The committee, he said, wanted ‘to assess
whether government plans in this area are well thought-out,
and whether there is a danger that such reforms might
undermine the long-standing strengths of the Civil Service’.
Representatives of Public Service
Commissions with Baroness Prashar
at a seminar in November
Stafford Northcote
Annual Report 2004-2005
37
With our responsibilities for recruitment and the Civil
Service Code, we have a vital role to play in both the
effectiveness and propriety of the Civil Service. As
Commissioners, we have worked together for four years.
Our evidence to the committee was based on this
experience. We also drew on our wider career experience
of working in and with a range of organisations, including
the Civil Service.
A summary of our comments to the committee is
as follows:
• The question of the Civil Service’s effectiveness can be
addressed successfully only if there is clarity and
understanding about its role and purpose.
• The existence of a permanent Civil Service – which is
there to offer honest and impartial advice to Ministers
and to provide them with all the information and support
they need to reach a decision and achieve their
objectives – is essential to the form of government that
has evolved in this country and its effectiveness.
• There is a need for greater clarity about the respective
roles and responsibilities of Ministers and Permanent
Secretaries in the management of departments. We
would argue that Permanent Secretaries should have full
responsibility for ensuring that their departments have the
capability and the capacity to respond to and deliver
Ministers’ policy objectives.
• The Civil Service needs to place greater emphasis on the
development of its staff if departments are to develop
that capability and capacity.
• There is no inherent tension between the core values of
the Civil Service – integrity, honesty, impartiality, objectivity
and appointment on merit – and its effectiveness. Rather,
as in any organisation, the promotion of and adherence
to a set of values and standards of behaviour is key to
the running of an effective business.
• The Civil Service needs to do more to promote the Civil
Service’s core values.
Charles Trevelyan
Annual Report 2004-2005
35
40
Civil Service Commissioners
Annual Report 2004-2005
33
150 Years 1855-2005
1855
150 Years 1855-2005
Links with other governments
150 Years 1855-2005
Evidence to Public Administration
Select Committee
1854
First three Commissioners are
appointed, not by Act of
Parliament as NorthcoteTrevelyan recommended but
under Order in Council by
Queen Victoria (Commissioners
are still appointed this way).
Commissioners, assisted by a
Secretary, run their first exam
– for men only.
Presentation to Parliament of
Northcote-Trevelyan Report on
the Civil Service which calls for
‘a proper system of examination,
for the supply of the public
service with a thoroughly
efficient class of men’.
A Civil Service Commission will
be set up to run the exams.
We gave evidence to the House of Commons Public
Administration Select Committee’s inquiry into the
effectiveness of the Civil Service.
Announcing its inquiry, the committee said it would be
asking ‘whether today’s civil servants have the right skills to
deliver public services, and whether wider use of new
technology, relocation outside London and more devolution
to local bodies will help strengthen the performance of the
service’. In particular, it would seek views on questions that
had emerged from a number of recent initiatives, including
the Government’s proposals for Civil Service reform, the
Gershon review of public-sector efficiency, the Lyons review
of relocation and the Government’s aim of increasing the
diversity of the Civil Service. The committee’s Chairman, Dr
Tony Wright MP, said its work on a draft Civil Service Bill had
brought into focus the need to bolster, with Parliament’s
close involvement, the vital Civil Service principles of political
neutrality and objectivity. But it was absolutely vital that civil
servants had the capacity and support to do the job
effectively. The committee, he said, wanted ‘to assess
whether government plans in this area are well thought-out,
and whether there is a danger that such reforms might
undermine the long-standing strengths of the Civil Service’.
Representatives of Public Service
Commissions with Baroness Prashar
at a seminar in November
Stafford Northcote
Annual Report 2004-2005
37
With our responsibilities for recruitment and the Civil
Service Code, we have a vital role to play in both the
effectiveness and propriety of the Civil Service. As
Commissioners, we have worked together for four years.
Our evidence to the committee was based on this
experience. We also drew on our wider career experience
of working in and with a range of organisations, including
the Civil Service.
A summary of our comments to the committee is
as follows:
• The question of the Civil Service’s effectiveness can be
addressed successfully only if there is clarity and
understanding about its role and purpose.
• The existence of a permanent Civil Service – which is
there to offer honest and impartial advice to Ministers
and to provide them with all the information and support
they need to reach a decision and achieve their
objectives – is essential to the form of government that
has evolved in this country and its effectiveness.
• There is a need for greater clarity about the respective
roles and responsibilities of Ministers and Permanent
Secretaries in the management of departments. We
would argue that Permanent Secretaries should have full
responsibility for ensuring that their departments have the
capability and the capacity to respond to and deliver
Ministers’ policy objectives.
• The Civil Service needs to place greater emphasis on the
development of its staff if departments are to develop
that capability and capacity.
• There is no inherent tension between the core values of
the Civil Service – integrity, honesty, impartiality, objectivity
and appointment on merit – and its effectiveness. Rather,
as in any organisation, the promotion of and adherence
to a set of values and standards of behaviour is key to
the running of an effective business.
• The Civil Service needs to do more to promote the Civil
Service’s core values.
Charles Trevelyan
Annual Report 2004-2005
35
40
Civil Service Commissioners
Annual Report 2004-2005
33
Civil Service Commissioners’ 150th anniversary
150 Years 1855-2005
Pensions are payable only
to civil servants who have
the Commissioners’
‘certificate of qualification’.
This makes the
Commissioners’ approval
much more important.
Commission is now chaired
by a ‘First Commissioner’.
It has 17 staff.
All entrants to main government
departments must now pass open
competitive exams. Post Office
employs the first female civil servants.
18561857185818591860186118621863186418651866186718681869187018711872
1873187418751876187718781879188018811882188318841885188618871888
1889189018911892189318941895189618971898189919001901190219031904
19051906190719081909191019111912191319141915191619171918191919201921
19221923192419251926192719281929193019311932193319341935193619371938
19391940194119421943194419451946194719481949195019511952195319541955
19561957195819591960196119621963196419651966196719681969197019711972
19731974197519761977197819791980198119821983198419851986198719881989
1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005
l
Job candidates:
38,223
Commissioners
get a telephone.
Recruitment of more women
is approved, but they must be
kept ‘in separate rooms under
proper female supervision’.
Job candidates: 64,828
Interviews of candidates are
introduced. Competitive
interview will remain a key part
of the appointments system.
Second World War forces
another big Civil Service
expansion, including many
temporary officials.
Civil Service Selection Board is set up to run
modernised recruitment, involving exams,
psychological tests, oral and written exercises, and
interviews. Commissioners’ oversight continues.
Commissioners’ oversight is extended to fixedterm as well as permanent appointments.
The first woman Commissioner is appointed.
Civil Service reorganised
into four ‘classes’:
Administrative, Executive,
Clerical and Typing.
Intelligence tests are
introduced.
First World War greatly
expands Civil Service.
Many new staff are women.
Post-war reconstruction
imposes major new tasks on
Civil Service. Commission
staff soars from 320 in 1946
to just over 1,000 in 1948.
Commission staff is
reduced to 400.
Job candidates: 61,000
Outside educational
Commission staff return to qualifications start to
peacetime levels at 544. replace Civil Service exams.
Recruitment to junior grades is
transferred to departments.
Commissioners begin
Commission staff is cut to 284. delegating clerical recruitment
Order in Council says recruitment to departments.
must be on merit after fair and
open competition. This will
remain the guiding principle
and the Commissioners will
ensure it is applied.
Civil Service ‘classes’ are
merged.
Civil Service exams are
abolished.
Civil Service shake-up begins after committee chaired
by Lord Fulton calls for changes including a unified
grading structure and major changes to recruitment
involving more delegation to departments.
Commissioners are
enabled to contract out
their monitoring role. They
now have only eight staff.
2005 is the 150th anniversary of the
establishment of the Civil Service
Commissioners. Here we show how
we have adapted to the challenges
of constantly changing times.
34
Civil Service Commissioners
Order in Council again changes
the Commissioners’ role. They
now concentrate on recruitment
to the more senior appointments.
They also get a legal duty to
advise the Civil Service Minister
on rules governing departmental
recruitment and to monitor their
application. Civil Service
Commission becomes Office of
the Civil Service Commissioners
(OCSC). Its staff is reduced to 22.
Commissioners
buy a typewriter.
Senior Civil Service is
established. Commissioners
are responsible for
appointments to it. Other jobs
are handled by departments.
Order in Council requires
Commissioners to publish a
Recruitment Code which
departments must follow.
Commissioners operate
contracted-out audit of Civil
Service recruitment.
First Commissioner is
appointed following open
competition and is no longer a
serving civil servant.
Commissioners’ work now
largely consists of approving
senior appointments after
ensuring they are made on
merit following fair and open
competition. A Commissioner
often chairs the panel.
Commissioners get new role
to hear appeals from civil
servants under Civil Service
Code which covers general
standards of conduct and
propriety.
Civil Service Reform
Programme is launched.
Senior appointments
approved: 107
Senior appointments
approved: 158
Senior appointments
approved: 202
Commissioners limit their
power of approval to most
senior posts (Pay Band 2
and above, plus some
others).
‘Next Steps’ plan for parts of the Civil
Service to become free-standing
‘agencies’ will transform many civil
servants’ working lives.
Nearly 150 years after
Northcote-Trevelyan called
for a Civil Service Act,
Committee on Standards
in Public Life also
recommends one. It wants
the Commissioners to
have a more active role in
upholding appointment on
merit and new powers to
ensure observance of
Civil Service Code.
Commons Public
Administration Committee
also calls for Civil Service
legislation.
Commissioners get new
responsibility of working with
departments to promote the
Civil Service Code.
Private Members’ Bills in
Commons and Lords
unsuccessfully seek to
introduce a Civil Service Act.
Senior appointments
approved: 89 (following the
raising in July 2002 of the
level requiring approval).
First Commissioner Baroness
Prashar says: “What made
the Northcote-Trevelyan
proposals a turning point was
that they led to a service in
which integrity, honesty,
impartiality, objectivity and
appointment on merit
became enduring values. We
have worked with the Civil
Service to ensure that the
objectives of the reform
agenda are achieved without
compromising the values.”
Senior appointments
approved: 91
Annual Report 2004-2005
39
150 Years 1855-2005
1855
150 Years 1855-2005
Links with other governments
150 Years 1855-2005
Evidence to Public Administration
Select Committee
1854
First three Commissioners are
appointed, not by Act of
Parliament as NorthcoteTrevelyan recommended but
under Order in Council by
Queen Victoria (Commissioners
are still appointed this way).
Commissioners, assisted by a
Secretary, run their first exam
– for men only.
Presentation to Parliament of
Northcote-Trevelyan Report on
the Civil Service which calls for
‘a proper system of examination,
for the supply of the public
service with a thoroughly
efficient class of men’.
A Civil Service Commission will
be set up to run the exams.
We gave evidence to the House of Commons Public
Administration Select Committee’s inquiry into the
effectiveness of the Civil Service.
Announcing its inquiry, the committee said it would be
asking ‘whether today’s civil servants have the right skills to
deliver public services, and whether wider use of new
technology, relocation outside London and more devolution
to local bodies will help strengthen the performance of the
service’. In particular, it would seek views on questions that
had emerged from a number of recent initiatives, including
the Government’s proposals for Civil Service reform, the
Gershon review of public-sector efficiency, the Lyons review
of relocation and the Government’s aim of increasing the
diversity of the Civil Service. The committee’s Chairman, Dr
Tony Wright MP, said its work on a draft Civil Service Bill had
brought into focus the need to bolster, with Parliament’s
close involvement, the vital Civil Service principles of political
neutrality and objectivity. But it was absolutely vital that civil
servants had the capacity and support to do the job
effectively. The committee, he said, wanted ‘to assess
whether government plans in this area are well thought-out,
and whether there is a danger that such reforms might
undermine the long-standing strengths of the Civil Service’.
Representatives of Public Service
Commissions with Baroness Prashar
at a seminar in November
Stafford Northcote
Annual Report 2004-2005
37
With our responsibilities for recruitment and the Civil
Service Code, we have a vital role to play in both the
effectiveness and propriety of the Civil Service. As
Commissioners, we have worked together for four years.
Our evidence to the committee was based on this
experience. We also drew on our wider career experience
of working in and with a range of organisations, including
the Civil Service.
A summary of our comments to the committee is
as follows:
• The question of the Civil Service’s effectiveness can be
addressed successfully only if there is clarity and
understanding about its role and purpose.
• The existence of a permanent Civil Service – which is
there to offer honest and impartial advice to Ministers
and to provide them with all the information and support
they need to reach a decision and achieve their
objectives – is essential to the form of government that
has evolved in this country and its effectiveness.
• There is a need for greater clarity about the respective
roles and responsibilities of Ministers and Permanent
Secretaries in the management of departments. We
would argue that Permanent Secretaries should have full
responsibility for ensuring that their departments have the
capability and the capacity to respond to and deliver
Ministers’ policy objectives.
• The Civil Service needs to place greater emphasis on the
development of its staff if departments are to develop
that capability and capacity.
• There is no inherent tension between the core values of
the Civil Service – integrity, honesty, impartiality, objectivity
and appointment on merit – and its effectiveness. Rather,
as in any organisation, the promotion of and adherence
to a set of values and standards of behaviour is key to
the running of an effective business.
• The Civil Service needs to do more to promote the Civil
Service’s core values.
Charles Trevelyan
Annual Report 2004-2005
35
40
Civil Service Commissioners
Annual Report 2004-2005
33
150 Years 1855-2005
Links with other governments
We value the opportunity for discussion of issues of mutual
concern with representatives of other governments. We
have found widespread international interest in our work as
a model of good practice and growing concern in many
countries about public-service ethics.
The First Commissioner addressed the International
Conference on Personnel Administration in Korea in May. In
October, she met the Director General, Public Service
Commission, South Africa. In November, the First
Commissioner and members of our Office held a seminar
under the auspices of Public Administration International for
representatives of Public Service Commissions in 16
countries (Bahrain, British Virgin Islands, Hong Kong, India,
Kazakhstan, Lesotho, Malaysia, Montserrat, Pakistan,
Rwanda, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, South Africa,
Sudan and the Turks & Caicos Islands).
Our Office meets a wide range of overseas visitors under
arrangements made by the Cabinet Office’s International
Development and Consulting group, the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office, or other organisations such as the
British Association for Central and Eastern Europe. During
the year, the Office discussed the Commissioners’ role and
related issues with representatives of the governments of
Albania, China, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Kosovo, Mexico
and Nigeria; the Prime Minister of the Republic of Srpska;
and MPs from Bosnia and Herzegovina and from Bulgaria.
The First Commissioner and our Office discussed issues
relating to the Civil Service Code with the Canadian
Government in correspondence and by telephone.
Annual Report 2004-2005
41
Appendices
Appendix A
Civil Service Commissioners’
responsibilities and costs
The Commissioners’ responsibilities are laid down by the
Civil Service Order in Council 1995 (with subsequent
amendments) and the Diplomatic Service Order in
Council 1991 (with subsequent amendments).
The procedures for making an appeal are set out in further
detail in a leaflet produced by the Office of the Civil Service
Commissioners. It is available from the Office and at our
website: www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk
Recruitment
Annual report
The Orders require the Commissioners to:
• maintain the principles of selection on merit on the basis
of fair and open competition in recruitment to the Civil
Service;
• prescribe and publish a Recruitment Code on the
interpretation and application of the principles;
• incorporate in the Recruitment Code certain restricted
circumstances in which exceptions to the principles can
be made, within the terms of the Orders in Council;
• approve appointments at the most senior levels in the
Civil Service made through open competition or under
the exceptions;
• audit the recruitment systems of departments and
agencies for compliance with the Recruitment Code.
The Orders require the Commissioners to produce an
annual report and specify what is to be in it:
• summary information on appointments requiring the
Commissioners’ approval which have been made
through fair and open competition and through the use
of permitted exceptions;
• an account of the audit of recruitment policies and
practices;
• summary information on appeals which have been made
to the Commissioners under the Civil Service Code and
the Diplomatic Service Code of Ethics.
In addition, the Commissioners, as empowered by the
Orders, require departments and agencies to publish
information about their recruitment, including their use of
the exceptions to selection on merit on the basis of fair and
open competition.
The Commissioners’ responsibilities relate to the Home
Civil Service and the Diplomatic Service. Other parts of the
public service are outside their remit. There are separate
Commissioners for the Northern Ireland Civil Service.
Finances
Appeals under the Civil Service
Code and the Diplomatic Service
Code of Ethics
We provide here a summary of finances during 2004-2005.
The figures are based on the likely out-turn.
The Orders give the Commissioners the duty to hear and
determine appeals under the Civil Service Code for the Home
Civil Service and under the Diplomatic Service Code of Ethics.
First Commissioner’s pay and related costs
Commissioners’ fees1
Commissioners’ travel and subsistence costs
OCSC staff pay and related costs
Consultancy costs
(including the compliance monitoring contract)
Other administration costs
Sub-total
Income from provision of training
Total
The Civil Service Code sets out the role and duties of civil
servants and the standards of conduct and propriety
expected of them. It also provides for matters which
appear to contravene the code, including those raising
fundamental issues of conscience, to be reported under
departmental procedures.
These provisions are paralleled in the Diplomatic Service
Code of Ethics.
When a matter has been reported and the civil servant
concerned considers that the response is not a reasonable
one, he or she may appeal to the Commissioners.
42
Scope of responsibilities
Civil Service Commissioners
£K
1
147
157
34
271
191
97
897
1
896
£1,200 per senior competition chaired and £300 per day
pro rata for other activities.
150 Years 1855-2005
Appendix B
Approval of appointments through open
competition to the Senior Civil Service
Our approval is required for appointments at Pay Band 2 and above in the Senior Civil Service and for government
communication posts in the Senior Civil Service below that level.
Senior Leadership Committee
appointees and others
Totals
SLC
19
Sources of candidates
approved for appointment
NON-SLC
72
(including 10 government
communication posts at
Pay Band 1)
Civil Service
37
Other public sector
17
Private sector and other sources
35
Other
2
(Rockefeller Foundation, World Bank)
Total
41 per cent
19 per cent
38 per cent
2 per cent
91
Senior Leadership Committee appointments
DEPARTMENT/AGENCY
Attorney General
Cabinet Office
Department for
Constitutional Affairs
Department for Culture,
Media and Sport
Ministry of Defence
Office of Government
Commerce
Department of Health
JOB TITLE
Director of Customs
Prosecutions
Head of the Office
of E-Government
Director General,
Strategy
Director General,
Finance
Director General
APPOINTEE
David Green
PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT
Barrister
Ian Watmore
UK Managing Director, Accenture
Rod Clark
Chief Scientific Adviser
Professor Roy Anderson
Deputy Chief Executive
Peter Fanning
Chief Nursing Officer
Christine Beasley
Directory of Strategy,
Planning & Performance, DWP
Chief Finance Officer,
Scala Business Solutions
Executive Director of
Policy & Partnerships, GLA
Professor & Head of Department of
Infectious Disease Epidemiology,
Imperial College London
Director of Procurement, London
Centre of Procurement Excellence
Director of Partnership Development,
Modernisation Agency
Director of Strategy, Kingfisher
Director for Resources & Deputy
Chief Exec, West Sussex CC
Chief Officer, Greater Manchester
Probation Service
Vice-President, Infrastructure,
The World Bank
Chairman, mm02
CIO & Vice President Information
Management, BG Group
Chief Economic Adviser,
Scottish Executive
Chief Executive, Countryside Agency
Barbara Moorhouse
Jeffrey Jacobs
Director of Strategy
Director General,
Financial & Procurement
National Offender
Manager
Department for
Director General,
International Development Regional Programmes
HM Revenue & Customs Executive Chairman
Chief Information Officer
Stephen O’Brien
Helen Kilpatrick
Scottish Executive
Andrew Goudie
Home Office
Head of Finance
& Central Services
Head of Environment
& Rural Affairs
Head of Health & Chief
Executive, NHS Scotland
Department for Transport Director General, Rail
Department for
Work and Pensions
Child Support Agency
Chief Executive
Christine Knott
Nemat Shafik
David Varney
Steven Lamey
Richard Wakeford
Kevin Woods
Mike Mitchell
Stephen Geraghty
Chief Executive, North Central London
Strategic Health Authority
Business Development Director,
First Group
Former Managing Director, Assistance
Division, Direct Line Insurance
Annual Report 2004-2005
43
Appendices
Other senior appointments through open competition
DEPARTMENT/AGENCY
Cabinet Office
JOB TITLE
Diversity Adviser
to the Civil Service
Director of Communications
APPOINTEE
Waqar Azmi
Chief Executive,
Tribunals Service
Peter Handcock
Communications Director
Lucien Hudson
Director of Finance
(Resources)
Chief Executive
Phillip Lloyd
Chair
Geraldine Peacock
Head of Strategic
Communications Initiative
Pam Teare
Chief Executive
Peter Moore
Chief Executive
Michael McDowell
David Olney
MoD Police
Director General,
Operations
Chief Constable
Office of the Deputy
Prime Minister
Fire Service College
Director of Delivery &
Change Management
Chief Executive
Sarah Cox
Department for
Education and Skills
Chief Economist
John Elliott
Department for
Constitutional Affairs
Charity Commission
Crown Prosecution Service
Ministry of Defence
Army Base Repair
Organisation
Defence Analytical
Services Agency
Defence Estates
Andrew Hind
Chief Executive,
Malta Shipyards
Head of Knowledge Centre, HMCE
Director, Children’s
Workforce Unit
Head of News
Director, Centre for
Procurement Performance
Department for Environment, Deputy Chief
Food and Rural Affairs
Veterinary Officer
Chief Executive of the
Veterinary Service
Office of Fair Trading
Chief Operating Officer
Jeanette Pugh
Acting Director, General
Operations, MoD
Deputy Chief Constable,
Humberside Police
Partner in Business Change
Consultancy, Barclays
Head of Training &
Development, HMPS
Acting Director,
Chief Economist, DfES
Acting post-holder
John Shield
Ian Taylor
Chief Press Officer, DfES
Head of Procurement, HBS
Fred Landeg
Food Standards Agency
Director of Consumer
Choice & Dietary Health
Director of Markets
Gill Fine
Director of Transmissions
Director of Legal Markets
Bob Hull
Duncan Sinclair
Acting Deputy Chief
Veterinary Officer
Justice’s Chief Executive,
Greater Manchester
Director, Performance
Improvement Consulting, PWC
Head of Food & Health,
Sainsbury’s
Senior Economist, Economic
Regulation, Civil Aviation Authority
Solicitor with Denton Wilde Sapte
EC/Competition Group,
Simmons and Simmons
The Office of Gas and
Electricity Markets
44
John Worne
PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT
Head of Equality and
Diversity, TMP Worldwide
Deputy Director/Head of
Strategic Communications,
Department of Health
Principal Policy Adviser to
Secretary of State on
Criminal Justice
Director of Communications
and Chief Knowledge Officer,
DEFRA
Director of Finance,
Learning & Skills Council
Chief Operating Officer,
BBC World Service
Charity Commissioner & Civil
Service Commissioner
Director, News, MoD
Civil Service Commissioners
Steve Love
Gillian Newton
Glenys Stacey
Bart Smith
Philip Davies
150 Years 1855-2005
DEPARTMENT/AGENCY
GCHQ
JOB TITLE
Finance Director
APPOINTEE
Jonathan Powell
Department of Health
Head of Information Services
Beverley Bryant
Deputy Director of Research
& Development (Delivery)
Director of Research &
Development
Model Career Portfolio Director
Noreen Caine
National Director of Social Care
Kathryn Hudson
Director for Equality & Human
Rights
Regional Director of Public
Health, West Midlands
Head of Policy
Communications
Director of Inspection &
Enforcement
Director, Hazardous
Installations Regulation
Director of Nuclear Safety
Surinder Sharma
Director, Finance, National
Offender Management Service
Peter Brook
Director of Strategy
Martin Bryant
Director of National Probation
Service
Senior HR Director, Immigration
& Nationality Directorate
Director of Performance &
Planning, Criminal Justice
Director of Policy, National
Offender Management Service
Roger Hill
Chief Scientific Officer
Professor Gordon
Conway
Liz Davies
Medicines and Healthcare
products Regulatory Agency
Health & Safety Executive
Home Office
Department for
International Development
HR Director
Director, United Nations,
Conflict & Humanitarian Affairs
Director of Communications
& Knowledge Sharing
Director, Asia
Chief Economist
Sally Davies
Nick Greenfield
Dr Rasmita Shukla
Mark Sudbury
Gerald Heddell
Kevin Myers
Mike Weightman
Paul Pagliari
Jonathan Sedgwick
Christine Stewart
Jim Drummond
PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT
Chief Financial Officer, Europe,
Cable & Wireless
Director of IM&T, NHS Shared
Services
Senior Research Associate,
University of Cambridge
Deputy Director of R&D
(Delivery), Department of Health
Chief Executive, North Central
London Workforce Development
Confederation
Director of Social Services,
Newham Council
Director of Diversity, Ford
Europe
Joint Director Public Health,
Leicester Primary Care Trusts
Senior Policy Communications
Manager, Department of Health
Director, Quality & Compliance,
GlaxoSmithKline
Chief Inspector of Construction,
HSE
Acting Director and Chief
Nuclear Inspector, HSE
Head of Strategy, Finance &
Performance, Correctional
Services
Acting Chief Operating Officer,
BP Retail Ltd
Head of London Probation
Service
HR Director, Scottish Water
Principal Private Secretary
to the Home Secretary
Director for Correctional &
Rehabilitation Policy, Home
Office
President, Rockefeller
Foundation
Human Resources,
Cabinet Office
Director, Iraq, DfID
Joy Hutcheon
Head of Western Asia Dept,
DfID
Charlotte Seymour-Smith Head Of India, DfID
Professor Tony Venables Professor of International
Economics, LSE
Annual Report 2004-2005
45
Appendices
DEPARTMENT/AGENCY
National Savings &
Investments
JOB TITLE
Marketing Director
APPOINTEE
Karen Jones
Office for National Statistics
Executive Director,
Reporting & Analysis
Jil Matheson
Northern Ireland Office
Director of Communications
David Brooker
Robin Masefield
Office of Rail Regulation
Director General, Northern
Ireland Prison Service
Head of Legal Services
Solutions Architect
Director of Communications
Chief Executive
Jon Wrennall
Chris Hopson
Vincent Geake
Director of Corporate
Services & Change
Finance Director
Sally Carruthers
HM Revenue & Customs
Lorry Road-User Charge
Management Authority
Scottish Executive
Office for Standards in
Education
Department of Trade and
Industry
Department for Transport
Jonathan Thompson
Director of Technological
Patrick McDonald
Innovation
Director, Planning & Performance Lucy Chadwick
Corporate Finance Adviser
Kate Mingay
Director for Analysis & Strategy
Director of Information
Finance Director
David Thompson
Denise Plumpton
Mel Zuydam
Vehicle and Operator
Services Agency
Chief Executive
Stephen Tetlow
HM Treasury
Director of Business
& Indirect Tax
Director of International Tax
Edward Troup
Chief Medical Adviser
Dr William Gunnyeon
IS/IT Risk & Quality Director
Anthony Hargreaves
Customer and Acquisition
Director
Nigel Richardson
Chief Executive
Terry Moran
Highways Agency
Department for Work
and Pensions
Disability & Carers Agency
46
Juliet Lazarus
Civil Service Commissioners
Mike Williams
PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT
Consultant working for BBC
as Managing Director, UK TV
Licensing
Acting Executive Director,
Economic & Social Reporting
Directorate, ONS
Principal Private Secretary
to Secretary of State for
Northern Ireland
Head of Policy Reforms Division,
NIO
Consultant, EU, Competition &
Regulation, Linklaters
Programme Manager, Accenture
Consultant
Chief Executive, Yeoman Group
Head of Human Resources,
Scottish Executive
Director of Finance and
Resources, North Somerset
Council
Director Key Business
Technologies, DTI
Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit
Temporary Corporate Finance
Adviser, DfT
DEFRA
IT Director, Sendo
Finance & Commercial Director,
Serco Government Services
Chief Executive of REME/
Director of Electrical & Mech
Eng, Army
Managing Partner, Tax &
Pensions, Simmons & Simmons
Head of Business Tax Group,
Inland Revenue
Medical Director, Capita Health
Solutions
Head of Group Organisational
Effectiveness, mmO2
Head of Customer Service and
Contact Centres, Barclaycard
Corporate
Field Director, Jobcentre Plus,
NW Region
150 Years 1855-2005
Appendix C
Interpretation of selection on merit
and fair and open competition
The Commissioners are charged with upholding the basic
principles of selection on merit and fair and open
competition. The principles are set out in detail in our
Recruitment Code. This is our interpretation of them.
Selection on merit
The Recruitment Code (2.5) states that selection on merit
has two objectives:
• No one should be appointed to a job unless they are
competent to do it.
• If two or more people meet the criteria for appointment, the
job should be offered to the person who would do it best.
Therefore, says the code, selection on merit means
selecting the best available person for the job.
Merit is a relative not an abstract concept. It calls for a
decision based on the circumstances at the time, not on
theoretical circumstances.
So merit depends on the context.
The nature of the job
What is the purpose of the job over the next three to five
years? Someone who is best at managing a start-up might
not be best at running an organisation in more settled times.
The length of the appointment
The best candidate in terms of doing the job over the next
three to five years might not be the one who would do it
best on day one.
The job market
The best person available will depend in part on the
attractiveness of other employment opportunities at the time.
Merit, then, is more than competence. But, before merit is
identified, competence must be defined properly.
The various competencies required in the job should be
weighted according to their contribution towards the
successful carrying out of the job. The most meritorious
candidate will be the one who is best at the job’s critical
elements.
So the task is to establish:
First: Who is competent to do the job.
Then: Who is the best person to do it.
The practical steps to be taken are:
1 Establish the qualities, competencies, experience etc that
are required for the job. Then list them in order of priority.
2 Decide which procedures for making the job known can
be expected to allow the best available candidates to
come forward for consideration.
3 Draw up procedures which will reliably determine
suitability for the job on the basis of the criteria
established in stage 1. In particular, the procedures must
distinguish how candidates compare with each other in
terms of merit.
4 Bring together a panel who are best placed to determine
merit with regard to this job.
These preparations require, first, that it is clear right at the
start why an appointment is wanted and what sort of
person is being sought.
It is essential to research the potential field of candidates
and think flexibly about effective ways of interesting them in
the appointment.
The selection processes must be thought through. Which
are most likely to show how far candidates meet the
various requirements of the job? And which will enable the
panel to make realistic comparisons among the
candidates? For example, an interview that concentrated
on how a candidate would handle particular circumstances
could reward those who can talk in hypotheses. But it
might not reveal how well the candidate handled critical
incidents in the past.
Annual Report 2004-2005
47
Appendices
Fair and open competition
Fairness
Openness
The Recruitment Code (2.9) says fairness means ensuring
there is no bias in assessment of candidates at any stage
of the selection process.
The Recruitment Code (2.14) states that openness is about
making Civil Service jobs accessible by ensuring that
opportunities are made known and publicised. It also
means that prospective applicants must be given equal
and reasonable access to adequate information about the
job and its requirements and about the selection process.
So open competition means, in the first place, that the
competition is open to eligible people. (In the past it was
contrasted with ‘limited’ competitions open only to civil
servants.)
But, if a job is to be genuinely open to eligible people, all
such people must be given an equal opportunity to find out
about it and what it involves. And they must have an equal
opportunity to apply for it.
Openness therefore means that individuals are not unfairly
excluded. There could be a risk of that as a result of where
the job is advertised and what is (or is not) said about it.
Inappropriate eligibility conditions also infringe openness.
Openness is also about setting thresholds for suitability
and excluding unsuitable people. It is linked with fairness in
making clear what people need to know in order to set out
their suitability for the job and what they would bring to it.
And openness is linked with merit in helping to ensure that
suitable people apply. An advertisement that produces a
small number of good candidates is better than one that
attracts a large number of applicants, many of whom turn
out to be unsuitable.
In considering whether or not the competition is open,
particular account needs to be taken of the following:
• Someone who might be interested in a job must have a
reasonable opportunity to find out about it.
• They must be clear about what is on offer (the nature of
the work, terms of appointment and remuneration) and
what will demonstrate suitability.
• The application process must help to identify suitable
candidates.
Fairness is to some extent an intuitive notion. To ensure that
procedures are fair, it is important to look at the circumstances
in the round. Account needs to be taken of the differences
between people. Fairness does not mean treating everyone
the same – eg asking them just the same questions.
To achieve fairness it is necessary to keep in mind what
would amount to unfairness. In any context, there will be
the possibility of doing something which might be
perceived as an unfair procedure or unfair treatment of
someone. Fairness is partly about avoiding these.
So fair competition means giving each person a full
opportunity to set out their suitability for the job and what
they would bring to it. That in turn requires assessment
procedures that avoid bias by being:
• objective and reliable indicators of future performance;
• unaffected by gender, race or other irrelevant
considerations;
• relevant to the job;
• consistently applied.
But consistency does not necessarily mean using identical
procedures for everyone. It is about applying the same
general criteria of assessment to everyone in order to
determine who is best able to do the job – in short,
selection on merit.
It is important that candidates should feel the competition
has been handled in these ways.
Exceptions to selection on merit and fair and
open competition
The exceptions to fair and open competition permitted by
the Commissioners are to do with flexibility, speed and
pressing operational factors; the benefits that can be
realised through secondment arrangements; and removing
unfairness in the case of disabled people.
When these procedures are used, it is important to
understand that exceptions to the basic principles are
being made. There should be no overlap or confusion
between them and normal procedures.
The Recruitment Code is at our website:
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/publications_and_forms/
recruitment_code/index.asp
48
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
Appendix D
Our role in senior competitions
The Commissioners’ approval is required for appointments at
the most senior levels in the Civil Service: Permanent Secretary
level and Pay Bands 2 and 3 in the Senior Civil Service. We
also approve senior appointments in government
communication in Pay Bands 1 and 1A.
A Commissioner usually chairs the appointment panel to help
ensure fairness and openness in the recruitment and selection
of the best person for the job.
We always aim to make a practical, flexible contribution that
takes full account of the post’s particular requirements.
Benchmarking compares our approach favourably with similar
processes in the public and private sectors.
In practice, no two competitions are identical because no two
jobs are identical, and the same can be said of our
involvement. However, our participation in the selection
process typically follows the pattern described here.
The second sift is then carried out by the panel to produce a
shortlist. These remaining candidates often meet line
managers and might be interviewed by an occupational
psychologist. This stage takes two to three weeks.
The panel then carry out the final interviews.
At each stage, the Commissioner seeks to ensure the
selection criteria are soundly applied in assessing candidates,
taking account of all the available evidence.
Finally, the Commissioner reports the outcome of the
competition to the department. If any problems have arisen,
the Commissioner will share these with the other
Commissioners and, if appropriate, also take up the matter
with the department. Similarly, if the competition has revealed
an example of good practice which could be applied more
widely in the Civil Service, the Commissioners will feed this
back to departments in their regular contacts with them.
First, the Commissioner chairing the panel must be satisfied
that the job and person descriptions are clear and accurate
and that the advertisements are appropriately worded and
placed. He or she will also help ensure that any other steps to
attract suitable candidates are open and effective. This stage
usually takes two to three weeks.
After the advertisements appear, another two or three weeks
are allowed for candidates to apply.
Next, the panel carry out the first sift of applications to produce
a longlist of candidates who will then be interviewed by the
recruitment consultants. This takes three to four weeks.
Annual Report 2004-2005
49
Appendices
Appendix E
Exceptions to selection on merit on the
basis of fair and open competition
The permitted exceptions to the principles of selection on
merit on the basis of fair and open competition are set out
in general terms in the Civil Service Order in Council. Our
Recruitment Code gives more details.
The exceptions include:
• short-term appointments justified by the needs of the
service or by the need to relieve long-term
unemployment (eg to allow Civil Service participation in
the Government’s New Deal programme);
• secondments to promote the exchange of ideas and
experience;
• the re-appointment of former civil servants who had been
recruited through fair and open competition;
• limited transfers from other public services;
• transfers into the Civil Service of staff whose functions
have been taken over by government;
• encouraging and assisting disabled people in the
selection process in ways not available to other
applicants (eg the guarantee of an interview);
• exempting, since the beginning of 2002, people with
disabilities in supported employment from the normal
requirements for selection on merit on the basis of fair
and open competition.
Very exceptionally, we may agree to the conversion to
permanency of a secondment or other short-term
appointment not made through open competition.
50
Civil Service Commissioners
150 Years 1855-2005
Appendix F
Freedom of Information Act
We record here the requests for information under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 that we received during
2004-2005 since the Act came fully into operation at the
beginning of 2005.
We endorse the principle of transparency which the Act is
intended to support. We have produced a publication
scheme which has been approved by the Information
Commissioner and shall look at ways to develop it so that
information in which there might be public interest is
available through our website.
Because of the nature of our responsibilities, a certain
amount of information that we hold should be exempted
from disclosure, as provided for in the Act. This is
particularly so in the area of senior recruitment where much
of the information is personal; where there is a need to
maintain confidentiality if free and frank advice or the free
and frank exchange of views is not to be inhibited;
or where legal privilege might be involved. In order to
preserve confidentiality with regard to advice and the
exchange of views, the First Civil Service Commissioner
has been appointed a qualified person by the Minister for
the Cabinet Office under Section 36 of the Act, enabling
him or her to exempt such information from disclosure.
During 2004-2005, we received one request for information
under the Act. This was from BBC Wales and related to the
appointment of the Counsel General, National Assembly
for Wales and our correspondence with the National
Assembly on this matter.
We commented on this appointment in our annual report
for 2003-2004. In response to the request, we disclosed
documents relating to the appointment but excluded, either
by document or redaction, information relating to individual
persons, advice on the issues from our legal advisers and
views on the issues by various parties involved with the
appointment.
Annual Report 2004-2005
51
Appendices
Appendix G
Documents
Civil Service Commissioners
HM Government
Civil Service Order in Council 1995
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
A Draft Civil Service Bill: A Consultation Document
(Cm 6373)
publications_and_forms/pdf/order-council_1995.pdf
www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/propriety_and_ethics/publications/pdf/
Diplomatic Service Order in Council 1991
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
publications_and_forms/pdf/order-council_1991.pdf
Civil Service Commissioners’ Recruitment Code
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
Cabinet_Office_Consultation_Bill_Cm_6373.pdf
The Government’s Response to the Ninth Report of the
Committee on Standards in Public Life (Cm 5964)
www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/propriety_and_ethics/
publications/pdf/9thgovres.pdf
publications_and_forms/pdf/ocsc-code_apr05.pdf
Civil Service Commissioners’ Guidance on Senior
Recruitment
Cabinet Office
The Civil Service Code
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/propriety_and_ethics/
publications_and_forms/senior_recruitment/index.asp
civil_service/civil_service_code.asp
Appeal to the Civil Service Commissioners under the Civil
Service Code
Code of Conduct for Special Advisers
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
special_advisers/code.asp
www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/propriety_and_ethics/
publications_and_forms/html/appeal_leaflet/index.asp
The Effectiveness of the Civil Service: Written Response by
the Civil Service Commissioners to the Public
Administration Select Committee
House of Commons Select Committee on
Public Administration
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/
publications_and_forms/doc/effectiveness_of_the_cs.doc
public_administration_select_committee/
A Civil Service Bill: Written Response by the Civil Service
Commissioners to HM Government
pasc_civil_service_effectiveness.cfm
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
Committee on Standards in Public Life
publications_and_forms/doc/
Annual Report 2003-2004
Ninth Report: Defining the Boundaries within the Executive:
Ministers, Special Advisers and the permanent Civil Service
(Cm 5775)
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
www.public-standards.gov.uk/reports/
publications_and_forms/pdf/annual/cscrep03.pdf
9th_report/report/report.doc
evidence_to_the_government-22-feb.doc
Civil Service Commissioners’ Information Leaflet
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk/
publications_and_forms/pdf/csc_brochure.pdf
52
Inquiry: Civil Service Effectiveness
Civil Service Commissioners
18551856185718581859186018611
8621863186418651866186718681
86918701871187218731874187518
76187718781879188018811882188
3188418851886188718881889189
01891189218931894189518961897
18981899190019011902190319041
905190619071908190919101911191
2191319141915191619171918191919
20192119221923192419251926192
71928192919301931193219331934
19351936193719381939194019411
9421943194419451946194719481
94919501951195219531954195519
56195719581959196019611962196
31964196519661967196819691970
197119721973197419751976197719
78197919801981198219831984198
51986198719881989199019911992
1993199419951996199719981999
200020012002200320042005
design: www.spydesign.co.uk
copy: www.sumnermedia.co.uk photography: Andrew Weekes; Patrick Brown-Egue © Crown copyright 2005
The Office of the Civil Service Commissioners
35 Great Smith Street
London SW1P 3BQ
www.civilservicecommissioners.gov.uk