CP Position Paper on Review of “Post-Service Outside Work for Directorate Civil Servants”
CP is of the view that both the Consultation Document and the “consultation” process employed is designed in such a way that the voice of civil servants will be heard and dominate whereas the issues of public interest involved may not be properly addressed. Civil servants know what they do; most members of the public do not. This imbalance of information, essential for an informed discussion and consideration, disables most members of the public from giving their informed views as to whether any and if so what changes need to be made to the current system. It gives the appearance of a process where the outcome is a foregone conclusion and the views of the public excluding civil servants do not count. Further, the presence of the Secretary for the Civil Service on the Committee does not lend credibility to any recommendations the Committee may make. The Secretary should have been excluded from membership but asked to give whatever information to the Committee which the Committee required. The Committee should have been wholly independent of the Civil Service and any administrative support staff should have been drawn from elsewhere.