The abolition of a department

I am willing to give one cheer for the disappearance of a whole government department, the Science, Innovation and Technology department. I would give more cheers if I thought things would be better and overheads were lower from the  changes. I  will be surprised if they do slim government as a result, as I suspect there will be the rebuilding of what it does and who does it through a complex redistribution of tasks and posts. The expanding Business department will be the main “winner”, gaining staff and work. Some activities will pass to DCMS.

The critics of the move claim this will mean less representation for science and technology in decision making. The supporters say all departments need to be alert to scientific and technology threats and opportunities. The government Scientists already operate across government depending on need, from the Government Office of Science.   There will be a Minister for AI in the Cabinet Office.

The danger of these reorganisations is they incur substantial costs and divert energies away from the subject itself to the complications of the Whitehall power structures  and musical chairs. It is difficult to point to what the outgoing Department has achieved. I asked recently that the Lords Minister set out what benefits we are getting from the government’s £3bn programme of introducing AI to its own processes, and what greater staff efficiencies it would generate. It was a friendly question giving the Minister the chance to explain how they were spending this large sum and what good it was doing. There was no reply, so presumably there was no briefing. The suspiciously round sums of the original announcement of AI money without precise programmes was always a concern. I thought now they were well into spending it they could tell us on what and how we will gain.Their inability to do so invites more questions about how this cash is splashed.

This  change in the architecture of government to handle the most exciting scientific and technological developments now underway goes unexplained. It would be good to see what the plan for transfer is, how much it will cost and who will control it. I doubt they have worked all that out. Officials  look for promotions or for a better deal and politicians lazily dismiss a whole department whilst wanting its work to live on elsewhere.Costs go up. No one is responsible for controlling them.  In business if you scrap a department it is usually to take out cost and reduce functions. Government works by different rules which usually ensure reorganisation brings more staff and more cost. AI too in the public sector may do the same, impeding not advancing labour productivity.