The first law of government is the law of continuous expansion.
In a democracy good causes line up as lobbyists demanding  government gets  involved. They lobby for government to intervene in areas it does not currently manage. They demand new laws and controls on things they do not like. They demand more money and supply of things they do like from the state.
The official government machine encourages lobbying for more as they like growing their tasks. Ministers often dislike constantly saying No to lobbies and buy them off by offering them cash and laws to help them.
Oppositions usually take up lobby causes and press the government. If the government gives in they claim some credit. If the government resists they claim the government is mean, tough, insensitive or worse.
The media join in, running campaigns on behalf of lobby groups and behaving like Opposition parties.
There are very few lobbies the other way. The  causes of a smaller state, less government control of our lives and even of lower taxes have  very few lobby groups arguing for them as a counterweight. They are chronically under  represented in the media.
The second law of government is the Treasury is usually weak at spending control but gets blamed for underfunding.
The Treasury is hopelessly outnumbered by spending departments in government. It can only hope to exert effective control if the Finance Minister and PM or President work together, and if spending  decisions  are mainly taken in bilateral meetings between the Treasury and the relevant spending department rather than in a wider forum .
Government departments can get more money by running things badly and demanding bail outs near the end of the year. They can get more cash by claiming it for crises or issues which come up in year. They can work with lobby groups outside government to create pressure for increases. Some are good at securing money for their next year’s budget under headings where they know they are unlikely to spend it all. They then vire this approved spending to another purpose later during the year, securing cash for something which might not have been approved if asked for originally.
It is commonly believed in government circles that a Treasury has too much control over spending and that a Treasury makes spending judgements that prevent other departments doing a good job. This is usually a dangerous myth. It comes from the proposition that new initiatives or demands need new money to pay for them. In practice there are often falling demands or waning initiatives elsewhere in each spending  department. There should be a more active pursuit of the things the department no longer needs to do at the same time as finding new things it is desirable to do. Old government initiatives rarely die. They rest in some distant corner of an administrative office, and keep their budget line.
The third law of government is its expansion is built into all the policy programmes of centre left and left parties.
It is easier being a left Minister as you are going with the flow of continuous government expansion set out in the first law.
The left welcome the idea of higher taxes to pay for more government. They see higher taxes as a good in themselves. They enjoy inventing new ways of taxing success and attacking independence and enterprise.
The left seek to monopolise the votes of public sector workers by being a kind of extended Trade Union for the  state sector. They constantly seek better conditions of employment for public bodies, and more staff to carry out tasks, at the expense of the private sector.
The left believe public delivery of goods and services is morally better than free enterprise doing the job.
The left believe that people and families allowed to make their own choices and allowed to keep more of their own money to spend will make bad ones. Government is necessary to restrain and tax the successful whilst making the less well off dependent on the all providing state who can then control and direct their lives.They hope for gratitude for state hand outs they conjure, but rely more on making false claims about the threats to people they allege the right represents. They seek to create a myth that right of centre parties enter politics to harm others.
The fourth law states that governments use the international rules based order to bind themselves into aims and policies which they place outside democratic control.
Some think governments undertake the international rules based approach to satisfy the vanity of rulers. They like to perform on the world stage, and are happy to sign grand undertakings to show their collective importance. There is more to it than that. International rules and commitments built into Treaties strengthen the powers of unelected officials and advisers, and reduce the number of areas that elected politicians can in future change. Officials negotiate much of the detail and pre-empt future choices and options for Ministers and new governments.
In its most developed form, EU membership, incoming elected governments have so much less scope to change and improve things than in non EU countries. They inherit a vast amount of EU law which remains as a given with no EU level impulse to repeal or reduce. As Euro members they inherit an economic policy largely determined outside their state, with interest rates, budget deficits and other matters settled or controlled from the EU centre. The EU requirements are enforced through an EU controlled court with the power to fine, to withhold access to EU money and to impose other sanctions. It greatly reduces what elections can alter.
Some of these international bodies allow independence of thought and action. NATO, for example, leaves members free to decide whether to join a NATO mission or not in any given case. The WTO is a series of rules for freer trade with a dispute settlement procedure, where any penalties have to be proportionate to the infringement and of the same kind. The international Treaty obligations around climate change are mainly enforced through moral and political pressures. Increasingly the Climate Change framework does pre empt policy and decisions in a wide range of governmental areas from energy and industrial policy through transport to agriculture.
The international rules based system has two main weaknesses. The first is that the alternative world view held by China, Russia, Iran and their allies allows them to behave in very different ways and sometimes to find and exploit weaknesses in the West’s approach. The open statement and predictability of the West’s approach is seen as a weakness. The second is how the rules are applied by an elite of well paid unelected officials acting as legislators and enforcers can cause a rift between a majority of the electors and what government is doing and saying. The more Treaty commitments a country makes the less power electors wield to demand change. The most important clause in a Treaty which dictates policies and laws to us is the exit clause.
The fifth law is Ministers who wish to make a difference have to find ways round the first four laws of government.
I have recently set out how Ministers can, for example make a difference by supervising and influencing quangos, or by taking back control from external bodies by legislation.
There are three main roles for Ministers to perform when supervising and sponsoring quangos or so called independent government bodies.
The first is to supervise the expenditures of public money. These bodies often rely on substantial grant income which needs to be agreed with Ministers and approved by Parliament as part of the annual national budget. A Minister can reasonably ask for a budget meeting with the quango to discuss their financial needs and to indicate to them likely financial support levels. There may need to be follow up exchanges depending on the negotiations within government with the Treasury about what is affordable. The budget meeting is a good opportunity to review the aims and resources of the body, to press for better value for money and to define precisely for the following year what is expected and what is needed by way of financial support. This is a process which gets reported to Parliament and can be subject to debate if the budget of a quango becomes a matter of public or Opposition concern.
Some of these quangos depend in whole or part on money they raise from charging user fees and licence fees on those who use their service. Usually the fee levels are regulated under legislative powers by Statutory Instrument. Often these bodies want annual fee increases which will need SI amendment and therefore Ministerial and Parliamentary approval. Under weak Ministers there is a tendency to accept any fee increase proposal the body requests, and to hope that the Opposition in Parliament will not bother to query or debate it. As left of centre oppositions rarely object to higher public sector fees and charges it is particularly incumbent on Conservative Ministers to be vigilant in the public and user interest. This is another variant of the budget review and conversation.
The second is to review and report on the annual performance of the body to Parliament. The Minister can ask to see a draft copy of the body’s annual report to review, or can require a meeting with the body after it has submitted its annual report to the sponsor department. This is another good occasion to review the aims and achievements of the body, to thank them if they have done well or to ask them to do better if they have not. It is a good idea for a Minister to show interest in the performance targets to be set for the ensuing year and in the performance achieved in the year under review. Again Parliament may if it wishes receive, read and debate the report of a government body.
The third is to require additional special meetings if the government wishes to change the aims and demands on the body, or if the body needs to report unexpected problems and difficulties, or if the Minister has become aware of a body of complaints and criticisms that are or will become public that he or she needs to answer. Such matters should of course be reported to Parliament unless there is some special good reason for confidentiality because for example matters relate to a vulnerable individual or to possible legal proceedings that must not be prejudiced..
Ministers are also entitled to become involved with recruitment to Boards of these bodies and to some of the senior management positions. If there is to be a change of chairman or chief executive this is another good opportunity to review performance and ask questions about aims and targets for the future.
If there is a good series of meetings for the more important quangos Ministers should avoid nasty surprises about the conduct and performance of these bodies, and the leaders of these bodies would stay well informed about the overall government policy context in which they are working and about the likely level of resources they will enjoy to carry out their tasks. The bodies should remember they are governmental and part of a greater whole answerable to Parliament. Ministers should remember they are not the day to day managers , they do not have quasi judicial powers over the regulatory work of these bodies and should not normally intervene in individual cases.
Ministers also need to be careful about accepting binding commitments in international Treaties. If they agree with the aims of a new International proposal they can state their intentions to follow it and to meet domestic targets without making an irrevocable commitment which will make it difficult for a future government to alter it.
There needs to be a strong Treasury dedicated to productivity and quality improvements in public services and capable of challenging moves to expand the areas of government activity.
May 16, 2021
You are well on your way to making this into a full blown political novel.
Please don’t stop now, some of this sense could get out into the public domain.
May 16, 2021
+ 1
May 16, 2021
Well, there seem to be an awful lot of assertions as to what other people think and intend, without any explanation as to how John knows these things.
So a novel, a complete work of fiction, might well be where all this is leading.
May 17, 2021
@MiC; Indeed, but how many will get lead up the garden path, in best Lewis Carroll fashion, to the the land of make-believe, and if enough people follow, does make-believe then become the new reality?
May 17, 2021
It is becoming obvious what our host is attempting to do, having now exhausted the possibilities of blaming the EU for all the UK’s ills he is constructing the idea that all our ills are due to ‘big govt’ and an even bigger civil service when in fact all our ills come from our elected politicos and their policies.
I wonder just who stopped calling our bureaucrats “Civil Servants” first, I always used to believe it was the bureaucrats themselves, but perhaps it was the politicos, to disguise the fact that Civil Servants merely do what the govt of the day insists – in the best Jim Hacker style of incompetence!
May 17, 2021
Do you actually read what Sir John writes Jerry?
May 18, 2021
@Peter2; Yes, I read, digest, to understand the underlying message, not just the words…
May 17, 2021
All three are pursuing varieties of State Capitalism and a broader Eurasian vision of land power which is the antithesis of the so-called Euro-Atlantic version based on sea power.
Sticking together they cannot be beaten-around 100 years ago the philosophical historian,Will Durant,wrote that in the great sweep of history,Europe was a mere “jagged promentory of Asia.”
As it is written,so shall it to be-you can see Germany being increasingly pulled eastwards to its “Great Asiatic Mother”,as the Noble literature laureate,Herman Hesse,described Russia.
May 17, 2021
I would have said that having spent some 40 very active years in Westminster and the HoC, Sir John is far better qualified to make observations on the behaviour of politicians, Governments, lobbyists and the Civil Service than all of his regular posters (including me) put together.
May 18, 2021
@SM; Your logic suggests Mrs Thatcher should have turned to the The Earl of Stockton, not our host, back in the early 1980s!
Our host entered Westminster politics, 40 or so years ago, because he was a fresh person with fresh ideas, at a time when many of the then existing policies were failing, or appearing to fail, ideas of a previous era, no longer the solutions to the (then) current problems & failed ideologies…
May 16, 2021
BH
+1
May 17, 2021
Pot, kettle, black. You and pal Andy are always telling us you know why millions of people voted and that they are all low education, low intellect and lesser people than you two. How do you know these things?
May 17, 2021
+10
May 16, 2021
I’m wondering about what this ‘alternative world view’ looks like, that you say, Sir John, is shared by communist China, capitalist Russia, and islamist Iran. It must be quite a flexible one.
Could it just be: ‘We don’t want to be pushed around by the Americans’?
May 17, 2021
@Hat man; “Could it just be: âWe donât want to be pushed around by the Americansâ?”
Well if that was the case why Brexit when, other than for China, the EU is the only (supranational) entity who is large enough to stand up to the Americans. I get the impression, not for our host, that some on the right, some Brexiteers, far from not wanting to be pushed around by the Americans, that’s exactly their goal.
May 17, 2021
All three are pursuing varieties of State Capitalism and a broader Eurasian vision of land power which is the antithesis of the so-called Euro-Atlantic version based on sea power.
Sticking together they cannot be beaten-around 100 years ago the philosophical historian,Will Durant,wrote that in the great sweep of history,Europe was a mere “jagged promentory of Asia.”
As it is written,so shall it to be-you can see Germany being increasingly pulled eastwards to its “Great Asiatic Mother”,as the Noble literature laureate,Herman Hesse,described Russia.
May 16, 2021
Is : The sixth law is Ministers who wish to make a bid for the big seat have to find ways to regularly comment on failings of Opposition parties when they were in government.
May 16, 2021
The seventh law is avoid sacking Ministers because it looks like you made a balls in your choice, when the music stops shuffle them round.
May 17, 2021
I think there may be a sub-section to this law. To bid for a big seat, one must also be a consistent ‘brown nose’
May 16, 2021
Make the fifth law the first and only law
May 16, 2021
It was really interesting to read about Redwoodâs five laws of government. May I ask who is enforcing them? What penalties are there if any of Redwoodâs laws is broken? Or is it that they simply are not âlawsâ the way such âsets of rules of conductâ are commonly understood?
Because if the points discussed were âlaws of governmentâ, one could expect them to apply whatever party is in government. From the commonly accepted definition, the third law simply does not make sense as a âlawâ. Or is it that the author simply assumes that only Tories are worth being in Parliament?
Isnât it a problem when people use âbig wordsâ out of context?
And to realise that this comes from someone supposed to be a bright light in the UK parliament.
May 16, 2021
Gosh you are very bitter and cynical today hefner.
Is the essay causing you to worry that socialism is becoming unpopular.
PS
It is Sir John to you hef.
May 16, 2021
The Statute book continues to expand and government expands accordingly. Perhaps it is time
to produce a Domesday book of the civil service and all its activities. Each department and quango
would be required to document every activity that it performs that takes up a least a man year of effort per year and cross reference it to the legislation that created that obligation and the manpower involved and annual cost of performing it. It should then be possible to expressly forbid any activity that has not been disclosed or nor mandated by legislation or instruction from a Minister in the current government, identify those activities which are unnecessary, repeal the legislation that required them thereby causing them to cease. Activities that are necessary should be examined to see whether their implementation is optimal to identify how much cost could be saved whilst achieving the same or a better delivery.
The system of trying to prioritise activities in order to improve delivery in e.g. the NHS is hopeless and also
dangerous because politicians are lay people with no medical training and not qualified to judge professional priorities. In the same way politicians demand improving exam results from schools; the result of this is the
reduction in scope and difficulty of syllabuses, the introduction of non-academic and entirely useless subjects, the increasing generosity of marking and the reduction or canceling of benefical activities that don’t result in a GCSE or A level grades A********* to E. All of this because ignorant and lazy politicians demand a simplistic metric by which they can judge performance and be judged in parliament.
May 16, 2021
Exactly right. Especially:- âMinisters also need to be careful about accepting binding commitments in international Treaties. If they agree with the aims of a new International proposal they can state their intentions to follow it and to meet domestic targets without making an irrevocable commitment which will make it difficult for a future government to alter it.â.
This rather subverts any democracy. We get it now on the CO2 devil gas religion, we have set these âlegally binding targetsâ so we this have to do X,Y and Z – say (for example) the fools on the âindependentâ committee for climate change. Regardless of how insane this agenda is and it certainly is.
May 16, 2021
You must have little else to do in putting together all of this blah blah. This is 2021 not 1821 when people had more time and since we’re in the business of breaking International treaties Protocols etc and other such stuff what difference does it make
May 16, 2021
If I may I want to go a bit off topic, however my off topic comments probably sits within the 5th law in the widest sense of the term when thinking about Corona advice.
There has been a flurry of speculation about the Indian Variant and its ability to transmit quickly along with suggestions it may be more resistant to vaccines. This then leads to speculation about extending lock-down.
Early reports from India and very recent initial investigations in Oxford suggest the variant does transmit up to 50% faster. However the variant is not able to affect the current vaccines effectiveness, and the older people who have sadly caught this variant have initially not taken up the offer of the vaccine programme. Reports all suggest the variant is centered in Asian communities with extended families, and we know what measures are being taken to help these communities.
Therefore based on what I have read I do not think the Ministers should change the current road map out of lock-down. (I hope Ive manged to weave my off topic into the 5th law) As a continued precaution it may be worth continuing with hands and face (not space) in that face mask wearing could be extended. I love some of the designer masks, although some have very naughty words and drawings on them and no I don’t have any of this type. I suppose its private enterprise at its best (or worst)
May 17, 2021
Given the controversy surrounding the effectiveness of masks and the various risks of wearing them for extended periods of time, I would prefer to see these as optional.
May 16, 2021
There is a sixth law.
That Governments will abrogate responsibility to: Quangos, Inquiries, Judges, Agencies, Private Contractors, Supranational bodies (such as the EU), Scientists … or allow bodies such as the BBC to define the political agenda and economic priorities and thus kick tin cans down the road, renege of manifesto pledges or simply say “Sorry. Couldn’t do anything about it (because of the above.)”
Or worse:
Ignore everyone who votes for them and obey the will of footballers, left wing rioters (what other type is there ?) or sixteen-year-old girls being used as human shields for billionaires.
May 16, 2021
+1
May 17, 2021
@NLA; <i."There is a sixth law. "
There are any number of additional ‘laws’, just make them up to deal with what ever ones pet peeve is!…
May 17, 2021
Exactly.
May 16, 2021
Interesting topic Mr Redwood, but in analysis of left & right it makes no difference to us as we always get screwed over in some way no matter who is in government.
I think you hit the nail on the head with your reent phrase – ‘we don’t believe you’
I wonder if you realise how uncanilly accurate you were with that one, and that we hold that sentiment equally with all political parties.
To be blunt, many people are just so weary of politics and politicians right now and it’s a struggle for many to get through life from one day to the next. The only certainty for a lot of people is that the next day will bring more of the same stress and crap life syndrome – all because of politics and the broken democracy we have in this country.
May 17, 2021
From the outside looking in government has all the qualities of a make work ponzi scheme. Essentially unprofitable in the widest sense of the word, except of course for those involved in it. Too many by my instinctive guess. One great big committee fest. The orchestrators of our lives are long overdue a severe pruning. Judgement on their continued existence should be based on an annual audit on what good they have achieved and at what reduced cost. If government are incapable of setting the direction of travel we should resort to that hated instrument of the establishment, the referendum.
May 17, 2021
It will not happen of course, because sitting on top of it all is the ultimate bloated ponzi scheme, Westminster. 650 MPs doing for 65 million what the USA does for 365 million with 250. A HoLs of around 800 to do what the USA does with 100. All setting their own rewards in terms of salary, pension, and expenses. All sat at the top of a civil service pyramid of make work, achieve little, but collect a fat pension and routine gong at the end of it. Much of it well placed to collect the reward of a fat directorship from the private sector they have facilitated in the past. Moderation prevents me naming names, rest assured there are plenty of them. Frankly it is an abuse of democracy that stinks to high heaven, but it is human nature if they can get away with it.
May 17, 2021
Look up “Ponzi Scheme” eh?
May 17, 2021
Good morning.
The only solution to that is, Direct Democracy. Make EVERY referendum legally binding as they do in low tax, spend and waste Switzerland.
End of !
May 17, 2021
Thanks for this information .Some quangos seem to have more power to filter out public money than others and vulgarly display the riches of their achievements . There is rumoured, that underhand methods to obtain money for themselves rather than the cause they say they can improve, is well established . For example if A is to be able to make a profit from B, B needs initially to have an income worth profiting from, especially if public money is the assured funding.
Perhaps with reference to the next diarised article is a region where the UK has a likeness, amongst others. to the USA.
May 17, 2021
just read my own sentence .. should read :- it is rumoured that underhand methods to gain control are being used ..etc
May 21, 2021
Why would you call a railway that serves England Great British Railways?, why does Shapps like so many in your Party struggle to understand the English, the Blue wall in the South may have to look elsewhere in the future.