Reid's double-talk will hit security
By David DavisLast Updated: 12:01am BST 30/03/2007
Have your say
Read comments
John Reid deserves credit for ingenuity. He normally leaves a department at the first sign of trouble. This time, by splitting up the Home Office, a department is leaving him. But cunning should not be confused with wisdom, let alone leadership. His plan is to create two separate ministries, one for security and one for justice. Mr Reid publicly argued against the idea less than a year ago, only to float it recently through his press advisers. He then spent three months haggling over it with colleagues - quarrelling over ministerial Cabinet rank, responsibility for MI6 and budgetary control. Ongoing bickering stalled the announcement for three weeks. As late as Wednesday, it was still touch and go. The Reid plan was eventually smuggled into the public domain, in a written statement on the last Thursday of Parliament before the Easter break. The Home Secretary had to be summoned, yesterday, to give an explanation to Parliament. It is precisely this lack of ministerial leadership that has left one of our great departments of state in such disarray in the first place. Mr Reid thinks it has too much on its plate. But there are two clear facts. First, the Home Office has never had so few responsibilities. Second, it has never been so poorly run. It has been well governed in the past, by Home Secretaries of all parties and it used to be much bigger. It is only over the past three years that Ministers have failed to cope. The Home Secretary owes his job to the foreign prisoner fiasco - his predecessor was sacked, in 2006, because he failed to ensure that the prisoners were considered for deportation. Mr Reid ignored the lessons of communication, coordination and prioritisation that led to that debacle. His plan would dislocate the immigration and prison services, just when they need to be more joined up. In truth, he has only made the department's problems worse. In January, it was revealed - by chance - that the Home Office had a backlog of 27,500 cases of convictions by British nationals, committed abroad but not recorded. Ministers said they knew nothing about the backlog. They conveniently forgot about the police letter explicitly warning of the seriousness of the problem. The Deputy Chief Constable said: "I recognise that this is something the Home Secretary would wish to be briefed about given the obvious links to foreign national prisoners." How would dividing up responsibility for court and police records help refresh ministerial memories? With a number of terror suspects already on the run, how does splitting up authority for making and enforcing control orders improve public safety? And how would dividing ministerial responsibility for prisoners and police help catch the killers that are on the run from Sudbury open prison? The answer is that it will not. The proposal is just a time-consuming, costly and bureaucratic distraction from the real task of getting to grips with the very real, day-to-day, problems this country faces. And that is just the Home Office. Under the Reid plan, the Department of Constitutional Affairs is set to become a Ministry of Justice. This at a time when our courts are in chaos, legal aid reforms are deeply flawed and unpopular, there are damaging new changes to the Freedom of Information Act and the electoral process is under attack from fraud. Is this really the right time for this department to take on additional responsibility for prisons, probation and criminal justice policy? When I was in business, if someone said a job was impossible, it normally just meant that he could not do it. The answer to the Home Office's problems is not to break it up. The cause of its serial failure is too much legislation, too much red-tape and too many targets. The answer is less legislation, and more leadership. Mr Reid is incapable of either. He failed to win support for a new Security Minister with Cabinet rank, who could focus 100 per cent on driving counter-terrorism policy. He failed to secure a single security budget. His plan fails to secure a Cabinet-ranking Justice Minister in the House of Commons - which shows remarkable disregard for democracy and disdain for the criminal justice system. Under the Reid plan, instead of having one dysfunctional department, we would have two. But we would not be getting two for the price of one. Creating two separate departments will involve expensive duplication - of resources, personnel and infrastructure. Mr Reid refuses to say what the costs will be, claiming they can all be met from existing resources. But the Home Office budget has been frozen, so funding for the re-organisation will have to come from the front-line resources dedicated to fighting crime, terrorism and illegal immigration. No wonder the Reid plan has been roundly lambasted from all sides. The heads of the civil service and the Home Office have serious reservations. The Lord Chief Justice is concerned about judicial independence and funding. The Home Affairs Committee's expert witness fears the breakdown of communications. Demos, a Blairite think-tank, calls the fragmentation "ironic when the Government needs to take a more collaborative approach". Mr Reid's plan is not much more popular within Labour's ranks. Blunkett thinks it will "Balkanise", Clarke calls its "batty" and Beckett nearly bolted from government over it. More important, since Gordon Brown intends to take direct control of security when he becomes Prime Minister, John Reid's half-baked plans will also be short-lived. The Home Office is crying out for strong ministerial leadership and effective operational coordination. Mr Reid's plan will achieve neither. Breaking up the Home Office will just undermine public security, and overwhelm the justice system. David Davis is Shadow Home Secretary |
Have your say
Comments
Beckett bolt from government!! Not as long as they continue to pay her exorbitant salary and expenses I think. How did she ever become foreign secretary???!!!
Posted by pewkatchoo on March 30, 2007 2:28 PM
Report this comment
Why oh why did you not get the top job!!
Posted by Conkeyron on March 30, 2007 1:58 PM
Report this comment
Denis Cooper (10:44am) raises a good point. Is this re-organisation of the Home Office being forced upon us in the interests of EU "harmonisation"? Indeed, how many of these seemingly pointless changes to our civic and governmental structures are driven by the EU? Knowing the general level of public antipathy to the EU, I'm sure that the politicians would much rather slip such changes through silently under the guise of "improvements". Can someone with greater knowledge than I of the EU's machinations comment on this? And what's gone wrong with our trust in politicians that such (arguably, paranoid) speculation seems perfectly plausible?
Posted by SwindonDavid on March 30, 2007 1:47 PM
Report this comment
Dear Sirs,
This smacks of the last fling of a desperate man. Despite his rapid movement as well as his colleagues from one failed mission to another, see Magaret Becket's simply astonishing record of utter incomptence, it is quite plain that the Cabinet has absolutely no control over its Civil Servants. It really is a question of control over a divided responsibility, the political as opposed to the executive. One is refusing to alter its modus operandi and the other is incapable of changing it. So we move to a reform, ill thought out, and no comprehension of the consequences.
Taking responsibilty from MI5 and MI6 and setting up a separate and no doubt uncommunicable department that can more easily be politicised is not only cynical, but dangerous, as the new department seeks to establish its own identity. Departments do this and especially when led by politicians eager to demonstrate their ability, or the converse as so often and sadly occurs.
No, this is a dog's breakfast thought up by desperate people hanging on until Gordon Brown comes in and hopefully, sweeps the lot away. By their own miserable performance, most of these fools that are in the Cabinet should be shown the door, including that of their mendacious leader. It is heard that Gordon Brown does not suffer fools gladly, and has little time for people who cannot perform to his own dour standards of dedication. To one with a similar attitude to work, let us hope that the direction he takes is the right one. Whatever the result, I have a grim anticipation that it will end in a day of tears, and for some the sooner the better.
Posted by Vivian J Phillips on March 30, 2007 1:18 PM
Report this comment
"Ministry Of Justice". All-pervasive state surveillance. Identity cards. Legislation curbing freedom of speech.
To New Labour, Orwell's "1984" isn't a work of fiction - it's a roadmap.
Posted by SwindonDavid on March 30, 2007 12:23 PM
Report this comment
Whilst everyone is worrying about the division of powers in what was the Home Office, Tony's (& Gordon's) minions will be ensuring the smooth, highly expensive introduction of ID cards.
Deep joy!
Posted by G. Tongey on March 30, 2007 12:10 PM
Report this comment
Don't you wish David Davis was leading the Conservative Party?
Posted by M.Williams on March 30, 2007 11:17 AM
Report this comment
It's all about the ducking of responsibility, after a split everyone will be passing the blame onto someone else. Reid isn't fit to do an office boys job - how did he get a PHd - did he buy it on the internet?
Posted by Peter Hindley on March 30, 2007 10:56 AM
Report this comment
The Germans have a Minister of the Interior and a separate Minister of Justice:
link
so clearly all EU states must have the same structure, or there could be confusion about the chain of command.
Posted by Denis Cooper on March 30, 2007 10:44 AM
Report this comment
So,let`s cut to the chase,how much is this going to cost me and if the goods are not delivered,who will be accountable?Not "Dr"Reid,I`m sure of that.
Posted by Sue on March 30, 2007 10:26 AM
Report this comment
Shame you aren't the Tory Leader Mr Davis.
Posted by Ben Moss on March 30, 2007 10:13 AM
Report this comment
It's unfair to say John Reid leaves ministries at the first sign of trouble. David Davis knows full well that he serves at the pleasure of the prime minister, and does not ask to be moved. It's well-known he did not want to go to Health, nor did he want to give up Defence. Be fair, Mr Davis.
Posted by Duncan on March 30, 2007 10:02 AM
Report this comment
The whole proposal is a typical failed government tactic. If something isn't working properly, divide it up, rename it. Anything to avoid accepting blame. But divide an important government department and you worsen communications and make things more likely to fail.
I go along with Eeeboy in that it was a pity that Mr Davis wasn't chosen as Conservative Leader. What we need is a stronger more vocal opposition to this sham of a government.
Posted by jayengee on March 30, 2007 9:39 AM
Report this comment
This sounds like another waste of Public Money
If the present set up cannot manage then it means that a NEW home office
managenent this is only a get out for Reid
Posted by Alan Hammond on March 30, 2007 9:18 AM
Report this comment
I never thought I'd find myself disagreeing with one of the few Tory big hitters I've got any time for. But on this one David, you are completely wrong. It's a masterstroke by Reid and one which a future Tory government will thank him for.
Posted by UK Daily Pundit on March 30, 2007 9:05 AM
Report this comment
Excellent article Mr Davis, this is the just kind of articulate and informed commentary needed to reveal the folly of this government.
I watched Mr Reid at the dispatch box yesterday during the urgent question, to me he seemed like a parlimentary version of Steve McLaren under extreme pressure and very unsure of his ground.
When his oratory skills flounded, he glared across the chamber as if he could bully his point through.
Sooner he is returned to the back benches the beter.
Posted by Jimmy - York on March 30, 2007 8:50 AM
Report this comment
If I didn't know better, I could be convinced it was a Monty Python sketch about how the government, specifically the cabinet, is trying to sabotage the country!
Posted by J Bush on March 30, 2007 8:23 AM
Report this comment
This is the classic 3 envelope strategy of management. As a chief execuitve resigns, he gives his successor 3 envelopes to open in times of crisis. The first one says "blame your predecessor", the second "reorganise the business", the third "prepare 3 envelopes for successor".
John Reid has already blamed his predecessor and now wants to reorganise... always a way of hiding the inability to solve the problems faced.
Posted by Peter Hollander on March 30, 2007 8:08 AM
Report this comment
No political jargon or cliches, no hot air about hot air, no bull. Mr Davis, you do a bang-up job showing up 'Dr' John Reid for the shifty, shameless showman he is (or tries to be, anyway), but however much your lot lose the next election by, that's how they should regret not making you its leader. An opportunity missed. Still, good luck.
Posted by Eeeboy on March 30, 2007 4:11 AM
Report this comment
Yesterday we had the empty outpourings of the Environment Secretary, I'm in tune with the 'I can' generation. (Remind me, was that Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick and Titch or The Troggs?)
Today we have the Shadow Home Secretary's serious article. Clear, practical and purposeful.
Compare and contrast.
Posted by David Moss on March 30, 2007 1:01 AM
Report this comment
Post a comment
Follow the world's worst financial crisis since the 1930s. |  | This week's selection of curious signs and bizarre translations. | | David Tennant talks about the two high profile roles. | | Eighty singers who have all slept rough take to the stage. |
