|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
130956
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In July 2013 the UK's coalition government published "The Civil Service Reform Plan - One Year on", reporting on progress against minister Frances Maude's objectives to shake up the civil service. This followed various reported disagreements between ministers and civil servants over policy implementation, and a research report commissioned by the government from think tank IPPR into lessons from overseas for civil service reform. This trio of short articles reviews the government's proposals from three perspectives: that of the lead author of the IPPR report, a former senior civil servant, and the chair of the House of Commons Public Administration Committee (PASC) which oversees the civil service. The authors take differing views on the proposals, which include introduction of 'extended ministerial offices', and greater control by ministers over choosing their civil servants. Should these be seen as useful next steps, worrying developments, and/or large and important enough to merit a Commission on the civil service, as PASC has suggested?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
130955
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In July 2013 the UK's coalition government published "The Civil Service Reform Plan - One Year on", reporting on progress against minister Frances Maude's objectives to shake up the civil service. This followed various reported disagreements between ministers and civil servants over policy implementation, and a research report commissioned by the government from think tank IPPR into lessons from overseas for civil service reform. This trio of short articles reviews the government's proposals from three perspectives: that of the lead author of the IPPR report, a former senior civil servant, and the chair of the House of Commons Public Administration Committee (PASC) which oversees the civil service. The authors take differing views on the proposals, which include introduction of 'extended ministerial offices', and greater control by ministers over choosing their civil servants. Should these be seen as useful next steps, worrying developments, and/or large and important enough to merit a Commission on the civil service, as PASC has suggested?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
130954
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In July 2013 the UK's coalition government published "The Civil Service Reform Plan - One Year on", reporting on progress against minister Frances Maude's objectives to shake up the civil service. This followed various reported disagreements between ministers and civil servants over policy implementation, and a research report commissioned by the government from think tank IPPR into lessons from overseas for civil service reform. This trio of short articles reviews the government's proposals from three perspectives: that of the lead author of the IPPR report, a former senior civil servant, and the chair of the House of Commons Public Administration Committee (PASC) which oversees the civil service. The authors take differing views on the proposals, which include introduction of 'extended ministerial offices', and greater control by ministers over choosing their civil servants. Should these be seen as useful next steps, worrying developments, and/or large and important enough to merit a Commission on the civil service, as PASC has suggested?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
123778
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Review of a Critical Path Securing the Future of Higher Education in England: the final report of the IPPR Commission on the future of Higher Education. The focus of the review is first on the funding of Higher Education and the options set out by the IPPR which include lower tuition fees, a graduate tax, means tested family contributions and changes to the loan repayment scheme; and second on better ways of widening participation and expanding opportunities for under-represented groups of students.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|