Skip to main content

Home Office Problem Solving

One of the top stories of the day is that the government intend fixing problems at the Home Office.

On the TV screens is a display of one of the presentations which goes approximately.
1. Find problem
2. Fix it
3. Check that it is solved.

This is really sad. If this is news to the Home Office then something is much more wrong than I ever believed. I still don't believe that they don't know this. I think it is purely window dressing.

The underlying problem as with any large organisation is one of how problems are solved. It is definitely the case that any board or senior manager should not generally be looking at little problems.

However, there is now a tendency to avoid ever looking at the details. This was a particular problem when we had Lin Homer as Chief Executive of the City Council. She (who now runs IND) argued strongly that we should never look at the detailed issues.

I would not see this as an approach which is only one for Ms Homer. There is a tendency in the paid officer service (Local Government Officers, Civil Servants) to get the politicians as far away as possible.

The problem is that you cannot really only manage services by considering outcomes. You also need to consider how to get the outcome. There tend to be turf wars between the different middle managers and the like and hence someone needs to be around to knock heads together.

In the public sector this is the final responsibility of politicians. It needs to be done in a sensible manner and simply going round ranting "Its not fit for purpose" does no-one any good.

As far as the responsibilities of the Home Office are concerned there is a very clear need for a flow chart of how people are processed by the system. I am very concerned as to what happens when people who have been given a "Hospital Order" are released. These are people who have committed a criminal offence because they are mentally ill. They are clearly dangerous people. They, however, seem to disappear in a crevasse between the NHS and the Courts and Criminal Justice system.

One of the problems with the way parliament works is that most of the problems in the UK public sector are management problems. Parliament is actually quite bad at holding the executive to account (by asking questions and getting answers), because the executive simply refuses to answer the questions.

The end result is that MPs get into the mood that the solution to a problem involves legislation. We end up, hence, with a vast quantity of rubbishy legislation when it really does not help.

What is actually needed is attention to detail. Identifying specific and clear problems and their solutions with full information. This can be done by opposition MPs perfectly well. Richard Bacon MP is quite good at this. Then you need to put your big bovver boots on and kick some backsides until the problem is fixed. Frequently the solution to a problem merely involves putting the boots on and no backsides need receive any metaphorical impetus. The threat is enough.

I am having a bit of a go on the audit of death certificates. If you want to identify doctors who kill their patients first look at the number of death certificates signed then look for the explanation of any large numbers.


Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.

Problems with Outlook Express - emails lost dbx corruption

In the light of the enthusiasm shown for my post relating to the OCX control that must not be named (and probably Microsoft's most embarrassing error of recent years) I thought I would write someting about Outlook Express. Outlook Express is the email client that comes as part of windows. I use it myself, although I have my emails filtered through a spam filter of my own devising written in java. It takes email off a number of servers using POP3 (Post Office Protocol TCP Port 110) and sends it using SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol port 25). I have recently spent a few hours dealing with the problem that arises when .dbx files get corrupted during compacting. Outlook Express (OE) stores the emails (and other things) in files with the suffix .dbx. Each folder has its own .dbx file. They are stored in hidden directories. This makes it harder to deal with things when OE goes wrong. It is very important to back up your stored *.dbx files as otherwise if you have a disk cra

Statement re False Allegations Campaign

Many people will know that my family and I have been subject to a campaign of false allegations by Esther Baker for the past 4 1/2 years. Yesterday there was a court judgment Baker v Hemming [2019] EWHC 2950 (QB) which formally confirmed that the allegations were false. Esther Baker, who had brought a libel claim against me, dropped her defence of Truth to my counter-claim and was taken by the judge as no longer trying to prove her allegations. Due to Baker's various breaches of court rules and orders, she has been barred from further repeating her allegations even in the court proceedings. Further claim of mine in libel against Baker are ongoing. There is a good summary in the Daily Mail here . This demonstrates the challenge in fighting false allegations in today's Britain. A substantial campaign was built up to promote allegations which had no substance to them. Various Labour MPs and in