Skip to content
DHWNEWS
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
Menu

The quality and capability of UK politicians? – a conversation with Claude (Ai)

Posted on October 4, 2025October 4, 2025 by ecwlarcombe

This is an extract from a conversation with Claude (Ai)

Question from EL – Good morning Claude – Have you any views on the quality of UK politicians – for example MPs. Are they capable of doing their jobs?

Response from Claude – Good morning! This is quite a nuanced question. I’d say the quality of UK MPs varies considerably, as you’d expect with any group of 650 people from diverse backgrounds.
There are some structural challenges that affect capability:
Skills vs. selection criteria – MPs are primarily selected for their ability to win elections and represent their party/constituency, not necessarily for policy expertise or executive competence. Many excel at the former but struggle with the latter.
The learning curve – Being an MP involves juggling constituency casework, legislative scrutiny, committee work, and media appearances. New MPs often describe feeling overwhelmed, and there’s limited formal training.
Exodus of talent – The job has become less attractive due to public hostility, social media abuse, security concerns, and (relatively) modest pay compared to equivalent private sector roles. This may deter some capable people from standing.
System constraints – Even capable MPs can appear ineffective because they’re operating within a system with strong party whips, limited time for proper legislative scrutiny, and where much decision-making happens in the executive rather than Parliament.
That said, there are undoubtedly many competent, hardworking MPs across all parties who genuinely try to serve their constituents and engage seriously with policy. The issue is often less about individual capability and more about whether the system itself is fit for purpose.
What prompted your question? Are you thinking about any particular aspect of their performance?

Response from EL – When MP’s get Ministerial posts, I see most of them as well-briefed puppets of the civil servants – in place to support policy, fend off criticism and take the blame when things go wrong. Could it be that Departmental and Ministerial employees prioritise protecting their jobs and pensions?

Response from Claude – You’ve hit on something that many observers and even former ministers themselves have discussed. There’s definitely truth to the dynamic you’re describing, though I’d say it’s more complex than pure self-interest.
The “Yes Minister” problem – That sitcom resonated because it captured a real tension. Ministers typically spend 2-3 years in a post (sometimes much less), while senior civil servants may spend decades in a department. The civil service has institutional memory, expertise, and knows how to manage ministers. A new minister can easily be steered toward “departmentally acceptable” positions.
Structural incentives – Civil servants do have incentives to avoid risk and controversy. Major policy failures can derail careers, while successful maintenance of the status quo is safer. Pensions and job security do matter, especially in an era of spending cuts and restructuring. The instinct can be to smooth things over rather than embrace disruptive change.
Ministers often complain about this – People like Dominic Cummings, former cabinet ministers from various parties, and others have described the frustration of trying to implement change against institutional resistance. The civil service can slow-walk policies, present obstacles as insurmountable, or offer watered-down alternatives.
But it’s not all self-serving – Many civil servants genuinely believe they’re protecting good governance, ensuring legal compliance, and preventing ministers from making ill-considered decisions. They’ve often seen similar ideas fail before. The question is: when does “institutional wisdom” become “institutional inertia”?
The minister’s role in this – Strong, knowledgeable ministers with clear vision and political backing can drive change. Weak or transient ministers get managed. The system perhaps reveals which ministers have real capability versus those who are just placeholder appointments.
Do you think the rapid turnover of ministers makes this worse?

Response from EL – I will leave that question unanswered

The questions you’ve raised about ministerial capability and civil service dynamics are certainly ones that deserve broader debate.

END

 

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Datchet Parish Council publishes false claims about DRCCT
  • Slough Observer – the DRCCT and DPC
  • How do you fill a Parish Council vacancy?
  • DRCCT and Datchet Parish Council (update 8/10/2025))
  • Failing timber footbridges? What about the duty of candour?

DATCHET

The name "Datchet" is thought to be Celtic in origin, and the last part may be related to cet ("wood"). In the Domesday Book it is called "Daceta".lla. Datchet is first mentioned between 990 and 994, when King Ethelred made small grants of land here.

HORTON

The village name "Horton" is a common one in England. It is Old English in origin and derives from the two words horu 'dirt' and tūn 'settlement, farm, estate', presumably meaning 'farm on muddy soil'.In the Domesday Book of 1086 it was recorded as Hortune.

WRAYSBURY

The village name was traditionally spelt Wyrardisbury; it is Anglo Saxon in origin and means 'Wïgrǣd's fort'. Its name is recorded in the Domesday Book of 1086 as Wirecesberie and as Wiredesbur in 1195. The name is seen again as Wyrardesbury in 1422.

©2025 DHWNEWS | Design: Newspaperly WordPress Theme