Sajid Javid is a nice guy - convivial, professional and human. ‘Saj’ as he is known within Westminster, has been recently promoted to Health Secretary. An important layer of qualification for this role has been so-called ‘ministerial experience’. Sajid Javid has held many, many roles. His career has involved being Chancellor, Home Secretary, Housing and Communities Secretary and Digital Media Culture and Sport (DMCS) Secretary. Many in the media swoon over this varied and eclectic portfolio. I look in horror. Sajid Javid’s average time in ministerial post is one of the shortest in the entire Cabinet. It is quite an achievement, in fact, for Javid to have moved so rapidly between so many jobs. He has been promoted, reshuffled, (effectively) fired and rehired – the whole lot.

It is quite revealing that just being in post passes as experience these days. The British political system is a cult of amateurism and downright bluffery. In the US, Cabinet posts are often given to people with some relevant expertise, often from outside the political system. Janet Yellen knows a thing or two about Monetary Policy – being a top academic who also spent about 25 years working for US financial institutions. Anyone anywhere in the US can be a candidate for a Cabinet job, meaning top experts can be plucked if willing . To add to this, the Senate can and will block their appointment if they lack relevant qualifications.

In the UK, Cabinet ministers tend to be generalists. Some have some applicable experience – Rishi Sunak and Sajid Javid both got filthy rich in the city. This is semi-relevant for both being appointed as Chancellors. Even here though, there is something quite comic about this example. It’s like some elderly relative getting you a Christmas present that vaguely correlates to interests you had when you were six. It is more important to get a present than for it to be perfect. It is more important to have Rishi, Gavin or Michael in the Cabinet than for them to have a job that suits their expertise.

This has serious ramifications. Nicky Morgan, herself a prolific ministerial chameleon, describes vividly what its like entering a new ministerial post. It is ‘extraordinary’ that there is ‘no handover period’ and ‘no training’. The failure of a policy has very real, very human consequences. I myself have had to bear the ministerial incompetence of Gavin Williamson – but in some respects I am lucky. The folly and destructiveness of some policies is staggering. Dominic Cummings’ testimony to the Health and Social Care Select Committee reveals several very recent and avoidable ones. Matt Hancock’s focus on testing figures over targeted testing will have killed. All so he could meet some stupid arbitrary deadline.

Ministers also represent a constituency. To add to the madness then, those barely qualified for the most important jobs in the country must split their time between two jobs. To make this even more farcical, the two jobs are geographically distant from one another and are two of the most time consuming and emotionally draining jobs there are. Ministers have very little free time – with even holidays being dominated by work. At the same time, the public tends to think little of politicians and often rightfully so. Ministers are often not cut out for the jobs they so ruthlessly scheme for – the public will naturally get sick of paltry results.

It’s no good replacing this lot of chancers for another lot of chancers. Labour, nor any other political party has the answers. The question is a structural one – one that requires hard work and a good step back. The dominance of Oxbridge, the fetishisation of debate, the cult of amateurism and a paternalistic and arrogant liberal elite are all culprits – but they are not the only ones. In light of a heavy intensification of the responsibility of ministers, things have changed. Our outdated system of ministerial appointment that was designed in the 18th Century and has had a good run. It may be time to have a look at something new.

Yours,

William