The government is looking at shaking up Whitehall's 'write-round' process as part of its bid to speed up decision-making, CSW's sister publication PoliticsHome understands.
A write-round is when ministers reach decisions through written correspondence, instead of an in-person meeting of cabinet or a cabinet committee.
The minister seeking a decision sends a proposal to other relevant ministers, requesting their approval. If any disagree with the proposal, they can respond in writing to the relevant cabinet committee chair, explaining their objection.
The process is designed to ensure that there is government-wide agreement on cross-departmental issues.
However, PoliticsHome understands there is growing frustration within the Keir Starmer administration that the process in its current form creates needless delays.
Officials complain that it is often an unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle to clear, as disagreements between departments over contentious issues are worked out prior to the write-round process, and sometimes delay decisions by several weeks.
Possible reform of the write-round process is thought to be part of a wider conversation within the Labour government about changes to how Whitehall works.
Starmer is believed to have become frustrated with how long it can take to implement decisions since he entered Downing Street last year.
Earlier this year, the PM said Whitehall must be "more agile, mission-focused and more productive”.
Dominic Cummings, who served as chief adviser to former prime minister Boris Johnson, strongly criticised the write-round process in a 2015 article. He said it created a “Potemkin system” which slows down the decision-making process and doesn't give ministers any “real power to oppose anything”.
Former Tory minister Steve Baker told PoliticsHome the write-round process was the “bane of every minister’s life” and created "an immense amount of pointless work”.
However, he said doing away with the system in its entirety would have "downsides" as it would result in ministers being "blindsided" on issues related to their brief.
Charlotte Pickles, director of think tank Re:State, told PoliticsHome that the write-round process “builds in delay” and “does need an overhaul”.
She suggested reforms like imposing time limits on how long ministers have to respond to write-rounds, and automatic consent when ministers miss the deadline to respond to them.
However, she said that any reform must be careful not to harm the government’s ability to spot “the cross-departmental implications” of policy decisions.
Pickles added that she would like to see the government be bolder in dealing with the “sclerotic” and “glacial” nature of Whitehall.
“Constant consultations, green papers then white papers, ludicrously long and complicated business cases, delayed decisions on funding, procurements that take years. If you really wanted to speed delivery, you would actually rewire Whitehall," she said.
Defenders of the current system say it helps avoid policy decisions having unintended consequences, like a clause in a piece of legislation not working for a particular part of the Union, for example.
It is also seen as a way of maintaining collective cabinet responsibility — the convention that ministers can disagree in private but must agree in public.
This article was written by Tom Scotson and Adam Payne at PoliticsHome, where this story first appeared