Civil Service: Impartiality
Baroness Prashar Excerpts(4 weeks ago)
Grand CommitteeRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Prashar (CB)
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Falkner, for securing this short but important and timely debate.
As we have heard, impartiality is the bedrock of our Civil Service. We have also heard that it is fraying, and that has been well illustrated. My experience as the former First Civil Service Commissioner from 2000-05 convinced me that, while the Civil Service needs to constantly change and evolve to meet the challenges and changes in society, its values of honesty, objectivity, impartiality and integrity, allied with flexibility, sensitivity and commitment, remain crucially important, perhaps even more so at a time of enormous upheaval. They must remain the guiding principles.
These principles not only root the Civil Service but engender trust, a word more important than ever before when change runs deep in the environment of the Civil Service and in the very definition of public service. Development of policy, delivery of services and explanation of policies are taking place against low levels of trust in government, politicians and institutions, and in a less cohesive society. Integrity of the process is therefore crucial. It is for this reason that these values are essential and not an impediment.
The Civil Service, while by no means perfect, has come under a great deal of criticism and scrutiny. It is an organisation and institution under strain. Reforms, particularly since the 1980s, have been driven in response to external pressures, perceived dilemmas and political drivers, rather than any continuous systematic assessment of the organisation. The Civil Service is a national asset. It is held in trust by the Government of the day for the next Administration. Capability, capacity and the constitutional position of the Civil Service should not become just the domain of the Government of the day; it is a matter of national interest.
Over the past four decades, a view has developed that the values of the Civil Service are a hindrance to reform. This is a misconceived view. Reform of the Civil Service and these values are not incompatible. Understood and applied properly, they enable change and do not hinder it. These concerns led to the publication in 1995 of the Civil Service Code, which has been updated several times and will, I understand, be updated against the background of the review that has been initiated. This update should not be a paper exercise but an opportunity to clarify, reaffirm, reinforce and reassert these values, and explain what they mean in practice. It should be an opportunity to convey to the politicians, civil servants and public servants their utility and how they assist in restoring the self-worth and identity of the Civil Service as a professional and impartial service.
I hope the Minister is aware of the Governance Project report, which was published in 2024. I should declare an interest as a member. The report recommended that the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 should be amended to make explicit that civil servants have a legal obligation to act in compliance with the responsibilities under the code and that Ministers cannot direct them to act in opposition to the code. This recommendation should be acted upon, to ensure that we do not have the sort of issues that have been raised in the debate today.
Broadcasting: Recent Developments
Baroness Prashar Excerpts(9 months, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Prashar (CB)
My Lords, I too thank the noble Lord, Lord Fowler, for securing this debate and for his thoughtful introduction. My remarks will be confined to public service broadcasting and the BBC.
As we have heard, we are operating in a very challenging media environment in which the case for public service broadcasting does not weaken but sharpens. The need to reinforce its values and purpose, and to reassert its role and the BBC’s mission in particular, matters more rather than less today. What is at stake is not simply the future shape of a broadcaster but the BBC’s continuing ability to help hold together the social fabric of our society and evade the dangers of fragmentation.
The BBC was established to serve the whole of society. Its mission to inform, educate and entertain was conceived as a durable public settlement, built on universality, editorial independence, impartiality and responsibility to public interest. The question before us not whether the BBC should evolve—it must—but whether the changes under consideration strengthen or weaken this ability to discharge its founding principles and duties to the public.
Some proposals in the current consultation would, if pursued without care, place real pressure on the BBC’s capacity to provide a universal service. If we are serious about the BBC as a public service broadcaster, then reform must be judged against its mission and purpose and not just against market pressures.
In a crowded market, attention is treated as a commodity to be harvested. As a public service broadcaster, the BBC should be enabled to stand apart as a public service resource which manages attention with care. This distinction matters.
That is why universality matters—which is not, in my view, a relic of the analogue age; it is a design principle for the digital one. Without universality, we do not share public conversations, and we fragment into parallel areas. Then there is of course the global dimension, but that global credibility rests on the trust built at home. The authority with which the BBC speaks abroad depends on the integrity, independence and accountability of the system here in the UK. Weaken that settlement and the global voice will weaken.
The standing of the BBC rests on the essential principle of impartiality. Impartiality is not about mechanically balancing opinions; it is a disciplined commitment to evidence, context and truth, applied without fear or favour—even under pressure. The BBC, at times, has taken a very narrow and procedural view of impartiality, and it is right to acknowledge that mistakes have been made. But what is needed now is a renewed commitment to impartiality as a professional and ethical standard. Properly understood, impartiality is not a constraint; it is what matters and what makes the BBC trustworthy.
Any reform that compromises universality, editorial independence and impartiality, and the BBC’s ability to remain a significant engine for the creative industries, would diminish the very role it exists to perform. In my view, the charter renewal is an opportunity to refresh the BBC’s original mission and to ensure that any updated framework strengthens rather than undermines the purpose and the ethos of the BBC and that of public service broadcasting. That is the responsibility before us, and it is one which we should approach with care and a clear sense of purpose, and be guided by the principles and values, not just by the market and commercial pressures. I look forward to the Minister’s response.