Apparently Civil Servants should want “strong leadership”
Today Gordon Brown is under attack for practising “Stalinist Ruthlessness” and for refusing to open policy to discussion with civil servants. This isn’t surprising, though again, its worrying for a guy who’s supposedly due to be running the country in less than 6 months time. Still, we’ve had our share of elected dictators in Britain.
What’s actually bugging me is a quote the BBC have given from Harriet Harman: “Not all civil servants admire strong leadership”. This strikes me as a horribly normative statement, implying that somehow we are to assume that strong leadership works. Sadly, some people still enjoy the presence of a bully, but I’m glad to hear that some civil servants recognise the danger of allowing someone to get away with “strong leadership”.
This post wouldn’t be complete with the obligatory Chavez-bash: Is Harman suggesting that Brown should get himself an enabling act on arrival in number 10, so he too can rule by diktat? Why can’t people realise that strong leadership is anti-democratic and that there’s no such thing as a good strong leader?!