You have already discuss

---

Ref:

A0361

CONFIDENTIAL

P R I M E M I N I S T E R

E f f i c i e n c y and Waste i n C e n t r a l Government

(C(79) 36)

You have already discussed this paper with S i r Derek Rayner and and you have his brief and a copy of his speaking note.

me,



My brief i s therefore

confined solely to handling and to conclusions.

HANDLING

2.

We are breaking new ground by inviting S i r Derek Rayner and his two

supporters to talk to the Cabinet. himself, M r C.S. Ponting of MOD

You will want to welcome them (Rayner

and M r N. R. Warner of DHSS).

You might

thank their M i n i s t e r s for allowing them to attend.

3.

You might remind Cabinet that you gave Rayner three jobs to do

initially:

(i)

Cutting down on demands on the public, f i r m s , etc. for

information;

(ii)

this i s i n hand,

Getting r i d of 'conventions' which inhibit efficient management;

this, too, i s well i n hand,

(iii)

Cutting out functions.

You asked each M i n i s t e r to designate

a suitable young official i n his Department to c a r r y out a quick

study of potential targets. come in, f r o m MOD

Two of the e a r l i e s t reports to

and DHSS, a r e very promising.

thought Cabinet would enjoy hearing about them.

And you

You are not

pointing the finger at any individual Departments: the object i s

to show what can be done, given co-operation and M i n i s t e r i a l

support, to eliminate inefficiency and waste even in the best-run

Department.

4.

You have circulated (C(79)39) a very good minute by Derek Rayner,

about the next steps.

One of his suggestions i s that there should be a regular

system of 'scrutinies' in Departments.

The pilot projects which Rayner has

already c a r r i e d out show what can be done.

-1­

The idea i s that M i n i s t e r s i n

CONFIDENTIAL

charge of Departments themselves

should undertake this work.

It is not a

question of the centre arrogating the responsibilities of Departments.

The



role of central Departments w i l l be limited to giving the thing a push, reviewing

p r o g r e s s periodically, and ensuring that lessons are r e a d - a c r o s s f r o m one

area to another.

5.

When Rayner and his two assistants have had their say, you will want

the d i s c u s s i o n to go round the table.

It will probably be helpful to c a l l the

Chancellor and the L o r d P r e s i d e n t f i r s t , as both of them will speak i n support

of Rayner.

The Home S e c r e t a r y i s also an ally.

We had expected the S e c r e t a r

of State for Defence to be hostile, but it will be difficult for h i m to argue that

everything is under control, following Ponting's h o r r o r stories.

I suggest

you avoid too much d i s c u s s i o n of the detail of the scheme, and concentrate

on getting agreement that the new system i s desirable, and on the target date

of 23rd November for r e p o r t s on the f i r s t batch of topics to be tackled.

You



could leave i t open whether Cabinet should have a further d i s c u s s i o n when you

see the f i r s t list.

(You may find it useful to have such a d i s c u s s i o n to put

p r e s s u r e on reluctant M i n i s t e r s . )

CONCLUSIONS

6.

The f o r m a l conclusions to r e c o r d at the end of the meeting might be:­ (i)

to welcome the f i r s t indications of success i n the Rayner

studies;

(ii)

to endorse the proposals i n his minute, circulated with C(79) 39;

(iii)

to agree that a l l M i n i s t e r s i n charge of Departments should send

their initial proposals f o r 'scrutinies' to /_you/

/_and the

L o r d President/ by 23rd November^

(iv)

to note thatyou will consider holding a further Cabinet d i s c u s s i o n

about that l i s t at a later stage.

(John Hunt)

3rd October 1979

-2­