This is certainly supported by the medians displayed in Chart 8 in the report, which ought nevertheless to be interpreted with a degree of caution. First because of youthfulness– two thirds of them are under 40 -& secondly because they tend not to stay in the Treasury for very long – three quarters have less than 10 years service.
These make disentangling cause & effect tricky – do bright young things want to join the Treasury for the value it adds to their cv when they move out to a much better paid job in the private sector, or does the Treasury suffer by not being able to pay good staff highly enough?
For now I just want to note one startling claim: that house price inflation is
“ leading to a situation where only staff with other income could afford a long term career in the Treasury, which could lead to a narrowing in the diversity of Treasury staff..”There is no elucidation of whether ‘other income’ means a high-earning partner, or a trust fund.
But Nevil Shute would welcome the way we will in future have Treasury civil servants who truly independent & are capable of standing up to a Chancellor who is difficult or unreasonable
