There should be eligibility criteria for standing as prime minster, one of which is a good CV working in the public sector

[Doormice]

I mean PM is basically head of the public sector isn’t he/she?

I think there's a bit more to it than that.

I'm not sure about this, I mean there are masses of incompetent people in the public sector, promoted way beyond their capability. What are the other criteria you would have?

Actually, I think people with an alternative background to the public sector can sometimes be forces for change in a good way. Different perspective etc.

Definitely. There should be job description with 'essential' experience listed. Most should be proving understanding of community needs plus 'lived' experience of every department they will be in charge of and loads more!

I’m not sure about the other eligibility criteria, perhaps there wouldn’t be any. I just think that as a public servant, the prime minister should not be a stranger to the public sector.

If anything I think the complete opposite
Part of the issue is that few MPs have ever had a proper job

id rather a requirement for balance of public/private sector to be honest. The public sector has a strange culture of extreme stress/no money (often resulting in bullying and poor leadership in some areas and of very low productive non visionary low agility approaches in others. Just this week I worked with a public sector client who couldn’t get something signed off because someone else was on leave and now the price of what they’re buying will go up 40k! I think having some mandatory balance within government is important though.

Yep. I'd say they need experience in the private sector.

Working in the public sector is a proper job?!
And very wide ranging! Many of my family work in the public sector, including a nurse, cps lawyer, teacher, TA and police officer.

Which of these are not proper jobs?!

In actual fact I think that your bizarre comment dismissing the worth of the public sector is EXACTLY the problem with politicians from private sector backgrounds.0

I can't believe that out of a nation of 80million you end up with numptees in these positions.

The USA is worse. (see current incumbent of top job)

Until you look at some figures.

800,000 political party members of all political parties in the UK. These party members are the people interviewing and putting forward their Candidate in an election.

So that's 1% of the population putting forward 000.1% of the population, that the rest of the country vote for in a GE.

No more demonstrated by the 160,000 tory members that have just voted LT into power.

And you wonder why it's a mess?

I disagree op. I'm public sector and I try and employ people who've had private sector experience. Doesn't have to be a lot but I find those who have got private sector experience (retail for example) are much less entitled and have a better work ethic.

Not everyone of course but sometimes the level of entitlement is staggering. I think that MPs (and therefore the PM) should have had a career first before going into politics.

I agree!

Obviously a career in front line public sector such as policing/NHS would also be valuable for MPs and the PM.

I want to see MPs who have done something other than SPAD/researcher/lawyer.

It doesn't need to be civil service though, and I can think of good reasons why having a greater spread of backgrounds would be a thoroughly good thing

I have had a theory for ages that before you become an MP you need to do a version of an apprenticeship as follows:

• 3-6 months on a hospital ward as an HCA
• 3-6 months in a job centre as a frontline benefits advisor
• 3-6 months in an inner city secondary school as a TA
• 3-6 months in a deployed role in Army/Navy/Airforce.

To qualify you must do the front line role and not a admin or back office role.

This would enable them to interact with a wide cross section of the public and gain an understanding of the daily struggle some people go through.

Add, 1 year minimum in nmw retail job

6 months unemployed

Neither with recourse to other additional funds to support during that time

Add, 1 year minimum in nmw retail job

6 months unemployed

Neither with recourse to other additional funds to support during that time

The military isn't a kind of finishing school for wannabe politicos thank you.

And 3 months would mean basic training only - and a mere 3 months beyond that won't give any real understanding. It would be smoke and mirrors, not real understanding, and I bet that's true of just dipping in to other fields too.

I'd rather see actual success in something (anything!) beyond the Westminster 'bubble'

no the PM is head of the government which encompasses more than the public sector

I think it's a unrealistic and couldn't happen in practice, but I do really like the idea. I remember the point as a child when I realised that Ministers did not have a background in the areas they governed and being totally floored. So, the health secretary doesn't have to have been a doctor? Then how do they know how to be health secretary?! And so on. But yes, a lovely, probably unrealistic idea.

I don't know about this. I think the issue is the circles a lot of these people socialise in and a year of hard knocks won't change them. I think we need to encourage more kids from state schools to get active in politics. We need a more socially diverse government.

It is strange how you don't even need a science degree to be Minister for Health but I disagree that you must work for the public sector to be PM. A banker could be a good Chancellor and someone who has experience of teaching in home Ed groups could make a great Minister of Education.
In an ideal world we'd have a PM who could say that they have lived on benefits (like UC) and it would be seen as useful real life experience rather than inevitably being mocked about it at PMQ.

@WhiskyTime

I agree!

At the very least they

Should take guidance from those at the very bottom middle and top.