The Permanent Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, 1854–1946

Reforming the Civil Service and revising the role of the mandarin in Britain: A view from the perspective of a study of eight permanent secretaries at the Ministry of Education between 1976 and 2011

“…(2001) also argues that 'no description of a system is adequate without a detailed treatment of the people who operate it ' (p. 483). These are views we share, along with Neilson and Otte (2012) who claim that 'it also, of course, makes for a good story ' (p. 16). We too hope to tell a story -one which to the best of our knowledge is the first interview-based study of its kind of an unbroken succession in any department in which permanent secretaries are identified, and to whom comments are largely attributed.…”

“…Thus whilst biographical studies are available on many political figures, they are notably absent on senior officials – as Normington wryly put it to us, “We rarely write autobiographies”. Furthermore, with some notable exceptions (Barberis, 1994, 1996; Eyvindr, 2012; Harris and Garcia, 1966; Neilson and Otte, 2012; Richards, 1997, 2009; Rhodes, 2005, 2011; Theakston and Fry, 1989) permanent secretaries have been the subject of scant research.…”

“…There are few such studies of any major department. Of these, one of the most illuminating is a history, relying mainly on documentary evidence, by Neilson and Otte (2012) reporting on the twelve permanent secretaries at the Foreign Office between 1854 and 1946. This argues that ‘to understand the past one must study individual biographies … It is our contention that it is people who make institutions work and that it is through the prism of individual personalities that the student of the past can illuminate past affairs’ (p. 16).…”

Why do states in conflict with each other also sustain resilient cooperation in international regulation? Britain and telegraphy, 1860s–1914

“…In the second sub-period, for the inclusion of the declaration in the 1884 SCC, it performs much less well than might first appear. In the conference negotiations not one state objected to the principle that the convention applied only in peacetime; debate was mainly about the peculiar, rather legalistic design of the British -almost certainly British FO Permanent Under-Secretary, Sir Julian Pauncefote's (a lawyer with no Admiralty or War Office experience: Neilson and Otte, 2009: 62-67) -draft clause, written and presented at a very late stage (Pauncefote, PUS FO, to Government Law Officers, 24.1.1883, PRO 30/29/359), which had attracted little enthusiasm even in the Foreign Office (Kennedy, FO delegate to the conference and the influential head of the FO's Commercial Department, memo, 8.12.1883, PRO 30/29/359) and none elsewhere (Bateman Champain, Director of the Indian Telegraph Service, memo 15.11.1883, PRO 30/29/359 provided a pointed critique); even in the Admiralty and War Office who were informed at a late stage and merely noted that the draft clause would meet the Foreign Office's (FO's) (rather than their) objectives, and neither military department had been consulted on it nor thought it necessary, let alone strategically important (Tryon, Admiralty, to Fitzmaurice, FO, 14.1.1884, PRO 30/29/359). In inter-departmental exchanges in preparation and at the conference, much more contentious were issues about court jurisdictions, fishing interests, signals for cable repairing ships and so on.…”

Prime minister and foreign secretary: the dual role of James Ramsay MacDonald in 1924

“…123 This willingness to take guidance from the Foreign Office is echoed in Keith Neilson and T. G. Otte's account of Sir Eyre Crowe as Permanent Under-Secretary in 1924. They maintain that Crowe's relations with MacDonald were 'surprisingly good' and that MacDonald leaned heavily on Crowe for advice, 124 although Otte does comment that their differences over relations with the Soviet Union were 'profound', and that Crowe 'did not often exercise much direct influence over MacDonald'. 125 Sir Robert Vansittart, Permanent Under-Secretary at the Foreign Office between 1930 and 1938, wrote that 'Ramsay MacDonald proved a good Foreign Secretary, the only member of his Labour Party whose mind approached the first order'.…”