Typical outputs from Phase 4

When composing a brief, envisage a busy Minister raising two fundamental questions: ‘Says who?’ and ‘So what?’ The first prompts us to give compelling evidence to support our assertions, while the second urges us to trace our statements to concrete outcomes, often revealing practical advantages.

The brief’s structure is crucial:

• start with a clear title that outlines the subject
• give the core content and context in the middle portion
• address practicalities and offer insights for future considerations

Suggested format for a submission (decision-making brief)

A submission is the form in which most departments make recommendations to Ministers and seek decisions from them. Different departments use different formats. A typical format would include the headings below. While the total brief length will depend on the issue at hand and its complexity, it is important to try and keep it concise.

Title of brief: Capture the essence of the subject in the title.

Policy context: Define the policy to be decided on, or the problem to be solved. This could be something like How to achieve X or Whether to do Y or Z.

Suggested proposals: Set out the proposals for agreement by the Minister.

Decision required by: DD/MM/YYYY

Background: Describe the context of the demand and proposal

Briefing content: Include the points below.

Objective: What we are trying to achieve with this recommendation.

Proposal options: List the top three or four options and then compare their expected effectiveness in achieving our objective. Always consider the ‘do nothing’ option!

List the pros and cons of each option and highlight key implications. When listing the pros and cons of each option, remain objective. You are not trying to ‘sell’ them your preferred option. Provide a balanced overview of proposal options, including weaknesses of your preferred option and strengths of less preferred options. This is more persuasive and defensible than bias. Include more detailed information about implications of each option. Warn the Minister about any potential problem with an option or tell them about a particular advantage – for example, this will be popular with the motor trade but will raise protests from environmental lobbyists.

Incorporate political and public views. These are very important. However, we can’t let these views over dominate as no new tax would ever be introduced.

Include draft costings for each option, if possible, and where relevant.

Programme for Government (PfG): Tell Ministers how this proposal supports specific PfG commitments – for example, “this policy supports the commitment to increase the fund for students with disabilities”.

Presentation: Explain how you think the recommended policy option is likely to be received by the public and stakeholders. Suggest how best to present this decision to the public so it is easy to understand, compelling, and robust.

Next steps: Describe where we go from here and/or any action required.

Once a decision is made by the political system, it is up to the civil service to deliver that decision to the best of its ability.

All the good work completed in policy development achieves nothing if it does not result in, or lead to, effective delivery. If government approval is secured, we must then take ownership of the task on ensuring successful implementation. Typically, this requires effective project management and risk management processes, together with robust governance and intensive communication and engagement with affected parties.

Moreover, if we find that effective delivery requires a significant change to the approved policy intervention, as it sometimes must, then this must be communicated to Government and appropriate approvals or sanctions secured.

Therefore, it is clear that the work of policy does not end with a government decision. The implementation of policy, to which we now turn our attention, is where policy becomes reality.