Not fit for purpose – the secret history of a deadly phrase

During a 2006 parliamentary session, the Home Secretary at the time, John Reid, famously stated, “Our system is not fit for purpose.” This brief remark, directed at the Home Office, launched a phrase that would become deeply embedded in British political discourse. The comment came shortly after thousands of foreign-born prisoners were released from British jails without prior assessment for deportation. Reid later credited the phrase to an unnamed senior civil servant, but a recent Newscast podcast series has uncovered its true origin: Sir David Normington, the permanent secretary of the department.

“It is my phrase, but it was written in a private memo to the Home Secretary, John Reid, just after he had arrived. Me saying, ‘This is what the Home Office is like,’” Normington recalled.

Normington accompanied Reid during the moment the phrase entered public consciousness. “With me sat beside him, [I tried] to rearrange my face as he described all 70,000 civil servants in the Home Office as not fit for purpose,” he said. The civil service, he noted, had pressed him to challenge Reid’s claim. “The trouble was… it was my phrase,” he admitted.

Over the past two decades, the four-word expression has evolved into a go-to critique for systemic inefficiency. Parliamentary records, such as Hansard, show it has been invoked nearly 3,000 times in debates since 2006—compared to just 37 instances prior. From military housing conditions to a Cornish hospital’s sewage system, the phrase has transcended its original context.

Normington sought to dispel myths surrounding the term. He clarified that it initially referred to the Immigration and Nationality Directorate, a specific unit within the Home Office, rather than the entire department. The critique targeted processes and technology, not the staff or immigration policies. Reid, he said, made these distinctions at the time, though they were later overshadowed in official narratives.

“Obviously, as in any organisation, there are things that are done well and things that are done badly,” Charles Clarke, Reid’s predecessor as Labour home secretary, told Newscast. “The job of the leadership… is to review how the department is doing, where it’s doing badly, and what you have to do to rectify or learn from those things.”

The phrase’s adoption had tangible consequences. Prime Minister Tony Blair shifted prison oversight to the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) following its use. Today, the MOJ employs 90,000 staff, making it the largest government department, according to the Institute for Government think tank. Even current Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood revived the term when addressing a critical report on the department. “The Home Office is not yet fit for purpose, and has been set up for failure,” she remarked last October.

Former advisers echoed the phrase’s enduring impact. Hannah Guerin, a former special adviser, noted the difficulty of long-term planning from Westminster’s Marsham Street: “You don’t have time to think. There is a lack of focus on the long term… if you don’t deal with the next 10, 15, 20, 24 hours, you’re not going to survive.” Danny Shaw, a Labour home affairs adviser, acknowledged similar challenges during opposition. “The focus was winning the election,” he said.