Did he think it wouldn’t make it into the morning papers, or did he think it would be just right for the weekend editions with all their space for arty things? I am wondering about the resignation of the director of the British Museum (BM) yesterday which was ‘in the news’ because of a series of jaw-dropping thefts. Meanwhile, some of our ‘betters’ in the MSM are happy to go on about Trump and Putin: after all, what would we peasants know or care about antiquities …: “Newspaper headlines: Trump mugshot and families share Letby fears” (link).
When I’d only briefly checked the news headlines yesterday evening, noting that BM director had resigned, I thought to myself that here’s one ‘CEO’ of an institution who didn’t need to be kicked out. Sadly, when I went on to read the articles this morning, my blood pressure went through the roof. No mugs were thrown only because I still needed the coffee they contained. Firstly, here’s the report in The Times’ report, nicely measured in tone:
“The head of the British Museum has resigned and his deputy has stepped back in the wake of one of the biggest scandals in its history, over stolen artefacts, which has prompted a police investigation. Hartwig Fischer, the museum’s director, quit over allegations that as many as 2,000 precious jewels and gems had been stolen over 20 years and some had been sold on eBay. Fischer, 60, admitted that it was “evident” that the museum did not respond “comprehensively” to warnings of thefts in 2021.” (link, paywalled)
Well, his contract was running out next year anyway. However, he was in the job since 2016, thus an inauguration audit surely should have been performed and turned up something? The remarks by the Chair of the BM Board of Trustees, a certain George Osborne – yes, him! – are bland when he said that “Fischer had “acted honourably” and that “no one has ever doubted Hartwig’s integrity, his dedication to his job or his love for the museum”.” (link, paywalled).
Is it really ‘honourable’ to resign after seven years of inattention to thefts which had been going on for so many years, undetected? Isn’t it the case that museums close once a year for their audit and stock-taking? What must these audits be like if clearly nobody noticed anything, for years?
Moreover, what must we think about the work ethic of those trustees when they need a whistleblower to point out thefts – a whistleblower who only incited action when he threatened to go to the press? The DM, not being a ‘posh’ paper, their authors not being afraid of getting no invitations to posh, upper-crust cultural jamborees, has this report on the affair and a report on the resignation as well (link).
I find it appalling that nobody, from the lowliest apprentice curator all the way up to department heads and the director, noticed that items – 1,500 at minimum – were missing. Allegedly this thievery went on for ten years, that’s an average of 150 stolen pieces per year, or one item going walkies every second day, taking in account holidays and weekends. And nobody noticed? Blimey!
Even more appalling is that nobody seems to have noticed that items were missing during the annual stocktaking – or did they notice items were missing but thought these things were just mislaid? For ten years? Of course, one cannot expect such highly placed ‘experts’ like yon BM director to scan Ebay for antiquities ‘for sale’, so how should they know … and whistleblowers are notoriously regarded as nuisances who don’t know what they’re talking about or have an axe to grind.
For me, this affair illustrates yet again that those who’ve reached top positions, be it as director of the BM, be it as CEO for a hospital trust, think they are untouchable and that any misdeeds being reported can and must be left to their minions to sort out – minions who can then be blamed and made to carry the various cans.
This affair also documents that it obviously doesn’t occur to any of those working in public institutions and public services that these institutions, these services are ours, the people’s. They seem to regard them as their own private possessions and fiefdoms one they’re ‘in’, to do with as they please and as any current zeitgeist demands, from ‘antislavery’ issues to ‘believe the nurse because she’s a woman’.
These ‘top people’, ‘experts’ and ‘CEOs’ are also prone to try and obfuscate, sweeping reports under the carpet. They only resign once the public uproar is such that there’s no way out. We’ve seen this in the case of the Coutts scandal, we’ve seen this in the Letby case, we now see it in the BM thievery scandal. And then they wonder why we, the people, don’t trust them any longer?
That’s all I have for today. Can we say that the upper echelons in our institutions and the public services have no honour? I think we can. Have a good Bank Holiday weekend.
The ineptness and incompetence of the Rishi Sunak led government has today been laid bare for all to see within the resignation letter of Nadine Dorries. His brand of politics has as much to do with conservatism as communism, and that is why his party is so far behind in the opinion polls. If this letter of resignation doesn’t finish off Sunak and his government, I don’t know what will.
Shouldn’t that be “taxpayers’ money” he’s getting?
Hmm, looting of the British Museum. Brings back to mind how Steve Hughes reported on Looting in London.
Pick up the sketch here; https://youtu.be/60VUtxmN1IE?t=397
‘Twigs’ Fisher is a good egg. George ‘Ozzie’ Osborne fagged for him at Eaton dontchaknow? A few past their sell by date trinkets and all that fuss. Its all a black Chinese Jewish plot.
Fear not, Twigs, you are in the frame for a banking job that’s up for grabs. Ten million quid golden hello, to go with the paltry two million golden goodbye you’ll be getting for your sterling work. Its only govmt money. Chin up Twigs. Toodle pip.
The British Museum is a large, hierarchical bureaucracy. Whistleblowing is occasional – self-interest usually overcomes any nobler impulses – and one suspects most bureaucracies would be in the news if whistleblowing were less consequential for employees. The problem with bureaucracies was summed up by Jerry Pournelle (American writer) with his ‘iron law’: “In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals that the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely.” The NHS is an obvious example. As doctors and nurses became subordinate to ‘professional’ managers (notwithstanding a few clinical staff morphing into managers) so scandals multiplied.
Pournelle, although he does not acknowledge it, appears to pithily summarise the German-Italian sociologist Robert Michels’ 1911 book on Political Parties wherein is his ‘iron law on oligarchy’ (how bureaucratisation leads to specialisation and delegation and the creation of a leadership elites) summed up as “Who says organisation says oligarchy”. The leadership class dominate power structures and to maintain power they must limit and control accountability. Michels argues that democratic attempts to hold leadership positions accountable are prone to fail, since with power comes the ability to reward loyalty, the ability to control information about the organisation, and the ability to control what procedures the organisation follows when making decisions. He also argued that for leaders in organisations, “The desire to dominate … is universal. These are elementary psychological facts.”
It explains why NHS bosses put protecting reputation over care for patients, for example, and why generally most bureaucracy bosses screen out anything that might disturb the status quo of their power and dominance. Poor decision making is built in as procurement scandals at the MOD, repeated yearly for decades, illustrate. In short, large bureaucracies have always been and will always be a problem.
We may never know the full particulars of what really happened at the British Museum, and its details may be different from the particulars of other scandals. But the common factor, no matter the differences across organisations and their scandals, is that they were large bureaucracies. It’s an iron law.
Jerry Pournelle. Now there is a name from the past – used to write in Byte magazine in the 1970s.
Every year he had an ‘Orchids and Onions’ awards – bit like the Golden Bull awards of Plain English.
I remember one award was ‘a big fat onion with garlic clusters award’. It did not often extend to politics, but . . .
“Hartwig Fischer” clearly with a name like that he was destined for greatness! No doubt he left with a financial package that will be as eyewatering as every other public servant/bank executive that has screwed up and then screwed the plebs. Well it’s only “our” money.
Will the museum have to discreetly sell some more valuables on eBay to pay for the directors golden goodbye?
The latest antics of Sad Khan:
https://www.itv.com/news/london/2023-08-21/backlash-after-mayor-website-says-white-family-doesnt-represent-real-londoners
Well past time that such interlopers as Khan were prevented from standing for office and, preferably, not allowed citizenship. We have had more than enough of their efforts to trash our country.
Goodness, with all the stuff that has been nicked and all the stuff they want to repatriate to the ex colonies , there soon won’t be anything left to go a see there, peraps they are ‘curating ‘a story to cover it all.
Norman. One of the BM’s biggest draws, the Elgin Marbles, will probably not be here much longer either. The Greeks have erected in Athens a new Acropolis Museum, very swish, with a big empty hall which they never stop saying, should hold the Elgin Marbles: ” but the British (Lord Elgin) have pinched these and won’t let Greece have them back” !!!! Instead of sulking, why don’t they have a facsimile made and display that !
If they want them back though, they’d better hurry before they too somehow “disappear,”