In this episode of Meyerside Chats, I sit down with Vijay Luthra—a UK-based public service reformist, ex-councilmember, and management consultant—to explore the future of government, the crisis in public trust, and why systems must evolve to meet 21st-century challenges. We dive into small “p” vs. big “P” politics, the transformation of the NHS, trade unions, and lessons from Brexit for the U.S.
🔔 Subscribe for more conversations about government innovation, local leadership, and global civic lessons.
⏱️ Timestamps / Chapters:
00:00 | 🎙️ Introduction & Welcome
01:00 | Vijay’s Unusual Journey from Roadie to Public Servant
03:00 | Big "P" vs Small "p" Politics Explained
06:00 | The Decline of Public Service Ethos
08:00 | Founding Siva: Reforming Public Services from Outside
10:00 | Entrepreneurship & Bureaucracy: Where They Meet
13:00 | Local Government, Risk, and Innovation Constraints
15:00 | The Power of Local Engagement in the UK & US
17:00 | NHS Transformation: The Biggest Reform in a Generation
20:00 | Virtual Wards & Healthcare Innovation
23:00 | Navigating Trade Unions in the UK
26:00 | Cultural Differences in UK vs US Labor Dynamics
28:00 | Class Systems, Military, and Social Stratification
30:00 | Vijay’s Wish: Undoing Brexit’s Damage
32:00 | Lessons for the U.S.: Division, Democracy & Unity
34:00 | 🔚 Final Thoughts & Closing Remarks
About Evan Meyer
Tech entrepreneur and civic leader - he founded mygovtools.org, a platform to drive government efficiency, constituent representation, and civic engagement; BeautifyEarth.com, a platform accelerating urban beautification through art; and its sister nonprofit, transforming schools in underserved areas. He also co-founded RideAmigos.com, a platform that optimizes commuter travel globally. Previously, he served as District Director for the California State Senate and led many civic initiatives in Santa Monica. Through seminars and his podcast Meyerside Chats, Evan inspires civic engagement, innovation, and cultural growth.
He loves the outdoors, is a master of creative projects, is an avid muralist and musician, and finds the world fascinating in every regard.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (00:00):
Hey everybody.
Welcome to my side chats.
Today we have Vijay Lura.
How are you?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (00:09):
I'm great.
Thanks Evan and, uh, reallygreat to join you.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (00:13):
It's great to have you.
So Vijay you are a an exgovernment inside government guy
and, working for the governmentin politics.
You also have served some timein public service.
as an elected representative.
you've have a consulting companywhere you are a public service
(00:33):
reformist, which is one of myfavorite three words to put
together.
I think it's fantastic.
So great journey.
Tell me a little bit about yourjourney and and where you're at
now.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (00:45):
Very, very happy to Evan and, and so,
so I guess I've come to, topublic service from some
slightly, a slightly oddsdirection.
I started my, my working life asa, uh, as a roadie.
Funnily, funnily enough.
But the life of a, a roadiewasn't, wasn't really for me.
(01:05):
And I ended up taking a job,working for the Mayor of London
and that that was the role thatreally.
Got me into public service.
But I guess if I, if I, if Irewind, I, I've all grown up
with a bit of a, a publicservice ethos and my, both of my
(01:25):
parents have, spent periods oftheir life working in, in
government in various guises.
My, mom, uh, was a teacher for avery long time.
my dad was a civil servantbefore, before he passed away.
so.
So that.
the public service ethos hasbeen there from, from a, from a
(01:46):
young, from a young age.
I was also politically activefrom a young age, so, so my
parents were activists for apolitical party in the UK called
the, the S stp, the SocialDemocratic Party, which, which
no longer exists.
Of UK political history.
They split from the Labor Partyat the point in time when, when
the Labor party was, was veryleft wing.
(02:08):
and so my were activists and,you know, I would go on the
campaign trail with them, youknow, being pushed around in a,
in a push chair.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (02:17):
Wow.
It's built into your, it's builtinto your blood.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (02:20):
kind of built into my, into my blood.
Yeah.
But I guess my journey, I spentabout a decade as a, as a civil
servant in the uk.
And then I spent just overanother decade in, in management
consulting.
But all of that time has prettymuch been working in government
or public service in one form oranother.
and then as you were kind enoughto mention, I also spent.
(02:40):
A term, a term in office as a, acity counselor in a part of
London called, called which, um,was really interesting.
Great.
Four years.
One of the things it taught meis that politics is, um,
difficult and that there is moreto politics then the big P of
politics.
There's also lots of small ppolitics.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (03:04):
Ah, well said.
Uh, I like that.
Elaborate on that.
What's the difference betweenBig P and small P politics?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (03:11):
Yeah, so, so I think and, and I think,
you know, being Anglo,Anglo-Saxon, I.
Um, or having many anglosaxonshared views and values that
there are probably manysimilarities between the, the US
and UK in terms of how politicswork at, at the micro level.
And I.
(03:32):
So, so small p politics is, youknow, the kind of politics of
organizations, of groups, of, ofpeople, which is it's about
views, values, relationships,grudges, um, hatred.
It's, it's, it's more abouthuman emotion than it
necessarily is about you know,the, the sort of higher ideals
of, of political philosophies.
(03:53):
And I guess.
I, I was a local counselor and,and in the UK.
It's not, it's, it's not thesame construct as in the US
where I know many of your, yourlisteners are from.
If you're a local counselor inthe uk it's a part-time role.
You do get paid some money, butyou do it alongside your, your
day job and, and you represent amuch smaller number of people.
(04:14):
So, so I represented along withtwo others about 11,000 people.
So, you know, it's a, it's asmaller.
It's a smaller commitment thanyou would undertake in the us.
but the time commitment is stillvery very extensive.
And I guess I, I was there at atime when the, the Labor Party,
so it was a Labor Partycounselor had gone from running
(04:35):
this part of London with a verysmall majority to a very large
majority.
And when you have a very smallmajority, unity is essential.
when you go to a very largemajority, Unity is still
essential to get things done,but it becomes more difficult to
create unity because that's whenyou start to get people
(04:57):
maneuvering for self-interest orfor their own for their own
causes.
And in fact, I think it'sinteresting we're starting to
see a bit of that in, in, in ukin UK government.
There's the prime Minister.
Kier has just headed off a bigparliamentary rebellion over,
over welfare payments.
And that's the sort of first,first signs that the unity in,
(05:20):
in the labor government isstarting to crack.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (05:22):
Hmm, interesting.
So to some degree, the moreunity in thought, the more.
Opportunity there is to divertfrom the policies that would
unite you and move more intoself-interest.
Did I sort of, did I sort ofunderstand, stand that right?
Where Unity has this conflict ofinterest.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (05:44):
Yeah, I think it can do I mean, I, I,
I'm slightly, Pessimistic aboutthe future of, of politics on
both sides of the pond, thesethese days.
One of the reasons why I'm a bitmore pessimistic is'cause I
think, back to that publicservice ethos point we were
discussing at, at the start, I.
(06:08):
I fear a lot of that publicservice ethos has dissipated
away.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (06:12):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (06:12):
I think self-interest has become a
much greater driver in politicson both sides of the pond.
I still see a great, a greatmany people who run for elected
office because they want to dothe right thing, but I see many,
many more,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (06:30):
hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-2 (06:30):
Politicians who in my view have gone into it
because they're, they'reambitious for themselves.
And, and I think,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (06:37):
Does that mean money?
Does that, does that mean moneyand power for themselves?
Is that the general couplet ofself-interested things?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (06:46):
well I think, I think, well one of
the big differences between theUK and the US is that there
isn't quite so much moneysloshing around in, in, in UK
politics.
So I would say it's
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (06:55):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (06:56):
about power.
And I think.
Reflecting on 20 years ago, you,you may have had maybe 10% of
members of Parliament whothought that they were good
enough to be Prime Minister.
think nowadays it's, it's thereverse.
I think 90% of members ofParliament perhaps think that
(07:19):
they're good enough to be PrimeMinister, and I think.
That has had a deep impact onthe, the, the culture and
relationships that we have inour, in our, in our politics.
And I think when people are moreself interested, I, I think
people, detect that.
And, you know, we're having somevery similar challenges of, you
(07:42):
know, credibility in our in ourelected leaders.
In, in perhaps a similar way tothe challenges that, uh, you're
having in the states.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (07:51):
Sure.
Well, you, you're as, as apublic service reformist.
You have a company that doessome in, in part some health
projects and other public cer,local government related
projects.
Tell me a little bit about someof those and some of the
outcomes you're looking toachieve and maybe how that's
related to solving some of thestuff that we've just talked
about.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (08:10):
Yeah.
So, so I set the company up soI.
As I mentioned, spent, you know,the last sort of 10, 10, 12
years, as a managementconsultant working mostly in, in
big companies.
my my view is, is that many ofthose big companies are no
longer operating in the bestinterests.
Of wider society and nor arethey operating in, in the
(08:34):
interests of of their clients tobe, to be frank.
So, so when I set up my companySiva that that desire to do the
right thing is, you know, we'vecentered that at the heart of
the company.
My, my business partner and I,and another reason for setting
it up is I think we are globallyin the most challenging time.
(08:58):
We faced probably since thestart of the Cold War.
You know, if you reflect on thesort of the, the, the landscape
that we are living through atthe moment, you know, we have a
war on the European mainland forthe first time, since the end of
the second World War.
We have this emergingtechnologies which are putting
lots of different aspects of howwe live our lives under, under
(09:21):
pressure.
Again, in the US and the UK andin, in other places, Canada for
example, we have a challenge ofaging population and that's
putting, huge pressures, notjust on our health systems, but
but across the, the governmentand public services landscape.
I think the challenge for publicservices organizations is that
they've gotta do more for less.
(09:43):
they've gotta be agile, they'vegotta be resilient.
And so my desire is to helppublic service organizations
build that resilience, thatagility, to be able to continue
and to thrive as we, as wecontinue moving into this
uncharted territory.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (10:03):
Yeah.
That's interesting.
You know, and it's funny as anentrepreneur myself, you know,
being agile and resilient andand fast to adapt and learn,
right?
Things that are traditionallyassociated with entrepreneurship
or business mindset.
I've had a couple conversationsabout this.
Um.
One with, uh, mayor Matt HaMayhan of, uh, of San Jose here,
(10:24):
who, who actually built a civictech company and sold it.
And so he had, and and I askedhim a lot about this
entrepreneurial mindset ingovernment.
He's now the mayor.
And I guess my question for youis how do you need to be
thinking in government that's.
We'll say that's possiblebecause there's some level of
(10:44):
bureaucracy that needs to stayas it is for certain important
reasons, right?
Like, like you, you have to beable to have some level of
protect, of protection, ofconsistent service, right?
That, that is just like thesystem needs to just work.
Doesn't always need to beefficient, as long as it works a
hundred per 99% of the time orwhatever, sometimes, right?
They're unwilling to take thoserisks to, for reduction of
(11:06):
service or stuff like that,right?
And as a person who's alwaysjust like, come on.
You know, sometimes, you know,move fast, break things, learn
fast, grow, fix it, be agile.
Where, what do you think ispossible in government with that
kind of mentality and where doesit sort of end?
I.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (11:24):
I mean, I mean, I, I think
there's, there's a, there's ahappy meeting place in the
middle between the extremes ofentrepreneurial practice and the
extremes of of civil, civilservice practice.
And, and I, I've been in both,I've been in both worlds.
And, you know, one of, one ofthe reasons I left government,
(11:44):
working in government in the UKwas because I didn't feel, As if
I could influence the change Iwanted to see from the inside.
so I went into consulting inorder to be able to to, to drive
some of the change I wanted tosee.
but equally, I think, you know,the worst excesses of the, the
(12:05):
entrepreneurial mindset are notright for governments.
Uh, a lot of entrepreneurs, forexample, have.
The, uh, the privilege of beingable to focus on a very specific
or narrow problem, uh, thatthere's an entrepreneur here in
the uk, guy called TomBlomfield.
(12:26):
He's the, one of the co-foundersof a bank, a bank called Monzo
a.
So he is very wealthy.
He, I think it was last year,tweeted something about how he
could come in and radicallyreform government and, and I,
and a number of other people.
We're, we're quite quick to, tocriticize that, that mindset
because it's easier.
(12:46):
It's easier said than done.
I think one of the privileges ofbeing an entrepreneur is, is
that you can choose the problemyou are gonna point at.
Government doesn't always get tochoose the problem.
It points at.
it doesn't get to choose who itcan provide services to.
So government is often dealingwith complex.
You know what?
In the entrepreneurial world wemight call edge cases government
(13:08):
doesn't have the ability to say,no, we can't serve those people.
They always have to be theyalways have to be served.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (13:16):
Yeah.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (13:16):
so, so as I say, I think there's a,
there's a happy medium.
Where do I think, so governmentcould be less risk averse.
And it's not completely riskaverse.
It's about adjusting a little tobe, to be slightly less risk
averse.
I also think government shouldbe open to, to newer ideas, and
(13:37):
certainly.
In the uk, if you wanna workwith central government and you
are a small business, it'sincredibly difficult to do that.
And that's a lot about riskmanagement.
And I think it's probably thesame in the us.
If you want to work with thefederal government it's probably
very difficult to actually getthrough the door, even if you're
knocking on the door.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (13:58):
Very much.
Yeah, I think, well there,there's a cultural attitude, I
think, at all layers ofgovernment in a little bit of a
different capacity.
But the big, the bigger it gets,the harder it is to change and
things are done some way forsome reason.
You know, often at the citylevel, for example, someone sued
someone for tripping on thesidewalk.
Okay?
So now you can't put rocksaround your trees on the
(14:20):
sidewalk because someone slippedon a rock and they sued the city
and they settled.
And like so much is built aroundlike cases like that.
Especially in the, on the localordinance level, right?
And which is why it's soimportant for people to get
involved at the local levelwhere it matters.
You actually.
Can get involved.
(14:40):
The things you'll see and feellike day to day at the local
level, you can actually haveyour voice heard meaningfully.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (14:45):
Yes.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (14:46):
And it, it's harder to have your
voice heard federally about theWarren in, you know, wherever,
right?
Like you're, your, the averageperson's viewpoint on Vladimir
Putin is not gonna ring toomany.
Ears and be like, oh, what agreat idea.
Right?
Like, that's such a smart point.
(15:07):
We should change our entireinternational strategy.
Right?
But at the local level, theaverage person can create that
change.
I'm assuming it's similar inthe, in the uk.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (15:17):
Yeah, I, I, I mean, I'd definitely say
I mean, again, reflecting on myexperience as a, as as a city
councilor in the uk, one of my,compatriots once said to me that
as a, as a local counselor, youhave virtually no power, but
lots of accountability.
And, and that's broadly truebecause you are accountable to
the people you represent, andit's a very direct kind of
(15:38):
democracy.
Because, you know, I would go,uh, you, you, you know, you,
you'd receive feedback duringcouncil meetings, formal and
also informal, but then alsoyou'd go and be in the
community.
So whether that was, you know,in the, in, in the uk, we'd do
it slightly different to the us.
But you know, we, we, we knockon doors, we canvas, we
(15:59):
campaign, we seek out people whohave, Casework issues they'd
like to be resolved.
And then we also go to communitymeetings.
So it's, it's often a verydirect form of democracy, which,
if you are if you are Stan satin 10 Downing Street, you,
you'll get some of that becauseyou still need to see
constituents.
(16:20):
But I, I'd be surprised if heexperienced, the Prime Minister
was experiencing the same kindof direct democracy.
That, you know, any, any backbench counselor in the UK would,
and, and equally by the sametoken, I imagine the, the
president could look out of thewindow of the Oval Office and
probably distantly see some ofthe protesters out on
(16:41):
Pennsylvania Avenue.
But, um, how much contact doeshe have with those, with those
protesters or, or those, youknow, people seeking to make
submissions?
I, I would guess it's probablyvery little.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (16:53):
Yeah.
Um, are, are there any projectsspecifically that you're working
on right now that you're excitedabout or that you want to, you
wanna talk about that?
You think are important.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (17:04):
Yeah, I mean we're, we're going
through a really big system orsystems wide series of changes
in, in the UK at the moment.
It's, you know, probably thebiggest checkup of of public
services for, for a generation.
I.
I like to think the intent is toput those services on a, on a
(17:24):
more sound footing.
I think many have become very,very fragile.
So, so we're doing quite a lotof work in the NHS at at the
moment.
The work we are doing istypically when NHS, trusts so
that the sort of theorganizational constructs.
Uh, that a hospital or group ofhospitals align to, is called a,
(17:48):
is called a trust.
Um, and typically when thishappens periodically in the NHS,
when there there's a need tomake cost reductions,
efficiencies most hospitals willstart a, a program of what's
called.
SIPS cost improvement programs.
and so that's happening acrossthe NHS in England, Scotland,
(18:11):
Wales, and Northern Ireland atthe moment.
And it's often, it's a verydifficult challenging process
because it means taking a viewon what things are we not gonna
do anymore.
cases it means reducing staffnumbers.
I mean, in fact the, the NHS is.
a program of redundancy for thefirst time in a very long time.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (18:32):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (18:32):
The what we are doing is, so one of
the trusts we're working withwe're actually, helping them
look into the future and to rereinterpret their operating
model and to understand, youknow, what, what does that
operating model need to looklike for the future?
So the work we're doing withthem will save them money.
(18:55):
But it's also about optimizingthem to be able to deliver
services, patient impacts wellin, well into the future.
So it's a bit more, from myperspective of a positive, um,
and more strategic problem thatwe're helping them solve, rather
than just going in there andsalami slicing stuff to, to help
(19:16):
them save money.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (19:17):
Sure.
How do you hold.
I don't want to know if it'shold them accountable, but how
did they hold themselvesaccountable for, you know,
hitting some of those, I'll usethe term like KPIs, right?
But obviously you're going andtrying to make a change.
Like okay, you can have morepeople can be served with less
(19:39):
resources to some degree or lessmoney, right?
We could be more effective inthis approach by changing a few
things.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (19:45):
Yeah.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (19:46):
like what could be one of those
things?
For example, and, and, and, andhow do they make sure that they
can stay consistent with those,you know, trying to achieve?
And do you set those benchmarkslike, we're gonna get from 95 to
99% or stuff like that?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (20:06):
so it's, it's, it's cash and, and,
um, what the NHS calls non-cashreleasing.
So, so some of the.
The works that we're doing willwill, for example readjust this
distrusts organizational design.
So org design is an aspect ofoperating model.
(20:26):
It's, but it's the last bit youdo because you, you need to
understand.
How your organization to fit itsdifferent component parts
together before you then startto work out, well, which boxes
do we put people in?
So there's a process ofredundancy that will go
alongside that.
That's not our responsibility.
It's the, the trust will will doit themselves.
(20:47):
But problem we're helping solveis what, you know, what
capabilities, what people do youneed in your organization of the
future.
And then you don't needeverybody.
So.
As I say, it's not quite sopositive.
It's, you know, they'll, they'lllose a few heads.
But we're also looking atproductivity measures.
So, for example, um, the NHSwill typically look at things
(21:08):
like the, the number of bed daysor, uh, what we call length of
stay.
So the, the amount of time thatsomebody's been in hospital for
and what are the ways in whichwe can, we can help.
Influence those metrics is to domore more in the home.
And so there's a concept herecalled virtual wards.
(21:31):
I think what in the US is calledhospital at home.
And so there's some verypromising tech enabled people
driven.
Solutions around virtual wardswhere, for example, someone is
discharged from a hospital bed abit earlier to their home, in
order to, they'll recover betterbecause they're at home, but.
(21:55):
They're not entirely on theirown because there'll be a bit of
tech to
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025 (22:00):
Mm-hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (22:01):
like vitals.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025 (22:02):
Mm-hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (22:02):
also be a team of people who will go
in to check on that person.
Once those people out are out ofhospital, they're not as
expensive, but they've alsoreleased that capacity within
the system to do more.
And hospitals can bank that inone of two ways.
They can either take the cashsaving and, you know, if you get
enough volume, you can.
For example, you might wannaclose down a hospital ward, but
(22:24):
actually what we generally tendto recommend is take that
capacity and do more with it.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (22:31):
Yeah.
Well, I don't know if you havethe, the equivalent of unions in
the uk
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (22:37):
We do have unions.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (22:39):
you have are they called unions?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-20 (22:40):
They're called unions.
Yeah.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (22:42):
Oh, okay, good.
Um, so, and I mean, do they,and, and do the government
workers belong to some of thoseunions where their jobs are
protect?
So do you deal with the samesort of protection level of, of
workers and you can't, you have,you need.
Real sufficient reason to takethem off staff.
Right.
(23:03):
Very often.
So you probably reorganizing iseasier than,
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (23:07):
Yeah.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025 (23:07):
cutting people.
Right.
And probably a lot feels betterfor the government, I'm
guessing.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (23:13):
Yeah,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17135 (23:13):
I probably like that.
Yeah.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (23:15):
I mean, our job is to advise.
So we're not dealing directlywith the unions, but, you know,
I, I've been, I've been a tradeunion member.
I think, you know, trade unionsdo good work.
They're important.
I think it's critical to haverepresentation in the workplace.
You know, my, the way I adviseclients is always to work hand
in hand with the unions.
I think most of them recognizethat we're in, exigent
(23:38):
circumstances that something,something needs to change.
and, you know, they, they will,are per persuadable.
But yeah, I mean, it is, it ismore challenging operating in
that space.
I think, you know, the nature oftrade unions between the US and
and UK is slightly, slightlydifferent.
I think the, the British flavorof trade unionism is perhaps a
(23:59):
little bit more a, a, a bit moreagreeable in the sense that the,
those unions are generally.
staffed by people who are usedto sitting down with leadership
in the organizations to,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (24:10):
Ah, I see.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (24:11):
to negotiate overpay settlements
and terms and conditions and,and all of those things.
So at working level, the, therelationships are, are often,
you know, sort of reasonably,reasonably good.
Not necessarily warm, but youknow, they're, they're effective
working relationships.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (24:26):
You don't have the same stories that
you have in America with unions.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-20 (24:31):
Rarely.
I think, you know,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (24:33):
Okay.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (24:34):
it might get to that extreme, but
very rarely in my
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (24:37):
Yeah.
Okay.
That's interesting.
That's sort of an interestingnuance to, to that know UK
politics.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (24:46):
Yeah.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (24:47):
Um.
Where there's agreeableness,where you, where, where, what
can be learned from that?
Like why does that really, thoserelationships work better in the
uk?
Or, or, or at least tend to benot as divisive.
Maybe they're just not asnewsworthy.
I don't know.
But or, or it's just peopledon't care about getting the
headlines as much.
(25:07):
I.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (25:09):
So, so I think I might be inclined
to say it's probably more to dowith the differences in culture
the US and the uk where, youknow, Brits, we, we, we are
famous for, for not beingterribly confrontational.
Right.
So, I think, I think that's partof it.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (25:28):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (25:29):
and I think, but I think also, the,
the nature of Trade unionmembership has, has changed
quite dramatically over the last50 years.
It's declined quite rapidly, sounions represent fewer people
than they, they would've done,know, even 20, 20 years ago.
Um, so their influence hasdeclined a little bit, but
(25:53):
there's still powerful forces inpolitics.
You know, most.
Uh, uh, trade unions in the UKcan affiliate to a political
party in a great many affiliateto the Labor Party, and they are
therefore the source of quitesignificant sums of money for,
for the Labor Party.
So that makes them tremendouslyinfluential.
(26:15):
But as I say, I think culturallythere, there perhaps isn't the
same sort of track record of ofrobust.
Perhaps aggressive where thingsdon't go.
The union's way, walkout strikesand, and, and things like that.
I mean, some of that is illegalin, in the uk You can go on
(26:35):
strike.
course, you know, the, the rightto withdraw your labor is a
human right.
but there processes that thatare wrapped around it to make
sure it's, it's done in a, in alegal way.
so I don't discount the effectsof unions, but I, but I think
it's kind of, it's a differenta, a a different kind of
settlement.
And as I say, we, we, as Brits,I think culturally we, we tend
(26:57):
to, lean more towards being agagreeable, agreeable types,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (27:02):
Hmm,
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-202 (27:03):
rather
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (27:03):
you weren't 200 years ago.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (27:05):
We weren't 200 years ago.
Well, I, I, I mean, I do wonderto myself, if you, if you think
about, um, the, the, the, the,the young men, they would've all
been young, young men becausethere were no women in the
military at that time who weremarched on the White House and
set fire to it.
I imagine most of the, theenlisted, all of the enlisted
(27:27):
men would've been working class.
Or agricultural class at thetime.
And then they would've been ledby members of the middle class
and the aristocracy.
And we still have a problem withthe class system in the United
Kingdom, in my opinion.
But back then the class systemwas even more of, of an
influence.
So, you
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (27:46):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (27:46):
the, The aristocracy le led the
armies, the middle class andmanaged the armies, and it was
the, the agricultural andworking class boys who did all
the fighting and dying.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1713 (28:00):
Is that much different?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (28:02):
Is it much different now?
Well, I mean, our armed forcesare a great deal, smaller than,
than they used to be.
Um.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:09):
Sure.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (28:11):
I mean, my reflection would be is,
is that from a listedperspective?
I think it's probably still a
evan-meyer_1_06-27-202 (28:16):
Similar.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (28:17):
a
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:17):
Yeah.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-202 (28:17):
split,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:18):
Yeah.
That's different conversationprobably.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (28:21):
I mean,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:22):
Yeah,
vijay-luthra_1_06-27 (28:22):
military's become much, much more
professionalized since, sincethose days
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:26):
sure.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (28:26):
sides of the Atlantic.
You know, you can no longer, forexample, buy a commission as an
officer in the military.
You have to go.
You know, our, our equivalent ofWest Point in the UK is, is
Sandhurst was actually onlyabout, you know, sort of five,
six miles up the road from whereI live.
So, you know, it's aprofessional military.
It's a very skilled military.
(28:48):
And, but yes, those, those sortof divisions are probably,
probably still in place.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:57):
Yeah.
What what would you like toimpart to if you could and have
a magic wish for London rightnow?
Or the UK in general?
What, what would that be?
And, and I'll take it.
Yeah.
And then I'm gonna, I'm gonnaadd a part B to it, which is,
what are those lessons and someof those lessons that you would
like to give to the US or eventhe state of California?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (29:20):
Yeah.
I think that the, that the sortof the greatest piece of harm
the UK has done itself in, inliving memory.
Um, I.
Was to leave the European Unionhas caused us untold harm.
Lot of the issues that we aredealing with at the moment are
(29:43):
as a consequence of Brexit.
you know, we, we've had many,many years of anemic growth or
no growth at all.
Partly due.
To not being in the EuropeanUnion, which, you know, let's
face it, it's, it's one of theworld's biggest single markets.
Why wouldn't you want to be init?
can sell stuff to without,without any barriers to doing
(30:07):
so.
So for us to.
Have left that voluntarily wasan extremely bad decision.
And you know, the polling in theUK reflects that.
I think most people recognize itwas an extremely bad decision.
We lumped COVID on top of that.
So you know, our.
Uh, economy is still notperforming at the level that I
(30:29):
think it would've performed,that if we'd still been in the
European Union, we could havetaken the hit from Brexit and
from, uh, from the COVIDpandemic.
And, know, I think thingswould've been bad, but they
wouldn't have been this bad.
I suspect we are navigating ourway back to Europe.
But it won't be on the sameterms that we had before.
The UK had very favorable terms.
(30:50):
When the European Union, we hada rebate on our uh, on the
membership fee we won't getagain if we, if we rejoin.
So that would probably, thatwould be my, my biggest wish is
that we, we hadn't left the, theEuropean Union.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1713 (31:06):
So to come back together is your
wish to join.
Rejoin or just that you hadn'tleft.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (31:13):
Just that we hadn't left,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (31:14):
Okay.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-20 (31:15):
rejoin, but I, I, I think it would be a
difficult, experience
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (31:22):
Hmm
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2 (31:22):
process.
And as I say, we wouldn't getthe deal that we had before.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025 (31:27):
mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Okay.
Any lessons that you'd want to,seeing what you see from the UK
side of things about the US andwhat we're going through?
All the things.
name, name your news, headlinewhat would you want to impart to
the us And then if you couldnarrow it down a California you
can, if not, don't worry aboutit.
(31:47):
It may be too nuanced, but up toyou.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (31:51):
So, so, so let me start around the
theme of unity.
So, so the Brexit, thereferendum that we had, which is
a rare example of directdemocracy in the uk.
We are not used to runningreferendums.
That, you know, sort of thefamous statistic is that it was
52% in favor of leaving theEuropean Union, 48% against
(32:16):
leaving the European Union.
But it's become a symbol ofdivision across the uk.
It's become a symbol of.
To some extent, class division,it's become a symbol of division
between Southern England andnorthern England.
It's become a, a symbol ofdivision between England and
Scotland.
It's become a symbol.
(32:36):
of division between, um, themainland Great Britain and
Northern Ireland, it's become asymbol of division between great
Britain and, and other, otherparts of, of the United Kingdom.
So my reflection is, is that it,it also feels to me like the US
is very divided right now in,you know, in the same way that.
(33:02):
You know, our, civil, civil lifeis divided in the uk and I think
that's a bad thing.
You know, I have grown up in anera where I.
us, whoever was running it,whether you know Republican or
Democrat, always a pretty stableinfluence power on the world
stage.
(33:23):
It doesn't feel like that at themoment.
And I think the re the, the wayor the reason the US has got
into the current situation isbecause of that, that division
that you have.
So, you know, my wish for the USwould be.
For, for more unity to come.
And if I steer it back toCalifornia, I have very high
(33:44):
hopes that Governor Newsom, ifhe, if he runs for the
Democratic nomination, might be,might be the man to, to bring
that unity.
But um, but I think we will,we'll have to see.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (33:55):
All right.
All right.
Hey, um, I really enjoyed our,our time today.
Thanks for sharing yourperspective.
This is great.
I, I'm, I'm inspired by the goodwork you're doing and the
service, uh, that you're lookingto provide and, and, and support
and, and, and having all thatexperience to help guide all the
right things forward.
So thank you so much.
Stick around just for a minuteas we close up the session here.
(34:18):
But thank you.
It was really, really greatchatting with you.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-202 (34:21):
Thanks so much, Evan.
Take care.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (34:22):
All right.
All right.
Hey everybody.
Welcome to my side chats.
Today we have Vijay Lura.
How are you?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (00:09):
I'm great.
Thanks Evan and, uh, reallygreat to join you.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (00:13):
It's great to have you.
So Vijay you are a an exgovernment inside government guy
and, working for the governmentin politics.
You also have served some timein public service.
as an elected representative.
you've have a consulting companywhere you are a public service
(00:33):
reformist, which is one of myfavorite three words to put
together.
I think it's fantastic.
So great journey.
Tell me a little bit about yourjourney and and where you're at
now.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (00:45):
Very, very happy to Evan and, and so,
so I guess I've come to, topublic service from some
slightly, a slightly oddsdirection.
I started my, my working life asa, uh, as a roadie.
Funnily, funnily enough.
But the life of a, a roadiewasn't, wasn't really for me.
(01:05):
And I ended up taking a job,working for the Mayor of London
and that that was the role thatreally.
Got me into public service.
But I guess if I, if I, if Irewind, I, I've all grown up
with a bit of a, a publicservice ethos and my, both of my
(01:25):
parents have, spent periods oftheir life working in, in
government in various guises.
My, mom, uh, was a teacher for avery long time.
my dad was a civil servantbefore, before he passed away.
so.
So that.
the public service ethos hasbeen there from, from a, from a
(01:46):
young, from a young age.
I was also politically activefrom a young age, so, so my
parents were activists for apolitical party in the UK called
the, the S stp, the SocialDemocratic Party, which, which
no longer exists.
Of UK political history.
They split from the Labor Partyat the point in time when, when
the Labor party was, was veryleft wing.
(02:08):
and so my were activists and,you know, I would go on the
campaign trail with them, youknow, being pushed around in a,
in a push chair.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (02:17):
Wow.
It's built into your, it's builtinto your blood.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (02:20):
kind of built into my, into my blood.
Yeah.
But I guess my journey, I spentabout a decade as a, as a civil
servant in the uk.
And then I spent just overanother decade in, in management
consulting.
But all of that time has prettymuch been working in government
or public service in one form oranother.
and then as you were kind enoughto mention, I also spent.
(02:40):
A term, a term in office as a, acity counselor in a part of
London called, called which, um,was really interesting.
Great.
Four years.
One of the things it taught meis that politics is, um,
difficult and that there is moreto politics then the big P of
politics.
There's also lots of small ppolitics.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (03:04):
Ah, well said.
Uh, I like that.
Elaborate on that.
What's the difference betweenBig P and small P politics?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (03:11):
Yeah, so, so I think and, and I think,
you know, being Anglo,Anglo-Saxon, I.
Um, or having many anglosaxonshared views and values that
there are probably manysimilarities between the, the US
and UK in terms of how politicswork at, at the micro level.
And I.
(03:32):
So, so small p politics is, youknow, the kind of politics of
organizations, of groups, of, ofpeople, which is it's about
views, values, relationships,grudges, um, hatred.
It's, it's, it's more abouthuman emotion than it
necessarily is about you know,the, the sort of higher ideals
of, of political philosophies.
(03:53):
And I guess.
I, I was a local counselor and,and in the UK.
It's not, it's, it's not thesame construct as in the US
where I know many of your, yourlisteners are from.
If you're a local counselor inthe uk it's a part-time role.
You do get paid some money, butyou do it alongside your, your
day job and, and you represent amuch smaller number of people.
(04:14):
So, so I represented along withtwo others about 11,000 people.
So, you know, it's a, it's asmaller.
It's a smaller commitment thanyou would undertake in the us.
but the time commitment is stillvery very extensive.
And I guess I, I was there at atime when the, the Labor Party,
so it was a Labor Partycounselor had gone from running
(04:35):
this part of London with a verysmall majority to a very large
majority.
And when you have a very smallmajority, unity is essential.
when you go to a very largemajority, Unity is still
essential to get things done,but it becomes more difficult to
create unity because that's whenyou start to get people
(04:57):
maneuvering for self-interest orfor their own for their own
causes.
And in fact, I think it'sinteresting we're starting to
see a bit of that in, in, in ukin UK government.
There's the prime Minister.
Kier has just headed off a bigparliamentary rebellion over,
over welfare payments.
And that's the sort of first,first signs that the unity in,
(05:20):
in the labor government isstarting to crack.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (05:22):
Hmm, interesting.
So to some degree, the moreunity in thought, the more.
Opportunity there is to divertfrom the policies that would
unite you and move more intoself-interest.
Did I sort of, did I sort ofunderstand, stand that right?
Where Unity has this conflict ofinterest.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (05:44):
Yeah, I think it can do I mean, I, I,
I'm slightly, Pessimistic aboutthe future of, of politics on
both sides of the pond, thesethese days.
One of the reasons why I'm a bitmore pessimistic is'cause I
think, back to that publicservice ethos point we were
discussing at, at the start, I.
(06:08):
I fear a lot of that publicservice ethos has dissipated
away.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (06:12):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (06:12):
I think self-interest has become a
much greater driver in politicson both sides of the pond.
I still see a great, a greatmany people who run for elected
office because they want to dothe right thing, but I see many,
many more,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (06:30):
hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-2 (06:30):
Politicians who in my view have gone into it
because they're, they'reambitious for themselves.
And, and I think,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (06:37):
Does that mean money?
Does that, does that mean moneyand power for themselves?
Is that the general couplet ofself-interested things?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (06:46):
well I think, I think, well one of
the big differences between theUK and the US is that there
isn't quite so much moneysloshing around in, in, in UK
politics.
So I would say it's
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (06:55):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (06:56):
about power.
And I think.
Reflecting on 20 years ago, you,you may have had maybe 10% of
members of Parliament whothought that they were good
enough to be Prime Minister.
think nowadays it's, it's thereverse.
I think 90% of members ofParliament perhaps think that
(07:19):
they're good enough to be PrimeMinister, and I think.
That has had a deep impact onthe, the, the culture and
relationships that we have inour, in our, in our politics.
And I think when people are moreself interested, I, I think
people, detect that.
And, you know, we're having somevery similar challenges of, you
(07:42):
know, credibility in our in ourelected leaders.
In, in perhaps a similar way tothe challenges that, uh, you're
having in the states.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (07:51):
Sure.
Well, you, you're as, as apublic service reformist.
You have a company that doessome in, in part some health
projects and other public cer,local government related
projects.
Tell me a little bit about someof those and some of the
outcomes you're looking toachieve and maybe how that's
related to solving some of thestuff that we've just talked
about.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (08:10):
Yeah.
So, so I set the company up soI.
As I mentioned, spent, you know,the last sort of 10, 10, 12
years, as a managementconsultant working mostly in, in
big companies.
my my view is, is that many ofthose big companies are no
longer operating in the bestinterests.
Of wider society and nor arethey operating in, in the
(08:34):
interests of of their clients tobe, to be frank.
So, so when I set up my companySiva that that desire to do the
right thing is, you know, we'vecentered that at the heart of
the company.
My, my business partner and I,and another reason for setting
it up is I think we are globallyin the most challenging time.
(08:58):
We faced probably since thestart of the Cold War.
You know, if you reflect on thesort of the, the, the landscape
that we are living through atthe moment, you know, we have a
war on the European mainland forthe first time, since the end of
the second World War.
We have this emergingtechnologies which are putting
lots of different aspects of howwe live our lives under, under
(09:21):
pressure.
Again, in the US and the UK andin, in other places, Canada for
example, we have a challenge ofaging population and that's
putting, huge pressures, notjust on our health systems, but
but across the, the governmentand public services landscape.
I think the challenge for publicservices organizations is that
they've gotta do more for less.
(09:43):
they've gotta be agile, they'vegotta be resilient.
And so my desire is to helppublic service organizations
build that resilience, thatagility, to be able to continue
and to thrive as we, as wecontinue moving into this
uncharted territory.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (10:03):
Yeah.
That's interesting.
You know, and it's funny as anentrepreneur myself, you know,
being agile and resilient andand fast to adapt and learn,
right?
Things that are traditionallyassociated with entrepreneurship
or business mindset.
I've had a couple conversationsabout this.
Um.
One with, uh, mayor Matt HaMayhan of, uh, of San Jose here,
(10:24):
who, who actually built a civictech company and sold it.
And so he had, and and I askedhim a lot about this
entrepreneurial mindset ingovernment.
He's now the mayor.
And I guess my question for youis how do you need to be
thinking in government that's.
We'll say that's possiblebecause there's some level of
(10:44):
bureaucracy that needs to stayas it is for certain important
reasons, right?
Like, like you, you have to beable to have some level of
protect, of protection, ofconsistent service, right?
That, that is just like thesystem needs to just work.
Doesn't always need to beefficient, as long as it works a
hundred per 99% of the time orwhatever, sometimes, right?
They're unwilling to take thoserisks to, for reduction of
(11:06):
service or stuff like that,right?
And as a person who's alwaysjust like, come on.
You know, sometimes, you know,move fast, break things, learn
fast, grow, fix it, be agile.
Where, what do you think ispossible in government with that
kind of mentality and where doesit sort of end?
I.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (11:24):
I mean, I mean, I, I think
there's, there's a, there's ahappy meeting place in the
middle between the extremes ofentrepreneurial practice and the
extremes of of civil, civilservice practice.
And, and I, I've been in both,I've been in both worlds.
And, you know, one of, one ofthe reasons I left government,
(11:44):
working in government in the UKwas because I didn't feel, As if
I could influence the change Iwanted to see from the inside.
so I went into consulting inorder to be able to to, to drive
some of the change I wanted tosee.
but equally, I think, you know,the worst excesses of the, the
(12:05):
entrepreneurial mindset are notright for governments.
Uh, a lot of entrepreneurs, forexample, have.
The, uh, the privilege of beingable to focus on a very specific
or narrow problem, uh, thatthere's an entrepreneur here in
the uk, guy called TomBlomfield.
(12:26):
He's the, one of the co-foundersof a bank, a bank called Monzo
a.
So he is very wealthy.
He, I think it was last year,tweeted something about how he
could come in and radicallyreform government and, and I,
and a number of other people.
We're, we're quite quick to, tocriticize that, that mindset
because it's easier.
(12:46):
It's easier said than done.
I think one of the privileges ofbeing an entrepreneur is, is
that you can choose the problemyou are gonna point at.
Government doesn't always get tochoose the problem.
It points at.
it doesn't get to choose who itcan provide services to.
So government is often dealingwith complex.
You know what?
In the entrepreneurial world wemight call edge cases government
(13:08):
doesn't have the ability to say,no, we can't serve those people.
They always have to be theyalways have to be served.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (13:16):
Yeah.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (13:16):
so, so as I say, I think there's a,
there's a happy medium.
Where do I think, so governmentcould be less risk averse.
And it's not completely riskaverse.
It's about adjusting a little tobe, to be slightly less risk
averse.
I also think government shouldbe open to, to newer ideas, and
(13:37):
certainly.
In the uk, if you wanna workwith central government and you
are a small business, it'sincredibly difficult to do that.
And that's a lot about riskmanagement.
And I think it's probably thesame in the us.
If you want to work with thefederal government it's probably
very difficult to actually getthrough the door, even if you're
knocking on the door.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (13:58):
Very much.
Yeah, I think, well there,there's a cultural attitude, I
think, at all layers ofgovernment in a little bit of a
different capacity.
But the big, the bigger it gets,the harder it is to change and
things are done some way forsome reason.
You know, often at the citylevel, for example, someone sued
someone for tripping on thesidewalk.
Okay?
So now you can't put rocksaround your trees on the
(14:20):
sidewalk because someone slippedon a rock and they sued the city
and they settled.
And like so much is built aroundlike cases like that.
Especially in the, on the localordinance level, right?
And which is why it's soimportant for people to get
involved at the local levelwhere it matters.
You actually.
Can get involved.
(14:40):
The things you'll see and feellike day to day at the local
level, you can actually haveyour voice heard meaningfully.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (14:45):
Yes.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (14:46):
And it, it's harder to have your
voice heard federally about theWarren in, you know, wherever,
right?
Like you're, your, the averageperson's viewpoint on Vladimir
Putin is not gonna ring toomany.
Ears and be like, oh, what agreat idea.
Right?
Like, that's such a smart point.
(15:07):
We should change our entireinternational strategy.
Right?
But at the local level, theaverage person can create that
change.
I'm assuming it's similar inthe, in the uk.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (15:17):
Yeah, I, I, I mean, I'd definitely say
I mean, again, reflecting on myexperience as a, as as a city
councilor in the uk, one of my,compatriots once said to me that
as a, as a local counselor, youhave virtually no power, but
lots of accountability.
And, and that's broadly truebecause you are accountable to
the people you represent, andit's a very direct kind of
(15:38):
democracy.
Because, you know, I would go,uh, you, you, you know, you,
you'd receive feedback duringcouncil meetings, formal and
also informal, but then alsoyou'd go and be in the
community.
So whether that was, you know,in the, in, in the uk, we'd do
it slightly different to the us.
But you know, we, we, we knockon doors, we canvas, we
(15:59):
campaign, we seek out people whohave, Casework issues they'd
like to be resolved.
And then we also go to communitymeetings.
So it's, it's often a verydirect form of democracy, which,
if you are if you are Stan satin 10 Downing Street, you,
you'll get some of that becauseyou still need to see
constituents.
(16:20):
But I, I'd be surprised if heexperienced, the Prime Minister
was experiencing the same kindof direct democracy.
That, you know, any, any backbench counselor in the UK would,
and, and equally by the sametoken, I imagine the, the
president could look out of thewindow of the Oval Office and
probably distantly see some ofthe protesters out on
(16:41):
Pennsylvania Avenue.
But, um, how much contact doeshe have with those, with those
protesters or, or those, youknow, people seeking to make
submissions?
I, I would guess it's probablyvery little.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (16:53):
Yeah.
Um, are, are there any projectsspecifically that you're working
on right now that you're excitedabout or that you want to, you
wanna talk about that?
You think are important.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (17:04):
Yeah, I mean we're, we're going
through a really big system orsystems wide series of changes
in, in the UK at the moment.
It's, you know, probably thebiggest checkup of of public
services for, for a generation.
I.
I like to think the intent is toput those services on a, on a
(17:24):
more sound footing.
I think many have become very,very fragile.
So, so we're doing quite a lotof work in the NHS at at the
moment.
The work we are doing istypically when NHS, trusts so
that the sort of theorganizational constructs.
Uh, that a hospital or group ofhospitals align to, is called a,
(17:48):
is called a trust.
Um, and typically when thishappens periodically in the NHS,
when there there's a need tomake cost reductions,
efficiencies most hospitals willstart a, a program of what's
called.
SIPS cost improvement programs.
and so that's happening acrossthe NHS in England, Scotland,
(18:11):
Wales, and Northern Ireland atthe moment.
And it's often, it's a verydifficult challenging process
because it means taking a viewon what things are we not gonna
do anymore.
cases it means reducing staffnumbers.
I mean, in fact the, the NHS is.
a program of redundancy for thefirst time in a very long time.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (18:32):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (18:32):
The what we are doing is, so one of
the trusts we're working withwe're actually, helping them
look into the future and to rereinterpret their operating
model and to understand, youknow, what, what does that
operating model need to looklike for the future?
So the work we're doing withthem will save them money.
(18:55):
But it's also about optimizingthem to be able to deliver
services, patient impacts wellin, well into the future.
So it's a bit more, from myperspective of a positive, um,
and more strategic problem thatwe're helping them solve, rather
than just going in there andsalami slicing stuff to, to help
(19:16):
them save money.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (19:17):
Sure.
How do you hold.
I don't want to know if it'shold them accountable, but how
did they hold themselvesaccountable for, you know,
hitting some of those, I'll usethe term like KPIs, right?
But obviously you're going andtrying to make a change.
Like okay, you can have morepeople can be served with less
(19:39):
resources to some degree or lessmoney, right?
We could be more effective inthis approach by changing a few
things.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (19:45):
Yeah.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (19:46):
like what could be one of those
things?
For example, and, and, and, andhow do they make sure that they
can stay consistent with those,you know, trying to achieve?
And do you set those benchmarkslike, we're gonna get from 95 to
99% or stuff like that?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (20:06):
so it's, it's, it's cash and, and,
um, what the NHS calls non-cashreleasing.
So, so some of the.
The works that we're doing willwill, for example readjust this
distrusts organizational design.
So org design is an aspect ofoperating model.
(20:26):
It's, but it's the last bit youdo because you, you need to
understand.
How your organization to fit itsdifferent component parts
together before you then startto work out, well, which boxes
do we put people in?
So there's a process ofredundancy that will go
alongside that.
That's not our responsibility.
It's the, the trust will will doit themselves.
(20:47):
But problem we're helping solveis what, you know, what
capabilities, what people do youneed in your organization of the
future.
And then you don't needeverybody.
So.
As I say, it's not quite sopositive.
It's, you know, they'll, they'lllose a few heads.
But we're also looking atproductivity measures.
So, for example, um, the NHSwill typically look at things
(21:08):
like the, the number of bed daysor, uh, what we call length of
stay.
So the, the amount of time thatsomebody's been in hospital for
and what are the ways in whichwe can, we can help.
Influence those metrics is to domore more in the home.
And so there's a concept herecalled virtual wards.
(21:31):
I think what in the US is calledhospital at home.
And so there's some verypromising tech enabled people
driven.
Solutions around virtual wardswhere, for example, someone is
discharged from a hospital bed abit earlier to their home, in
order to, they'll recover betterbecause they're at home, but.
(21:55):
They're not entirely on theirown because there'll be a bit of
tech to
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025 (22:00):
Mm-hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (22:01):
like vitals.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025 (22:02):
Mm-hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (22:02):
also be a team of people who will go
in to check on that person.
Once those people out are out ofhospital, they're not as
expensive, but they've alsoreleased that capacity within
the system to do more.
And hospitals can bank that inone of two ways.
They can either take the cashsaving and, you know, if you get
enough volume, you can.
For example, you might wannaclose down a hospital ward, but
(22:24):
actually what we generally tendto recommend is take that
capacity and do more with it.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (22:31):
Yeah.
Well, I don't know if you havethe, the equivalent of unions in
the uk
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (22:37):
We do have unions.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (22:39):
you have are they called unions?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-20 (22:40):
They're called unions.
Yeah.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (22:42):
Oh, okay, good.
Um, so, and I mean, do they,and, and do the government
workers belong to some of thoseunions where their jobs are
protect?
So do you deal with the samesort of protection level of, of
workers and you can't, you have,you need.
Real sufficient reason to takethem off staff.
Right.
(23:03):
Very often.
So you probably reorganizing iseasier than,
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (23:07):
Yeah.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025 (23:07):
cutting people.
Right.
And probably a lot feels betterfor the government, I'm
guessing.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (23:13):
Yeah,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17135 (23:13):
I probably like that.
Yeah.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (23:15):
I mean, our job is to advise.
So we're not dealing directlywith the unions, but, you know,
I, I've been, I've been a tradeunion member.
I think, you know, trade unionsdo good work.
They're important.
I think it's critical to haverepresentation in the workplace.
You know, my, the way I adviseclients is always to work hand
in hand with the unions.
I think most of them recognizethat we're in, exigent
(23:38):
circumstances that something,something needs to change.
and, you know, they, they will,are per persuadable.
But yeah, I mean, it is, it ismore challenging operating in
that space.
I think, you know, the nature oftrade unions between the US and
and UK is slightly, slightlydifferent.
I think the, the British flavorof trade unionism is perhaps a
(23:59):
little bit more a, a, a bit moreagreeable in the sense that the,
those unions are generally.
staffed by people who are usedto sitting down with leadership
in the organizations to,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (24:10):
Ah, I see.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (24:11):
to negotiate overpay settlements
and terms and conditions and,and all of those things.
So at working level, the, therelationships are, are often,
you know, sort of reasonably,reasonably good.
Not necessarily warm, but youknow, they're, they're effective
working relationships.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (24:26):
You don't have the same stories that
you have in America with unions.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-20 (24:31):
Rarely.
I think, you know,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (24:33):
Okay.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (24:34):
it might get to that extreme, but
very rarely in my
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (24:37):
Yeah.
Okay.
That's interesting.
That's sort of an interestingnuance to, to that know UK
politics.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (24:46):
Yeah.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (24:47):
Um.
Where there's agreeableness,where you, where, where, what
can be learned from that?
Like why does that really, thoserelationships work better in the
uk?
Or, or, or at least tend to benot as divisive.
Maybe they're just not asnewsworthy.
I don't know.
But or, or it's just peopledon't care about getting the
headlines as much.
(25:07):
I.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (25:09):
So, so I think I might be inclined
to say it's probably more to dowith the differences in culture
the US and the uk where, youknow, Brits, we, we, we are
famous for, for not beingterribly confrontational.
Right.
So, I think, I think that's partof it.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (25:28):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (25:29):
and I think, but I think also, the,
the nature of Trade unionmembership has, has changed
quite dramatically over the last50 years.
It's declined quite rapidly, sounions represent fewer people
than they, they would've done,know, even 20, 20 years ago.
Um, so their influence hasdeclined a little bit, but
(25:53):
there's still powerful forces inpolitics.
You know, most.
Uh, uh, trade unions in the UKcan affiliate to a political
party in a great many affiliateto the Labor Party, and they are
therefore the source of quitesignificant sums of money for,
for the Labor Party.
So that makes them tremendouslyinfluential.
(26:15):
But as I say, I think culturallythere, there perhaps isn't the
same sort of track record of ofrobust.
Perhaps aggressive where thingsdon't go.
The union's way, walkout strikesand, and, and things like that.
I mean, some of that is illegalin, in the uk You can go on
(26:35):
strike.
course, you know, the, the rightto withdraw your labor is a
human right.
but there processes that thatare wrapped around it to make
sure it's, it's done in a, in alegal way.
so I don't discount the effectsof unions, but I, but I think
it's kind of, it's a differenta, a a different kind of
settlement.
And as I say, we, we, as Brits,I think culturally we, we tend
(26:57):
to, lean more towards being agagreeable, agreeable types,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (27:02):
Hmm,
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-202 (27:03):
rather
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (27:03):
you weren't 200 years ago.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (27:05):
We weren't 200 years ago.
Well, I, I, I mean, I do wonderto myself, if you, if you think
about, um, the, the, the, the,the young men, they would've all
been young, young men becausethere were no women in the
military at that time who weremarched on the White House and
set fire to it.
I imagine most of the, theenlisted, all of the enlisted
(27:27):
men would've been working class.
Or agricultural class at thetime.
And then they would've been ledby members of the middle class
and the aristocracy.
And we still have a problem withthe class system in the United
Kingdom, in my opinion.
But back then the class systemwas even more of, of an
influence.
So, you
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_17 (27:46):
Hmm.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (27:46):
the, The aristocracy le led the
armies, the middle class andmanaged the armies, and it was
the, the agricultural andworking class boys who did all
the fighting and dying.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1713 (28:00):
Is that much different?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_16 (28:02):
Is it much different now?
Well, I mean, our armed forcesare a great deal, smaller than,
than they used to be.
Um.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:09):
Sure.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (28:11):
I mean, my reflection would be is,
is that from a listedperspective?
I think it's probably still a
evan-meyer_1_06-27-202 (28:16):
Similar.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (28:17):
a
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:17):
Yeah.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-202 (28:17):
split,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:18):
Yeah.
That's different conversationprobably.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_161 (28:21):
I mean,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:22):
Yeah,
vijay-luthra_1_06-27 (28:22):
military's become much, much more
professionalized since, sincethose days
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:26):
sure.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (28:26):
sides of the Atlantic.
You know, you can no longer, forexample, buy a commission as an
officer in the military.
You have to go.
You know, our, our equivalent ofWest Point in the UK is, is
Sandhurst was actually onlyabout, you know, sort of five,
six miles up the road from whereI live.
So, you know, it's aprofessional military.
It's a very skilled military.
(28:48):
And, but yes, those, those sortof divisions are probably,
probably still in place.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (28:57):
Yeah.
What what would you like toimpart to if you could and have
a magic wish for London rightnow?
Or the UK in general?
What, what would that be?
And, and I'll take it.
Yeah.
And then I'm gonna, I'm gonnaadd a part B to it, which is,
what are those lessons and someof those lessons that you would
like to give to the US or eventhe state of California?
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025 (29:20):
Yeah.
I think that the, that the sortof the greatest piece of harm
the UK has done itself in, inliving memory.
Um, I.
Was to leave the European Unionhas caused us untold harm.
Lot of the issues that we aredealing with at the moment are
(29:43):
as a consequence of Brexit.
you know, we, we've had many,many years of anemic growth or
no growth at all.
Partly due.
To not being in the EuropeanUnion, which, you know, let's
face it, it's, it's one of theworld's biggest single markets.
Why wouldn't you want to be init?
can sell stuff to without,without any barriers to doing
(30:07):
so.
So for us to.
Have left that voluntarily wasan extremely bad decision.
And you know, the polling in theUK reflects that.
I think most people recognize itwas an extremely bad decision.
We lumped COVID on top of that.
So you know, our.
Uh, economy is still notperforming at the level that I
(30:29):
think it would've performed,that if we'd still been in the
European Union, we could havetaken the hit from Brexit and
from, uh, from the COVIDpandemic.
And, know, I think thingswould've been bad, but they
wouldn't have been this bad.
I suspect we are navigating ourway back to Europe.
But it won't be on the sameterms that we had before.
The UK had very favorable terms.
(30:50):
When the European Union, we hada rebate on our uh, on the
membership fee we won't getagain if we, if we rejoin.
So that would probably, thatwould be my, my biggest wish is
that we, we hadn't left the, theEuropean Union.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1713 (31:06):
So to come back together is your
wish to join.
Rejoin or just that you hadn'tleft.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_ (31:13):
Just that we hadn't left,
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_1 (31:14):
Okay.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-20 (31:15):
rejoin, but I, I, I think it would be a
difficult, experience
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (31:22):
Hmm
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2 (31:22):
process.
And as I say, we wouldn't getthe deal that we had before.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025 (31:27):
mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Okay.
Any lessons that you'd want to,seeing what you see from the UK
side of things about the US andwhat we're going through?
All the things.
name, name your news, headlinewhat would you want to impart to
the us And then if you couldnarrow it down a California you
can, if not, don't worry aboutit.
(31:47):
It may be too nuanced, but up toyou.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-2025_1 (31:51):
So, so, so let me start around the
theme of unity.
So, so the Brexit, thereferendum that we had, which is
a rare example of directdemocracy in the uk.
We are not used to runningreferendums.
That, you know, sort of thefamous statistic is that it was
52% in favor of leaving theEuropean Union, 48% against
(32:16):
leaving the European Union.
But it's become a symbol ofdivision across the uk.
It's become a symbol of.
To some extent, class division,it's become a symbol of division
between Southern England andnorthern England.
It's become a, a symbol ofdivision between England and
Scotland.
It's become a symbol.
(32:36):
of division between, um, themainland Great Britain and
Northern Ireland, it's become asymbol of division between great
Britain and, and other, otherparts of, of the United Kingdom.
So my reflection is, is that it,it also feels to me like the US
is very divided right now in,you know, in the same way that.
(33:02):
You know, our, civil, civil lifeis divided in the uk and I think
that's a bad thing.
You know, I have grown up in anera where I.
us, whoever was running it,whether you know Republican or
Democrat, always a pretty stableinfluence power on the world
stage.
(33:23):
It doesn't feel like that at themoment.
And I think the re the, the wayor the reason the US has got
into the current situation isbecause of that, that division
that you have.
So, you know, my wish for the USwould be.
For, for more unity to come.
And if I steer it back toCalifornia, I have very high
(33:44):
hopes that Governor Newsom, ifhe, if he runs for the
Democratic nomination, might be,might be the man to, to bring
that unity.
But um, but I think we will,we'll have to see.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (33:55):
All right.
All right.
Hey, um, I really enjoyed our,our time today.
Thanks for sharing yourperspective.
This is great.
I, I'm, I'm inspired by the goodwork you're doing and the
service, uh, that you're lookingto provide and, and, and support
and, and, and having all thatexperience to help guide all the
right things forward.
So thank you so much.
Stick around just for a minuteas we close up the session here.
(34:18):
But thank you.
It was really, really greatchatting with you.
vijay-luthra_1_06-27-202 (34:21):
Thanks so much, Evan.
Take care.
evan-meyer_1_06-27-2025_171 (34:22):
All right.
All right.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.