Title

The idea of an ‘easyCouncil' as one way of beating the budget cuts stirred debate as never before. To discover if it is the magic solution for local government, The MJ brought together senior local government leaders to gauge their views. Chris Smith reports. Big cuts in public spending have led to a new mantra... that radical times require radical measures. The debate over the future of public services has crystalised around whether councils should deliver a Scandinavian-type model, or one which follows the example set by a budget – easyJet – airline. Wide provision, paid for by taxation, or a minimum standard which the public or private providers then top up. Which brings us to the crux question: When one can no longer salami slice, what is the alternative? The Panel: Paul Bradbury, group business development director, Civica Ltd Robert Coomber, chief executive, Thurrock Council Steve Douglas, corporate director, Hackney LBC Joe Duckworth, chief executive, Newham LBC Laura McGillivray, chief executive, Norwich City Council Stephen Moir, corporate director, Cambridgeshire CC Derek Myers, chief executive, Kensington and Chelsea Gillian Norton, chief executive, Richmond upon Thames LBC David Roots, managing director, local government, Civica Ltd Sue Smith, chief executive, Harborough DC Dave Smith, chief executive, Sunderland City Council Martin Smith, chief executive, Ealing LBC Paul Smith, technology director, Civica Ltd Chair: Michael Burton, editor The MJ Heather Jameson, deputy editor, The MJ First, the public will need to accept that doing everything for everyone is no longer possible. And, as highlighted during The MJ discussion, changing perceptions of staff and the public to the council's role in its community is seen as crucial to meeting the challenge. One delegate asks: ‘How can we move from being the council which will provide, to the provider of last resort? The public have been given a level of expectation.' The first issue of consensus is that there cannot be a standard model of service delivery. Replicating a standard, ‘easyCouncil' model everywhere will be impossible. And the cold reality is, as one speaker argues, the ‘big ticket things have been done'. ‘It's easy to say, "There's going to be less of you", but that leaves the potential to misunderstand the complex work which lies ahead. Back-office sharing will deliver some of the first gains, since they are not service areas that the public see. But managing the relationship between those authorities which sign up to it is critical to ensure it benefits everyone. But the savings delivered there will only go so far. The real changes will have to come in areas such as social care. Large parts of the private sector are now bringing some business functions back in-house. Contracted-out services which offer marginal benefit by being delivered from outside can return. One attendee advises: ‘Get out of private fostering because it is expensive, the outcomes are not great, and councils have greater control, with the ability to move quickly when problems emerge.' Linked to this is the familiar issue of procurement and negotiating to get the best deal also. ‘I'm not sure councils are still getting the contract right,' says one contributor. If a council outsources staff and specifies tight conditions, the ability to innovate and deliver savings is lost. Even a marginal improvement in productivity can deliver big savings – productivity is still one-third lower than in the private sector. Tackling sickness and absenteeism can bring significant gains, which would support an initiative such as a recruitment freeze. Performance monitoring too, is another solution. Says one delegate: ‘Don't carry dead wood. A lot of middle managers run a mile when asked to manage.' Moving services closer to those communities which use them is highlighted as a useful and effective way of creating better, modern services that people actually want. The role of the third sector should not be overlooked as a part of this. Sub-regional partnerships between local authorities and partners in health and education are also seen as useful tools in driving big efficiencies and better decisions. Total Place will offer opportunities to refocus working at local level, but it is not the panacea that some are hoping for. Challenging Whitehall to reduce the plethora of duplicated demands on issues such as teenage pregnancy is also highlighted. ‘What value do they give?' asks one of the group. Another adds: ‘What we do not want is another set of local area agreements.' One contributor challenged the current perception that councils have moved ahead of the rest of the public sector in modernisation. There is a consensus among those attending that thinking from the centre will have to be just as radical, rather than an attempt to push demand down to local level or rebrand unreconstructed Westminster-based departments. But there is also the admission that the way council employees work will also have to match those changes. ‘We still have services that were designed in the Victorian era,' says one. ‘We still have engineers, planners and other people working in the same way that they always have.' Another warned that the easyCouncil concept should be seen another way – the easy savings will come in the first year. The hard decisions will come in year three. There is a consensus that a return to growth, which will happen as the effects of the recession wear off, should not be used as a retreat back into the comfort zone. So, in the ‘what next' scenario, is there an alternative to salami slicing? There is confidence that local government can deliver, but as one delegate warns, there is a danger that it could be interpreted as making it look easy compared with other parts of the public sector. One comment sums up what could be a new approach. When evaluating service plans, ask one simple question, Is it changing our residents' lives?

Title

WHITEHALL

Reality check on the 'easy' life

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING