Government should withdraw council productivity plan demand
This article first appeared in the LGC briefing.
The intent behind Michael Gove’s announcement was not to improve productivity – and it won’t, writes Adam Lent.
What are Michael Gove’s productivity plans for? It surely can’t be the stated aim: to improve the efficiency of councils. Local government is already the leanest part of the state having imposed 13 years of the deepest spending cuts and redundancies in the public sector.
It is also the tier of government that is widely accepted to have responded with speed and agility to the pandemic while the centre wasted billions on ineffective PPE, failed test-and-trace technology and empty Nightingale hospitals.
It’s the political equivalent of agreeing to give your child extra pocket money this week but only if they promise to tidy their bedroom.
If there is still significant inefficiency in the sector, it is more likely the result of woefully insufficient resource than inherent wastefulness.
In truth, the productivity plans are simply a condescending quid pro quo for the provision of a further £600m as part of the local government finance settlement. It’s the political equivalent of agreeing to give your child extra pocket money this week but only if they promise to tidy their bedroom. The message clearly is: here’s the cash but you don’t really deserve it.
It exposes a wilful blindness to the devastating impact of austerity on local public services alongside the associated (and increasingly ludicrous) claim that councils are somehow to blame for that impact themselves.
It’s a move that says much more about Westminster and Whitehall than it does about local government. It exposes a wilful blindness to the devastating impact of austerity on local public services alongside the associated (and increasingly ludicrous) claim that councils are somehow to blame for that impact themselves.
It also highlights the weird mindset in central government regarding council finance which sees the money not as going to local people in need of care and decent services but as something likely to be misused by feckless local authorities. How else to explain the non-sequitur in last week’s ministerial statement warning councils not to waste the extra funds on “widely discredited” diversity programmes?
Productivity is not improved by imposing a new ream of red tape on the public sector.
More fundamentally, it reveals how little Whitehall understands the genuine drivers of greater efficiency in public services. Most obviously, productivity is not improved by imposing a new ream of red tape on the public sector. Clearly those who drew up the ministerial statement didn’t spot the irony in demanding that the £600m is spent directly on frontline services while simultaneously requiring councils to divert resource to the ‘back office’ to concoct productivity plans.
More importantly, everything we are learning about addressing the current demand crisis in public services tells us that a blunt focus on productivity is rarely an effective solution and often counter-productive. Quick-fix efficiencies, such as reducing the amount of time that care and health workers spend with their clients and patients, only results in poorer care and declining well-being and health. This ultimately means even more intensive support including costly and labour-intensive medical interventions further down the line.
Councils are discovering that increased efficiency is actually a by-product of shifting to community powered and strengths based services.
In contrast, councils are discovering that increased efficiency is actually a by-product of shifting to community powered and strengths based services. Take, for example, Manchester City Council’s Early Help initiative which is based on these principles and has generated a return of £1.90 for every £1 invested while reducing demand and improving outcomes for children and families on a wide range of metrics.
But these are complex shifts that take time and careful planning. They certainly can’t be encapsulated in a productivity plan delivered within the next six months for review by a national body with no knowledge of local conditions.
In short, neither the intent nor the outcome of the productivity plans is greater productivity. They will waste time and money when councils have none of either to spare. The idea should be quietly shelved prior to the Budget on 6 March and before councils have wasted any energy on them.
Photo credit: ‘CDL Michael Gove hosts virtual media huddle at 123 St Vincent St’ by Number 10 on Flickr. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 DEED.
Join our mailing list