A Northern TUC Response to Proposals for Future Unitary Local Government in Cumbria
A Northern TUC Response to Proposals for Future Unitary Local Government in Cumbria
A Northern TUC Response to a Proposal on the Case for a Unitary Cumbria
Introduction
The Northern TUC aims to ensure public policy design and delivery recognises and is enhanced by the vital contribution of working people in bringing about improved economic and social outcomes. The response to consultation on future unitary structures for local government has been informed by trade union affiliates in the North East and Cumbria. Trade unionism is an important feature of the governance landscape in the Northern region and contributes significantly to civic participation. In fact trade union membership continues to grow here at a faster rate than anywhere else in the UK; more than 38% [1] of working people in the region belong to a trade union, many of whom are employed in the public sector. In the North East and Cumbria public services are integral institutions and local government is at the heart of promoting social justice and economic prosperity to improve quality of life and well being in communities and contribute to the sustainable development of the region. As a key social partner sharing a keen interest in this agenda, The TUC welcomes stakeholder consultation on future unitary structures and values the opportunity to comment on the direction of local government reform.
Strategic Importance of Local Government to Cumbria
Local government is of significant importance to the Northern region. With an enviable reputation as the region with the largest proportion of high performing councils in England, [2] anyreorganisation of local government should be considered in light of how this achievement can best be sustained to advance social and economic progress. This is an aspiration all stakeholders share andis testament to the commitment of local government workers striving to improve service delivery and outcomes for people and communities. Trade unions with representation in the local government sector are uniquely placed to represent the interests and views of members and staff, both as users of local government services, public servants and supporters of local democracy. It is the TUC's intention to offer an analysis of existing local government performance and to illustrate the challenges that the proposed shift towards unitary status in two tier areas could present. Local government should deliver effective public services and continue to be accountable and responsive to the needs of local communities. We also seek to illustrate the crucial role played by local government in underpinning efforts to create more well-rounded and balanced regional, sub-regional and local development in the North.
High quality, accessible, user focused, efficient public services, which are democratically accountable and facilitate citizen engagement in provision is strategically important. Enabling the region to realise its optimum potential, local government has a key role to play in creating the conditions that support the development of balanced economic growth and thriving, sustainable communities. As a strategic civic leader, local government is often the lead partner in a locality, engaging the public sector in strategic policy initiatives. This is crucial in joining up and co-ordinating policy development, implementation and regeneration across a range of agendas and governance levels. Working collaboratively with other stakeholders, local government co-ordinates and provides a wide variety of essential services to the public. It promotes economic development by attracting and retaining inward investment, marketing the region as an attractive place to live and work. Local government is uniquely positioned to build the vital infrastructure needed to connect physical, economic and social strategic planning, on a number of governance and spatial levels, to community-led regeneration enabling local residents to shape and foster ownership of the development of their local area.
Contribution to the Regional Economy
Jobs in the public sector make a valuable contribution to the Cumbrian economy. As a source of direct employment it offers reasonably well-paid, good quality work and generates a significant element of GVA. Recent employment growth has occurred in managerial and professional occupations, especially in the public sector, supporting the region's transition to a knowledge economy with a highly skilled workforce. This is imperative for sustainable growth and competitiveness in a global market. In Cumbria the public sector constitutes 24% of all employment, equivalent to almost 52,000 jobs in health, education and public administration. The public sector is also significant in Cumbria because of the spending it generates and the investment channelled into the County. Recent research estimates revenue expenditure of at least £2.156 bn in 2003/04 equating to an estimated average spend of £4,402 per capita in Cumbria. [3] Fewer people in Cumbria are employed in the public sector compared to similar rural areas due to the concentration of public sector service delivery in Manchester and Liverpool. The economic strategy for Cumbria is actively seeking opportunities to strengthen employment in the public sector and to prevent loss of capacity to deliver services in the County. Therefore it is important that local government restructuring retains the benefit of skilled workers, promoting attraction and retention within the sector.
Public sector investment has led to increased numbers in employment and consequently, higher employment rates. Progressive public sector employers, committed to work life balance, offer a wide range of flexible working options and family friendly policies. This enables many workers who would otherwise be excluded from the labour market to enjoy meaningful employment and contribute effectively to the regional economy. Local government restructuring affords an opportunity to capitalise on this practice, deploying the local government workforce more effectively to: introduce innovative models of service delivery focused on users; secure commitment, motivation and flexibility of the workforce to respond positively to change; extend employment opportunities and act as an exemplar to other employers promoting work life balance to attract workers and visitors to the County.
However, reduced growth in public expenditure is anticipated with the announcement of the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) settlement. This will have implications for the Cumbrian economy, affecting not only the public sector, but also businesses in the private sector that have become increasingly reliant on public sector funding and contracts. [4] Consequently if a slowdown in public expenditure is confirmed, it is crucial that local government exercise care in restructuring and develop policies that maximise public sector spending for the benefit of the region.
In addition the various equalities duties placed on public sector employers facilitates the development of a more diverse workforce; overcoming institutional and cultural barriers many people from underserved communities experience in accessing work. This is particularly relevant to Cumbria as it actively seeks to embrace equality and become more diverse in its make up. Any move towards unitary status should preserve and enhance the role of local authorities in advancing and embedding the equality and diversity agenda in workplaces and communities.
Affordability
The TUC recognises that unitary local government has the potential to minimise duplication and reduce waste, eliminate confusion about roles and responsibilities, create economies of scale and demonstrate greater transparency of service delivery costs. Lack of clarity about the services provided by County and District Councils can make it difficult for citizens and stakeholders to identify who is responsible for public services, the level of service that can be expected and how this provision is funded. As a result this confusion can lead to misunderstanding about the quality, efficiency and value for money of council services. Partnership working can also be complicated and frustrated as outside bodies struggle to identify who they should interact with, which is time consuming and costly. Unifying local government into a single structure would arguably create an authority sufficiently resourced to reduce the cost of providing services by generating economies of scale and strengthen council capacity to procure goods and services more cost effectively.
Local authorities operate in a challenging financial climate. They are under pressure to keep council tax increases to a minimum in the face of rising service costs, demanding service user expectations, and a tight financial settlement from the Government. This is set to be constrained further in the CSR to be announced later this year. The TUC notes the Government's position that any move towards unitary status should be financed from within existing resources. No assistance will be forthcoming if the costs of reorganisation exceed financial forecasts and new unitary authorities will be barred from passing on surplus costs to council tax payers.
Financial modelling estimates the cost of transition from two tier to unitary authority status at £21.3, of which £13 m is allocated for redundancy payments. The real savings that will be generated by restructuring are dependent on estimated transitional costs being realistic and achievable. The case championed for the creation of a single unitary authority is the generation of £22.2m efficiency savings every year, the harmonisation of council tax at the lowest rate in the County (pegged for 3 years) and transition costs repaid in 2.5 years. Trade unions are particularly concerned regarding the Council's ability to meet this target in the tight timescale outlined; doubtful it will be possible to secure continuous improvement, or even maintain current levels of service provision when income to pay for this investment is decreasing and annual efficiency savings are increasing. The situation is exacerbated by the Council's low level of reserves (£6.6m) compared to the debt to be repaid. Furthermore the Council has agreed to implement Single Status from April 2008, addressing equal pay issues and introducing a new pay and grading structure which will not be cost neutral. [5] Possible costs of this liability are approximate and to be financed from the revenue budget, which will potentially impact on services. The County Council currently has in excess of 3,200 claims relating to Equal Pay legislation amounting to an estimated £50m, which if successful may need to be paid in 2008/09 coinciding with the potential launch of a new unitary authority. Trade unions are anxious there is insufficient provision to meet prospective budget shortfalls, resulting in deteriorating levels of service.
There is a possibility that unforeseen costs will place additional strain on resources and service delivery leading to cuts in jobs and services. The TUC is of the opinion that to mitigate this risk, any efficiency savings must be made available for reinvestment in council services, underpinned by robust financial contingency planning to avoid an adverse impact on workers terms and conditions.
Regarding diseconomies of scale and the possible duplication of staff roles following the creation of unitary structures, the Northern TUC believes there should be no compulsory redundancies particularly as the security of local government employment is critical to successful reorganisation and the vitality of the regional economy. The TUC appreciates some staff may want to accept voluntary redundancy or take early retirement following reorganisation. In these circumstances it is vital sufficient funding is made available by central government to cushion voluntary redundancy or early retirement and that existing pension provisions are guaranteed.
Broad Cross Section of Support
The proposal for unitary local government in Cumbria has attracted support from a number of strategic partners; such as the North West Regional Development Agency, Director of the Learning and Skills Council, Chief Executive of the CBI, Cumbria Tourism and NHS Trust. Such support is consistent with local authorities' duty to produce 'joined up' approaches and solutions to cross cutting issues including influencing the local economic development agenda in shaping future models of unitary local government. However while the endorsements received thus far indicate strategic support for the principle of unitary local government, the messages suggest these organisations are not strongly in favour of this particular model. By the Council's own admission in many cases support comes with recommendations to improve the model and offering to assist the council design a new way of working. This position echoes many of the views expressed during consultation meetings with trade unions. Similarly qualitative citizen focus groups provided mixed feedback on the current proposal. Many participants attached importance to maintaining high quality services rather than efficiency savings commenting 'all we have seen about a new authority is saving money; we want to see services maintained.' [6] Respondents recognised that unitary local government may help to attract inward investment, yet no evidence was forthcoming to suggest a single unitary authority in its proposed form would better discharge an economic development role. Concerns persist about the loss of local knowledge, democratic representation and responsiveness to local issues. However consensus was reached on the need for further consultation before decisions on unitary local government structures are made.
A broad cross section of support should encompass a wider range of key partners at the regional and sub-regional tier together with service users at local level, identifying a number of key allies whose support will be vital if a new system of unitary local government is to function effectively.
The commitment of the local government workforce will be essential to implementing change and should be at the forefront of any reforms to deliver service improvement. Local government workers possess expert knowledge and experience to raise performance and improve efficiency. The key is involving staff in delivering change in a meaningful way, harnessing their commitment and enthusiasm. Coherent service plans, underpinned by sound evidence, discussed and developed between employers, trade unions and staff can unite the workforce behind a common vision for the organisation and promote greater understanding of its relevance in delivering wider policy objectives. Investment of this kind raises productivity by helping to achieve cross-cutting aims at strategic and operational levels through workforce participation. This can lead to improved decision making about how services should be organised and delivered to meet the needs and expectations of users.
Improvements both the Government and the public want to see can best be achieved by taking into account the views of local government workers responsible for running and delivering services. Changes to the structure of local government can create long term disruption for both the public and employees, escalating costs if not properly managed. Public sector unions with members affected by such changes will be seeking full involvement in the process.
Trade unions play an instrumental role negotiating change in the interests of the people and the communities members serve in addition to ensuring local government workers' terms and conditions are not detrimentally affected by a move to unitary status.
The TUC understands Government needs to be assured that a new unitary structure will inspire public trust and confidence in the ability of local government to deliver quality public services and community leadership. Service quality must remain high and the commitment to cost effective, value for money, user centred services undiminished. Local government workers contribution to the delivery of this agenda is to be commended and deserve recognition for their commitment and ability to provide high quality services.
Strong and Accountable Leadership
Clear vision and strong leadership are necessary to tackle contemporary social and economic challenges. A single unitary authority has the potential to promote greater alignment between regional and local policy development and delivery, bringing coherence to a complex governance landscape. New models of leadership and governance structures advocated in the White Paper are designed to assist local government step up to its augmented role in implementing large scale economic and social regeneration, promote partnership and cross boundary working at a sub regional and city regional level to facilitate this development, and strengthen multi-agency working across the County to deliver improved service outcomes locally.
To deliver this ambitious vision it is important to differentiate between the leadership and structures required to prioritise investment in economic and social development, transport, skills, housing and the environment at the regional from the co-ordination and monitoring of local service delivery, strategically and operationally, especially at the point of contact with the public.
Ensuring synergy between the activities of regional and local partners, particularly where regional and local agendas intersect will be crucial to the successful delivery of economic and social outcomes.
A single unitary authority may find it easier to engage with neighbouring authorities and work across boundaries to discharge its role in supporting regional and city regional development, delivering large scale regeneration projects with the capacity to forge and manage the relationships required to take this forward. Arguably a single unitary authority is in a stronger position to articulate Cumbria's priorities in a competitive environment and the structure would facilitate dialogue with key organisations, working across boundaries to discharge its role in regenerating the area.
In relation to local service delivery a unitary structure would facilitate partnership working with agencies to improve service outcomes locally. Arguably a single local authority is in a stronger position to offer leadership, with the legitimacy of scrutinising the performance of service delivery by a range of providers and must be backed up by sufficient power and resources.
We understand the proposal for a single unitary authority advocates an indirectly elected Executive with the Leader appointed for a four year term, selecting a Cabinet and designing portfolios to match particular skills and abilities. The Executive will deal with strategic issues affecting the whole County such as housing, transport, cultural development and spatial planning. This is with the aim of developing stronger leadership to tackle contemporary economic and social challenges and respond to the pattern of thematic, multi-agency, cross sector working that is steadily emerging as the appropriate scale on which to plan and deliver public policy. The TUC recognises that strengthening Executive leadership is necessary to enable Cumbria to effectively voice its interests and successfully influence policy development by ensuring appropriate connectivity to City Regions on the doorstep and articulate the distinct needs of the County in relation to jobs, investment and resources. We believe a strong public sector is required to meet this challenge.
However we caution against the erosion of local democracy by concentrating decision making powers in the hands of a few. The public is already apathetic regarding the ability to influence responsiveness of local authority service delivery, compounded by the remoteness of Local Strategic Partnerships from elected control and the presence of alternative service providers.
Breaking up the functions of planning and providing services into separate bodies causes fragmentation and dislocation between strategy and service delivery. This has the effect of removing direct lines of accountability, which enables citizens to identify through taxation how public money is spent, thus holding a stake in and having collective ownership of public services.
Visibility does not always equal accountability when it comes to leadership. Clear, accountable leadership is fundamental to strengthening strategic decision making capacity, particularly on the regional and national stage. It is also important leaders are empowered with a secure mandate to execute decisions in the long term interests of the County, even where they may prove unpopular initially, building consensus between the council's partners and exercising an influence beyond the council's sphere of authority. For this to work decision making powers must be balanced with effective scrutiny arrangements to ensure future policy and service planning benefits from stakeholder input, reinforced by political, managerial, organisational and operational probity. The TUC recognises Cabinet leadership is a key feature of decision making within the local democratic framework and needs to be strengthened in light of emerging and evolving policy challenges. However we perceive a gap exists in the proposed unitary authority scrutiny process to hold Executive members to account for decisions made in respect of city regional, sub regional and regional development when discharging its place shaping role. We believe this could be resolved by reviewing the purpose of LSPs.
Rather than concentrating on commissioning services, which produces blurred lines of accountability for public service performance and confusion about respective roles and responsibilities, the TUC envisages a more productive remit for LSPs, one which offers potential to add significant value to the governance of policy development and implementation at regional, sub-regional and city regional levels. A new model of accountability needs to be developed in response to a greater focus on places, shared policy outcomes and strategic engagement with local and regional stakeholders and strategy. LSPs could undertake this role providing a coherent link between the local and regional agenda by constructively scrutinising the activities of the Cabinet to clarify the relationship and contribution of local government to the delivery of national, regional and local priorities.
LSPs, like Regional Assemblies, promote effective strategy and delivery by bringing together a broad cross sector coalition of economic and social partners to inform the development of public policy. Generating greater engagement and buy-in with this process fosters collective ownership and support for the achievement of policy outcomes, underpinned by effective monitoring and evaluation. This structure leads to more robust and transparent public policy making and continuous improvement, which combined with democratic accountability, helps to strengthen the credibility of local leadership and confer legitimacy on the LSP.
In addition new local authorities must be allocated sufficient power and resources to scrutinise the performance of service delivery by a range of providers.
The TUC is also concerned about the accretion of power to Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs), which sit outside direct democratic control. Working in partnership with other agencies from the public, private and voluntary sector, local authorities are expected to co-ordinate local service delivery by encouraging different agencies to work collaboratively to improve whole areas, rather than individual services, separating commissioning and service delivery so the local authority and LSP concentrate on service improvement, not direct provision. Via the Local Area Agreement (LAA) councils will be encouraged to develop a services market, competition and a diversity of suppliers. Decisions about service provision should represent the interests of service users, avoiding any conflict of interest if their own organisation is competing to deliver the services. We support the need for continuous improvement in the pursuit of high quality public services, yet there is no evidence to suggest that competition produces better services by pitching providers against each other. Building quality public services requires investment in infrastructure, equipment, people and the work they do, not exposure to divisive competition and a drive to save money at all costs.
In circumstances where services are not provided directly by a new single unitary authority, the TUC would expect staff to be TUPE transferred with the Council implementing and monitoring the Protection Code of Practice on Workforce Matters. However, the TUC has identified a number of problems with this approach. Increased growth in service commissioning and an arms length body (LSP) overseeing delivery will make it harder for local authorities to hold service providers to account, particularly when they do not lead the LSP.
The LAA would be the principle mechanism to agree priorities, minimum service standards and examine performance. Experience developing LAAs tells us that national targets constrain flexibility to innovate and develop priorities that are sensitive to the needs of a local area. National targets conflict and inevitably partners are driven by demands from the centre rather than give primacy to local concerns. Local Area Agreements are still relatively in their infancy. Should their development be reviewed before expanding their reach further? The TUC is concerned about the capacity of the new authority to ensure compliance with minimum service standards, exercise prudent use of resources, secure improved outcomes and guarantee equity when the LSP is remote from the communities it serves and outside local authority control. Representation on the LSP is also a matter of concern regarding the It is vital that participation structures are protected from 'capture' by narrow interest groups and that decision makers are seen to be legitimate and accountable.
There is also an issue surrounding the capacity and skills of LSP members to commission services on this scale. The TUC is supportive of user involvement in raising the quality of public services but we remain concerned about the possibility that objective judgment and providing services according to need will be conceded in favour of minority constituencies of interest.
The prospect of unitary local government offers an opportunity to rethink community engagement to maximise participation, particularly from underrepresented groups, promote public involvement in decision making and thereby generate a greater understanding of the role and funding of public services to improve citizen satisfaction.
In Cumbria approximately 20-30 communities will be identified, subject to extensive consultation, represented by a Community Board. Frontline councillors In South East Northumberland will be empowered to administer a delegated of ward budget of approximately £5,000-6,000 to respond to local issues. Alongside unitary authority wards, the remit of Town and Parish Councils will be strengthened. Transition will be overseen by four Area Committees aligned to four geographic areas.
The Executive would concentrate on regional development issues whereas Area and Community Boards focus on neighbourhood engagement and choice to improve local service delivery.
Disconnecting people from scrutinising the function of a powerful Executive coupled with muddling performance monitoring with citizen involvement in service delivery obscures opportunities for stakeholders to formally scrutinise council or partner activities at a local level, undermining subsidiarity and weakening democratic engagement. Allowing only those with the requisite civic skills to influence council structures and decision making processes perpetuates ingrained patterns of social exclusion and highlights the importance of conducive relationships with representative bodies such as trade unions.
It is difficult to see how this adds up to a more directly accountable form of leadership. To what extent the Executive can bend partner priorities to ensure they are aligned with council priorities and a shared vision for Cumbria is unclear.
Identity
The TUC recognises that the local authority needs to develop service delivery infrastructure and governance arrangements, but would wish to highlight that citizens concept of identity are often far more complex than a mere sense of belonging to a geographic area or an arbitrary notion of a local authority administrative structure. This should be taken into account when considering the responsiveness of services, community participation and democratic representation. Social and economic change has broken down class distinctions and individuals are just as likely to define themselves politically in terms of their gender, ethnicity, age, disability, sexuality, and family status as by social class. [7] Consequently this poses challenges for decision makers confronted with choices about how to allocate resources, and deliver responsive services sensitive to the demographic composition of the local population when promoting equality and political participation.
Cumbria is a diverse County characterised by complex economic, social and demographic geography. The urban and rural mix presents distinct challenges for the delivery of local governance and service provision; which will not disappear with a new unitary structure. The proposed model may not be sensitive to or reflect the needs of local communities. At the local level it is critical that new unitary authorities ensure effective interaction between LSPs, City Region development and local community entities and organisations, building upon existing good practice in partnership arrangements. Any change to the structure of local government in Cumbria should demonstrate spatial awareness.
Neighbourhood Empowerment
The impact of participation on service delivery is critical, bringing about better policy development and planning, with a focus on outcomes and an important pillar of economic and social justice, integral to building a cohesive community. Despite improvements in the regional economy and greater prosperity in the last decade, pockets of poverty, deprivation and exclusion persist as people aspire to become more affluent. People are generally more autonomous and individualistic, engaging in social and political discourse through new channels of communication, exhibiting less deference towards traditional institutions. Government has responded to this challenge by championing 'a Copernican revolution' in public service reform, insisting services are configured and centred on the needs and aspirations of the individual user, delivered in times and settings convenient to them. There are many positive aspects to this 'voice and choice' agenda, enabling people to access good quality local services in a way that fits in with their daily lives and meets their needs and concerns.
However research has shown that variations in socio-economic circumstances affect citizens' ability to participate in civic life. Well-resourced individuals and organisations with the skills to shape service provision dominate political engagement. [8] The affluent and well networked are advantageously positioned to access services and influence decisions. There is anxiety about the accessibility of competitive public services to users who are least able to navigate their way around the system. The TUC believes a market-based approach will reinforce the current divide between those able to access the public services and those who cannot. Real choice means a positive commitment to responding to citizens' needs, making services accessible, and encouraging individuals to shape services and learn from user involvement. Local government strives to make services available to everyone on an equal basis. Indeed, the Government has insisted that proponents of unitary local government in two tier areas demonstrate how their proposals will conserve this tenet of public service. Subjecting services to market forces is not a sustainable option. Rather than drive up performance and keep costs down, by disaggregating the planning function and providing services to separate bodies to strike a better deal, competition threatens to damage quality public services and limit accessibility. There is a disjunction between making services available to everyone on the basis of equity, social and economic need and according to individual choice. Whereas there may not be high demand for a particular service, it may be necessary to ensure it is available to provide for those in need in a fair society. Only effective and efficient public services, funded adequately can both respond to the evolving needs and aspirations of citizens and nurture the health and well being of society.
Yet to what extent does the majority of the public want to be more involved in hands on, grass roots public service delivery? Based on an analysis of existing research, the TUC is dubious whether there is a real appetite for this approach. A survey conducted by Ipsos Mori research [9] revealed that while 82% of people in a local area supported the concept of community partnerships, only 26% would consider getting involved and this figure drops dramatically to only 2% who actually do. Furthermore the use of the private and third sector service providers does not win public support. The survey showed that of almost three quarters of those polled, (72%) believe local government is best placed to provide local services and 56% said local government, using public sector workers, was best placed to provide local services like education, refuse collection and care of older people to a high standard for local communities. Only 16% were in favour of a public private partnership and 3% private sector provision.
Neighbourhood empowerment measures appear to concentrate on the engaged and fail to reach out to excluded groups already struggling to access services. The TUC believes the ability of local government to provide services in the interests of the majority should remain paramount, with tailored service specification where required.
Voluntary organisations can bring specialist knowledge and sensitivity to the needs of their clients, which is sometimes lacking from more traditional vehicles of delivering public services required to reconcile competing demands. However involving third sector organisations in the provision of public services on a large scale raises a number of important issues. It is unclear whether voluntary organisations have the skills and capacity to take on responsibility for delivering services to the whole community as opposed to an interest group within it. Voluntary sector providers may believe their independence and campaigning role may be compromised if they receive public money and withdraw from community involvement in the wake of onerous levels of responsibility, hindering partnership working. Financial insecurity can also disrupt continuity of service and if councils provide subsidy to rectify the problem the dynamics of the relationship between the local authority and voluntary sector may be detrimentally affected.
However where there is support for public involvement in service delivery the Government should develop a programme of community empowerment to assist people to fulfil this new role. To this end the TUC supports the commitment in the bid to invest in supporting the development of Town and Parish Councils with capacity for improvements to the governance and ethical framework.
Most people want access to good quality local public services, schools, environmental services and health and social care, but do not necessarily wish to control the assets in which they are housed. In short everybody wants the grass cut, but don't want to own a lawn mower! Once assets are transferred out of council control it is unclear who is responsible for future maintenance and continued investment in community infrastructure, vital to support sustainable communities and enhance the quality of the natural and built environment to lever in private sector investment for regeneration.
Moreover, we would contend that ward and area budgets earmarked to promote greater citizen involvement in local decision making are symbolic gestures of a transfer of power from the centre to the community. They are tokenistic in comparison to the revenue budget controlled by the Council and therefore only grant notional powers of self determination. Trade unions in the local government sector believe this money should be directly invested in supporting community development. The business case cites that a new system of governance offers opportunities for neighbourhood flexibility and empowerment by allowing communities to identify the best way to access key services in their areas. However genuine citizen involvement enables people to advise local councils not only how they wish to access services, but influence their shape through meaningful engagement and exercising democratic control.
Formal models of civic infrastructure do not only reflect current patterns of engagement, but also signify more deep rooted values within localities related to the broader economic, social and cultural history of an area. (Duncan and Goodwin 1988, Gyford 1991) Such traditions help to shape the nature and level of citizen engagement. For example the North East has a strong history of trade unionism that mobilises a collective style of community activity, which is an important feature of the governance landscape and a catalyst for increasing civic participation. Union membership in the North East continues to grow at a faster rate than anywhere else in the UK. A 2.4% rise in 2006 means 38.9% [10] of working people in the region belong to a trade union, many of whom work in the public sector. Co-ordinating bodies in civil society like trade unions can act as important conduits for public participation, facilitating access to politicians and service managers by developing the skills and capacity of individuals to engage in dialogue with other institutional actors. This activity can help to build consensus from the dichotomy of voices within the community to inform the ongoing development of responsive, high quality public services accessible to all.
The TUC is anxious about the long-term impact of the Government's policy on neighbourhood empowerment and its effect on direct service provision. We are particularly concerned local government will lose capacity to guarantee the secure and sustainable supply of quality public services over time, unable to maintain the knowledge and skills required, storing up future problems. We are aware of services contracted out to alternative service providers that have been returned in house to manage service delivery failures at substantial cost to the council, and ultimately the tax payer. Managing this risk is an ongoing issue and the TUC urges Government to ensure local government is properly resourced and equipped to address this eventuality. Moreover, the success of direct service provision in overturning such failures should be rewarded.
Value for Money Services
A move towards unitary local government in Cumbria affords an opportunity to review current service provision and identify ways to improve the experience for the citizen from first point of contact to service delivery. This can be achieved by adopting a more customer focused approach, placing service users at the heart of service planning and delivery, exploiting technologies to make it easier for citizens to access services, increase community consultation and involvement and develop shared services to boost efficiency.
Citizen satisfaction and engagement is not only shaped by the democratic decision making process, but also interactions between citizens in the delivery of services. The quality of these interactions affects general perceptions about the responsiveness of public services more often than contact with an elected representative. Therefore local government workers, familiar with the needs, aspirations and characteristics of the communities they serve should be involved in the design and delivery of service improvements.
Value for money services should not only look at providing services at the lowest price but take into account social and environmental factors to ensure levels of service provision are sustainable and meet the needs of citizens and communities.
Government is committed to maximising the use of technology in local government to enable the public to access services in times and settings convenient to them. Yet if corporate infrastructure is contracted out to the private sector there is danger only the majority will be catered for and those who experience difficulty accessing mainstream services will be overlooked, accentuating social and economic exclusion.
There is also a strong business case to indicate significant savings can be achieved by integrating back office functions and developing a shared services agenda. The TUC is of the opinion that given the importance of public sector employment to the local economy, any new unitary authority should give a commitment to developing shared services with other public sector providers. Cuts based on the artificial distinction between back-office and frontline functions and piecemeal cuts and privatisations will not deliver improved efficiency. Instead this will lead to poorer services, with less accountable public decision-making, eroding the trust of citizens in public servants and public servants in their employers. Effective service delivery is dependent on integrated back-office and front-line functions. An evidence based approach should always be taken in deciding the best strategy for improvement and not an automatic presumption that the private sector will produce greater efficiencies.
It is clear that realising this strategy will require different skills, knowledge, systems, working practices and organisational change which will involve changes to the profile of the current workforce and patterns of employment.
The TUC is confident that if approved, unitary local government can be run effectively for the benefit of citizens and the workforce. Trade unions appreciate outdated working practices and staff structures, coupled with a lack of investment in the knowledge, skills and abilities of the workforce, impacts on service performance. A review of managerial decision making and working practices creates scope for employers and staff to identify opportunities for continuous improvement and achieve service performance targets. Engaging the workforce in meaningful, open, comprehensive communication and consultation facilitates the smooth introduction of new processes, systems and working practices by promoting the concept that employees are more likely to give of their best if they feel valued, able to contribute ideas and understand the rationale for change. In this way the workforce, as key delivery agents are committed to introducing and securing improvements within the organisation, fostering a change positive culture that is receptive to new ways of working, embraces alternative thinking and inspires innovation. This approach nurtures effective management and leadership capacity, involving employees in the decisions affecting them, aligned to the development needs of the organisation.
Trade union structures offer a useful framework in which dialogue can take place to develop and implement new workforce policies and practices. It is essential this approach is developed jointly with the workforce and that a new unitary authority avoids imposing change in a rush to get up and running to meet the tight deadline set by Government.
Clearly the skills base of the workforce will need be developed to meet the demands of a unitary authority and individuals should be equipped with appropriate skills to support the transition and contribute towards new models of service delivery. Trade unions can work jointly with employers to undertake skills needs analysis, developing and implementing programmes designed to upskill the workforce to help people adapt to changes in employment and promote career progression. On the job training is regarded as a vital source of workplace development to enable people to innovate, maximise the use of new technologies and adopt methods of working designed to improve service performance and exploit new opportunities. As trusted peers within the workforce, Union Learning Representatives can work with employers to identify staff training and development needs, raise awareness of learning opportunities and plan learning and skills programmes suited to the needs of the organisation, creating a culture of lifelong learning in the workplace.
Transfer of council assets into community control, the use of strategic business partners and the loss of staff during the transition process will impact on staff terms and conditions. We agree the new councils should enter into discussion with local communities about how they want to access services, especially in more remote areas and recognise the scope to create flexible employment opportunities for those currently excluded from the labour market, such as carers and lone parents. However the TUC believes the sought after level of efficiency savings will harm direct public sector employment and thus the local economy. We urge the authority seriously consider the consequences of this approach for the sub-regional and regional economy; in particular the downgrading of jobs and insecurity will result from the use of temporary, fixed term and interim appointments and increased use of alternative methods to procure and deliver services. Trade unions are particularly disappointed to find the new authority would continue to use as many as three major commercial partners to drive efficiency savings. In 2005 the Audit Commission found the County Council to be a 1* performing authority, even though they contract with three commercial partners. It may be that an alternative approach developing public shared service partnerships would help to increase overall performance improvement. Trade unions representing Council staff will call upon the new authority to reconsider its position and negotiate changes to terms and conditions.
Conclusion
The Northern TUC supports the Government's aspirations for reform and welcomes long term investment in our public services. We believe the creation of unitary structures should be driven by the need to provide better quality services to people using well trained, skilled and highly motivated workers delivering services directly to the public. Efficiency savings generated by reform should be reinvested in local services; to sustain improvement and maximise outcomes from public investment to continuously upgrade performance. This can best be achieved by securing the commitment of the workforce, collaborating with local communities to deliver positive change and continuous improvement. We remain concerned the public does not share the Government's desire for 'community' service delivery. We are apprehensive about the long term impacts of this policy in terms of the capacity of local government to withstand service fragmentation and permanent revolution to sustain universal high quality, accessible service provision for all. Sufficient resources must be made available to achieve improvement and reform and any change in local government structures needs to be underpinned with stronger democratic, social and economic stakeholder engagement to scrutinise performance of new unitary authorities.
[1] DTI Trade Union Trends Survey 2006
[2] ANEC Manifesto 2006-07 Based on the Audit Commission Annual Comprehensive Performance Assessment for Local Authorities.
[3] Cumbria Economic Regeneration Action Plan 2007-2010 p32
[4] Never Had It So Good? The North East under New Labour 1997-2007 Fred Robinson, Ian Zass-Ogilvie, Michael Jackson St Chad's College Durham University p14-16
[5] Questions on the Cumbria County Council Business Case
[6] One Council, One Vision, One Voice The Case for a Unitary Cumbria p 69
[7] A New Agenda: Labour and Democracy Micahel Wills IPPR June 2006
[8] Locality Matters Making Participation Count in Local Politics Vivien Lowdnes, Lawrence Pratchett and Gerry Stoker IPPR
[9] http://www.ipsos_mori.com/polls/2006/ey.shtml
[10] DTI Trade Union Trends Survey 2006
Stay Updated
Want to hear about our latest news and blogs?
Sign up now to get it straight to your inbox