Thursday, November 25, 2010
By Henry Kippin
Last night I was speaking at the mining institute in Newcastle at a roundtable discussing themes from LOCAL – a book my Dad and I published recently. The book is a mix of photography (based on an artist-in-residence period at Cumbria County Council), and text (an essay on local politics & identity), and the roundtable reflected a mix of interests in the photographic process, the politics of creating a piece of work like this, and its relevance to the current national and local political context.
Lots of discussion centred on the potential impact of spending cuts on the North East – impacts that no-one can really prejudge, but that most people felt would be socially damaging. Those asking “where is the growth strategy to get places like Sunderland out of the other side?” are asking the right question. This is where concepts like the big society and the 2020 Commission’s idea of social productivity must have practical impact. And it is precisely because the public sector is such a shaper of economic trajectory (the University in Sunderland, for example) that social productivity – which suggests a more active role for the state – is more likely to help people think through what happens next.
Back around the table, one participant commented on the ‘pace’ of the photographic content of the book – “feels almost rhythmic, like its own council logic of movement but inertia, meetings, decisions, problems, meetings, solutions, meetings…et cetera.” What he was getting at was that the pictures carry a sense of the banal, a sense that nothing changes in the machine of (local) government. Our book was created in 2009, before the current politics took shape. But I wonder if this is true now. Bradford council was reported to have sent every employee a letter warning that ‘their jobs are at risk of reduncancy’. This is hardly everyday – and we should be worried if it is the start of a new politics that considers jobs and people as collateral damage as budgets are quickly balanced.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
By Ashish Prashar
“This evening the Commission on 2020 Public Services – of which I am Chair – launches its Interim Report: ‘Beyond Beveridge: principles for 2020 public services’. The report is the culmination of a long period of discussion, deliberation and, ultimately, agreement. We are a diverse commission, representing many political, professional and personal backgrounds. That we have come together with a common voice is surely significant.
This interim agreement at a moment of crisis for public services is what makes the recommendations of our Commission worth considering. All 20 Commissioners agree that narrow critiques inevitably find their way to narrow solutions. So our critique is broad; and our vision for the future is positive and coherent. Short-term solutions to the debt crisis dominate the press. So our report looks to the longer term – arguing that short-term decision making must be underpinned by deliberate and strategic principle.
Ultimately, the Commission is about finding a way to develop public services that do better by the people who most rely on them. We believe in public services as things we all benefit from. But outcomes are failing some citizens. The structural basis of our system – designed by William Beveridge in his 1942 report – is no longer adequate for the new world we live in.
Today’s report sets out the Commission’s interim findings. We lay out a positive vision for public services, and some building blocks to get us there. Our own next steps involve grounding these principles in the real lives of citizens and those who work in public services. We will present our final recommendations in summer this year.”
Together with its interim report, the 2020 Public Services Trust is publishing an essay by Professor Howard Glennerster entitled Financing the United Kingdom’s Welfare States and a report prepared by Ipsos MORI called What do people want, need and expect from public services. Professor Glennerster’s essay reveals the extent of the hole in our public finances and advocates partnership approaches between the state and citizens to fund public services. The report by Ipsos MORI uses the most up to date quantitative and qualitative research to explore the public’s priorities and anxieties and suggests how the relationship between citizens and their services might change in the future. These papers have enriched the Commission’s understanding of the context in which it operates – from the perspective of citizens, and with the country’s delicate fiscal situation in mind.
Two major new reports follow these publications. Online or In-Line: The Future of Information Technology in the Public Services is a report exploring both the opportunities technology can create for public service reform as well as the associated risks, coming out this Friday. On March 23rd, check our website for Delivering a Localist Future: a route-map for change which assesses the practical barriers to achieving the frequently debated, often promised and never delivered localism, and suggests ways to overcome those challenges.