Civitas Press Release
<!– /**/ –>
Civitas Press Release
<!– /**/ –>
Reforming Public Services? You thought that New Labour started that in 1997? Quite. You’re right but they failed to deliver because there were too many meaningless targets and too much micro-management which continues to-date.
Hence, the need to re-reform public services. But how?
Irrespective of what the centre says, first, there has to be political will from the leader of the Council and the Chief Executive to  thoroughly clean up the political governance and service delivery governance  separate wood from the trees  retain ‘change champions’ empowering them in the front-line to ‘break rules’ in-line with my tuppence-worth [below] think of and implement service changes to that reduce duplication, unnecessary bureaucratic effort, simplify and streamline delivery, save time and money  similarly identify areas of fraud and incisively deal with them including reforming procedures removing silo-mentality, sharing information within and external partners.  carry out root and branch reform of the entire culture without fear or favour.
As mentioned above my view is to start with the root & branch reform of the entire culture of the organisation.
Establish a TQ Culture Total Quality Culture where the Cultural implications of providing such a service to the customers of any Local Authority service provider are that it essentially involves the whole organisation, every department, every activity, every single person at every level. For such an organisation to be truly effective, each part of it must work properly together, recognising that every activity affects, and in turn is affected by, others.
The purpose and importance of policies and procedures is to translate the Government Legislation, Initiatives, Agendas, and directives (through LA’s Strategies) into processes by which those could be delivered consistently, reliably, cost-effectively and within time. Such delivery mechanisms would in their own turn introduce a way of monitoring performance and to clearly identify (through the audit trail) where something went wrong, why and how best to address the failing so as not to repeat the same mistake again. Thus introducing such a (motivated) culture to the first step change into continuous improvement cycle.
I have numerous policy, service, procedural and processes innovations. All my innovations have been self-motivated business critical ideas delivering value-for-money or realisable efficiency gains. It is my Dharma, my true inherent nature, to find the most efficient and effective ways to serve – to cut through bureaucracy and wasted effort and to go beyond expectations in delighting the customers. That is the only way to repeat the business. True to that Dharma – my work ethics have always been: “I’ll conduct my life’s work on the basis that the question is not if the opportunities of improvement exist but how they will be taken.”
Hence, I consider myself also a Change Champion, Equality & Diversity Champion (including Older Peoples’ Services Champion), an Innovator, Public Service Improver, value-for-money & efficiency champion, and a Social Entrepreneur.
Although Sir Peter Gershon Efficiency Review insisted that efficiencies are achieved through:
However, it identifies unacceptable activities as efficiency gains including:
It identified cashable & non-cashable efficiency gains by workstreams viz:
Whilst these all are applicable to any local authority, there is nothing new about the common-sense business critical activities that any business, private or public, worth its salt ought to be conducting to survive let alone succeed.
The latest biggest piece of Housing Legislation in a decade has become an act impacting further on the LA front-line staff who will have to take on greater role in regulating private sector housing. There are seven parts to the Housing Act – the first five cover private housing, part six deals with public sector issues & part seven with supplementary matters.
The culture therefore ought to identify, deal with and prevent future fraud both internal as well as external.
Given the culture change I have mentioned above, the devolved budgets, accountability and empowerment to decide and deal with public needs will inevitably create a culture that thrives on learning as the keep earning good will from the service users. Such a valued and an innovative culture will in time be able to do away with expensive and unnecessary consultants, greatly reducing their budgets. But what does such a culture appear like?
Cabinet Office Research [1997-1999] confirms that local govt’s impressive track record of finding efficiencies is solely due to the innovative nature of the front-line staff who are in the best place to innovate as they know the systems inside out. The New Labour never got around to devolving controlling from the centre to know how to enable and empower the front-line services to do what they are employed to do.
My tupennys worth:
My answers to MK Citizen published today.
1. Do you believe a cut in spending on public services in Milton Keynes will be necessary after the election?
2. What is your policy on housing development in the city?
3. MK’s grid roads – expand them or scrap them?
Expand them retaining the original ‘master-plan’ comprising the best of housing development, landscape planning, free open spaces, parks, walkways, cycling routes etc. Milton Keynes has the best balance thus far. I would hate to see the development greed, haste and inconsistency ruin all that has been achieved since 1967.
4. What would be the first thing you would do if you gained power?
Power lies in the electoral will of the MK Citizens. Should I be fortunate enough to be elected, the first thing I’d do is to wholeheartedly, unequivocally and humbly thank all the electorate irrespective of how they cast their votes.
5. What is the policy which defines your party/campaign?
On April 27th 2010, as Conservative Party leader David Cameron made his way to a car after a General Election campaign event in South London he was confronted by Bartley, accompanied by his disabled son, Sam. Mr Bartley claimed Conservative manifesto plans encourage placement of disabled children in special needs education, rather than mainstream, and that this amounted to unfair exclusion of children like his son. Cameron, crouching to be level with Bartley and wheelchair-bound Sam, tried to more fully explain the policy and that it was under Labour he was having problems finding his son appropriate schooling, but was continually interrupted by an angry Bartley.
The Daily Telegraph and many other media outlets suggested this meeting was a politically motivated stunt by Bartley, a Liberal Democrat supporter and left-wing campaigner, at a time when the Liberal Democrat and Conservative Parties were close in opinion polls.
Bartley later described himself as a “floating voter” and denied he had planned the incident, claiming Conservative Party officials invited him to speak with Cameron, though he was “very, very angry” about Conservative special needs education proposals.
I support mixed tenure housing to give much needed social experience and mobility to those renting from the social landlords. Similarly I support mixed and inclusive education for all where the mainstream eduction, in the opinion of the school governors, is unlikely to be adversely affected by such inclusion [although the need for special education depending upon the level of disability is unlikely to go away].
Britain’s most respected budgetary think tank has turned its slide rule over the spending and taxation proposals of each of the major parties. There are three vast black holes – one in each of the party’s proposals. All the parties have announced plans to return the economy to balance by 2015/2016. The Institute for Fiscal Studies says that 87 per cent of the Labour government’s plans for cuts in public spending or tax rises have not been revealed. It says that 82 per cent of the Tory plans are unexplained and 74.1 per cent of the Lib Dems. This is the bit of this election campaign that none of the major parties want to talk about.
Paying it back after being found out, legitimises this person to negotiate the outcome of the next government?
If you believe that then you’d believe that Leeches suck only vegetable sap.
Think. Vote judiciously.