CHAPTER SEVEN CONCLUSION: TEN PROPOSITIONS ON PUBLIC SERVICE REFORM
In this concluding section, we offer our interpretation of the fieldwork evidence in the form of ten propositions for public service reform.
Improve the quality of feedback
7.1 Our first proposition concerns the relationship between service providers and users. Public service decision-makers and providers should improve their capacity to seek and respond to service user feedback. The principle of giving a good enough account of decisions made emerges from the fieldwork evidence consistently. Our experience in other areas leads us to believe that public service managers and elected leaders need to do more to understand this need to provide 'full feedback', offering an account of where they agree and disagree with public priorities, and why.
Be clear on priorities and expectations
7.2 Part of the leadership role in public services is to lead a debate on priority setting in the public interest. There is a clear distinction to be drawn here with most market goods and services. Our expectations as consumers have risen steadily, with the growth of internet trade/retail, 24-hour shopping and telephone transactions. At the same time, these expectations spill over into public services. Yet, these are tax-financed, subject to finite public spending and cannot deliver the same degree of personalisation we can achieve by paying for services. The citizen interest is not the same as the consumer's, although core elements of good customer service should apply increasingly to public services.
7.3 Tradeoffs are an implicit part of public service decision-making: how to target on the basis of client group and/or area when needs vary; what services to make available on a universal basis; what minimum standards should be guaranteed regardless of where the service user lives and so on. Making this more explicit might help towards the goal of raising appropriate public expectations - i.e. for the public to become more demanding of providers on what they fairly can be expected to deliver.
Devolve more powers as they are earned to strengthen accountability
7.4 Participants in the five groups had much in common with each other in terms of the principles they expect to apply to improving public services. The diversity of locations means the specific local priorities for reform vary. This suggests to us the need for an enhanced degree of local decision-making, and perhaps budgetary power, at the sub-authority level. A potential link was made between greater fiscal autonomy for local government and stronger accountability to the public. A clear challenge for central government is to find ways of devolving greater autonomy, at least to areas which have earned it, while ensuring authorities performing less well meet minimum standards across the board.
7.5 At the same time, participants placed a high value on equity of service standards between areas within their authority, as well as between authorities. This calls for more localised datasets to assist with the role of scrutiny. Achieving the right balance between localisation and equity is a familiar challenge. We believe this calls for further testing of discretionary action at the local level, especially to achieve demonstrable improvements in the 'vital signs' by which residents are likely to judge the true extent of progress. Variations of this kind should complement the successful achievement of agreed minimum standards.
Adapt services and skills to serve a more diverse population
7.6 An ageing Scottish population is likely to mean greater need to support independent living, for advocacy and other forms of support for vulnerable service users, as well as improved training and awareness among service planners and frontline staff on the growing diversity of the population they serve ( e.g. by impairment, language, cultural needs). This should apply as well to a more diverse workforce, to ensure that migrants working directly with the public ( e.g. bus drivers) have good enough English to communicate well with service users. A core part of citizenship is being able to access the full range of public services needed. Greater equalities/diversity awareness skills will be needed to place public service reform in the context of full citizenship.
7.7 In addition, public services must become more adaptive to changes in lifestyle and working patterns. While group participants did not make explicit references to 'innovation', they identified practical ways to extend and adapt existing services to better meet their needs - including longer opening hours in primary care centres, doorstep collection of household waste and goods for recycling to be available to all, and extending the Community Wardens initiative further. They emphasised the service gaps they believed should be addressed - more visible local policing being the most common example - as well as proposing new types of services to respond to issues of growing concern, notably support for parenting as well as healthy living (better diet and, by implication, responsible drinking).
Reforms need to connect more clearly with public concerns about reducing waste and improving efficiency
7.8 Public views on reducing waste and improving efficiency appear to be expressed less clearly than on other Scottish Executive fundamentals of reform. Nonetheless, evidence in this study shows members of the public are keen to discuss how to improve efficiency because they believe this will lead to better services, not only to moderate Council Tax levels. Survey findings indicate many participants think their council delivers high quality services while at the same time doubting it achieves the best it can with the money available. Developing a better understanding of citizen and local taxpayer interests in improved efficiency will be essential if the Efficient Government Initiative is to deliver sustained improvements to frontline services.
How services are funded and delivered may be more important than who delivers them
7.9 There is clear policy divergence across Britain in how to reform public services. In Scotland, few explicit references are made to 'contestability.' Instead, it appears that the fundamentals are to be pursued mainly through reform of existing institutions rather than a significant expansion of alternative providers.
7.10 Discussion on who should deliver public services was limited in the public groups. Different views were expressed, with the balance of opinion being unconcerned or undecided about other providers. Participants were relatively more comfortable with the idea of the voluntary sector playing a greater role in public service provision than the private sector. Residents of the least advantaged neighbourhood were most comfortable of all, while participants form the most affluent area were least comfortable with this option. Residents from the most remote rural location were most comfortable with the private sector playing a greater role, although the underlying issues of high costs and lower demand facing any provider in such areas was not explored fully. Some support was expressed, as well, or private sector skills being used to support financial audit and monitoring of standards.
7.11 We believe there are no intrinsic reasons why public, voluntary and private sector providers cannot achieve significant progress on each of the five fundamentals set out by the Scottish Executive, even if they face different incentives and pressures. Whatever balance of provision is considered best, the public will expect to see improved scrutiny of standards by local authorities and poor performance addressed quickly.
Pursue two-way and 'long-run' accountability
7.12 Evidence from the study persuades us there is a demand for new ideas on how to improve local accountability and responsibility for decision-making. Participants expressed almost unanimous support for closer public involvement at all stages of the decision-making process, and believed this would lead to tangible improvements in public services.
7.13 This suggests a model of 'two-way accountability', where decision-makers and providers are willing to engage with the public in new ways, and where citizens are willing to engage with some of the hard choices emerging in their area. As well as working with established community and voluntary networks, there may be a case for paying people to participate and developing their expertise over time. In addition, greater use of deliberative polling may be appropriate. However, the suggested use of local referendums is unlikely to resolve issues with a clear regional dimension ( e.g. railway development or congestion charging), where residents of neighbouring authorities may express different interests ( e.g. the Greater Stockholm congestion charge referendum, September 2006).
7.14 Some participants raised the idea of being treated as 'shareholders', with a stake in the success of their area. Their idea of receiving a clearer account of the decisions made and planned by their public service leaders, in the form of an annual report/ AGM, has merit in principle. More important than this kind of output, however, is the associated change of mindset needed on the part of providers towards the public. We conclude that basic improvements in customer service standards in all public services would go some way to addressing this point.
7.15 Looking ahead, the idea of 'long-run' accountability should have greater prominence. There is little sense from providers of a consistent 'futures' perspective. This was raised by participants in relation to the financing of Public Private Partnerships. While these may offer the only way to fund large capital projects for public services, some participants expressed concern about a lack of transparency over how decisions are made and how the eventual costs are accounted for. By definition, those who make decisions may not be in positions of authority when repayments are finally completed. Moreover, participants questioned the assumption that the public will prefer, in all cases, new schools and hospitals. There may be support for intermediate reform options ( e.g. good enough provision provided locally) rather than more centralised solutions.
Local and virtual accessibility
7.16 Participants expressed strong support for all service users to have a choice over how to communicate with service providers. Some felt they would be very comfortable with using on-line sources of information and guidance, but recognised others would not. Concerns were raised over the drift towards call centre communications for issues they felt are best dealt with locally and on a face-to-face basis. This covers private providers ( e.g. banking and utilities) as well as public services ( e.g. the desire for local police stations with full staffing). Public service reform should consider how to extend choices for service users with different communications skills and preferences.
Expertise and independence
7.17 A higher value should be placed on the goals of independence and improved expertise. Greater public confidence is needed around information on service standards, trends and comparisons between neighbourhoods and authorities. Some support was expressed for the idea of more 'professional' councillors and leadership expertise. In two areas, this led to participants questioning the continued role of party politics in local government. Whatever political complexion emerges in 2007, we believe it is essential that public service leaders consider how to promote the public interest in their area, and demonstrate that standards of monitoring/scrutiny are improving.
Move further towards joining-up and 'single gateway' approaches
7.18 The goal of joining-up public services to provide easier access and better outcomes is not new. Yet, with some notable exceptions, progress in Scotland appears to have been limited. We believe there is strong support both among the public and stakeholders to move further in this direction. As well as joint strategic work through Community Planning Partnerships, joining-up could extend to joint budgeting around shared aims, joint consultations on local objectives, shared or multi-agency staff and shared back-room functions. Moreover, this principle should apply to closer cross-sectoral working, e.g. to ensure local transport provision by franchised operators is factored into public service reform.
7.19 Finally, public participants did not expect all services to be available under one roof, and indeed placed a value on a mix of statutory and independent providers being available. However, they did express support for the first point of contact being able to signpost users towards the most appropriate sources of information and advice. Such 'single gateway' models have been used to drive reform of the former Benefits Agency and Employment Centre. We believe they have considerable merit as a way to make the joining-up agenda work for service users.