04 August 2006
The chief executive of the Local Government Association tells Joseph McHugh about the push for greater autonomy and diversity in the provision of council services
Paul Coen is a man who likes to get things done. The new chief executive of the Local Government Association is only a few weeks into his new role, but already he is making his mark on the organisation.
The 52-year-old's dynamism and evident enthusiasm for the role – 'the advert said it was the best job in local government' – is reinvigorating the body at a crucial time for the sector.
As Ruth Kelly finalises the local government white paper and Sir Michael Lyons nears completion of his two-year inquiry, there is a sense that local government is again a force to be reckoned with.
Coen clearly relishes the chance to spearhead the LGA's push to secure a new relationship between central and local government.
'The LGA has a very special opportunity to influence the outcome of this debate, and that's what attracted me,' he explains. 'Many people would be grateful for the chance and I've got it.'
Coen has spent years getting his hands dirty working for a number of local authorities, so he understands only too well the concerns of those who work on the front line.
After a politics degree at the University of Manchester, he joined the National Coal Board as a graduate trainee. But he moved from what had become British Coal to local government and by 1990 was working for Hertfordshire County Council, where he rose to become deputy chief executive.
In 1995 he bagged the top job at Surrey County Council; he was its chief executive until 2004, when he moved to Essex County Council.
Coen told Public Finance about his vision for the future of local government, the changing relationship between Whitehall and town hall, and what he wants from the white paper.
What is the current key priority for local authorities?
We need to deepen and strengthen the relationships that councils have with other partners in their localities. All of the improvements we want to see in key public service areas are dependent on the participation of a number of different services and organisations.
What forms will closer working take?
Take social care as an example. It is already in many, many councils substantially contracted to either private or independent sector providers, and that's the case across a whole range of services. We have no problem at all with the concept of contestability.
The job of the council is to ensure the outcomes for the citizen or the customer, not necessarily always to provide the service.
That will be controversial among some LGA members
Liverpool is a fundamentally different place from Barnsley, which is a fundamentally different place from Weymouth. That difference extends into the private and voluntary sector in those places.
So, whereas in some parts of the country it may make obvious sense – because there is a vibrant private and voluntary sector marketplace – to contract substantially with them, frankly in other parts of the country the only way the services can be provided is through the direct employment of staff by the council. We need to avoid adopting policy stances that are not grounded in practical reality.
Should councils have scrutiny powers over other service providers?
I don't think a council should control every public service in its area, but it does have a role to play in every public service. In order for the health service, or the police service, or the learning and skills council to achieve their outcomes, they need to be working with councils and other partners locally, so it's in their interests to have this arrangement.
We also know that one of the things that we need in our service model, to complement the top-down political and ministerial drive, is sharper public accountability. Because the council has democratic legitimacy, it is the only body locally that can bring that to the service improvement agenda.
The LGA argues that centralist forms of government have had their day. Has that message got through across Whitehall?
This is a long process and I have no doubt there is still a whole range of opinions in government. However, the centre of gravity, the consensus, is settling around an approach that is local in focus.
I genuinely believe that in the next period we're going to see a very significant shift towards a more locally determined, locally focused, locally accountable system of public services and with that an enhanced but very different role for local councils.
That will require finance reform. Will the Lyons inquiry lead to substantive change?
The reform of local government finance has always been hugely complex and political. I have every confidence that Sir Michael Lyons will produce serious and valuable recommendations. We hope the government will engage with those and implement change at the time of the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review. In the CSR there are huge funding questions that impact on our services, and so on our funding. You can't sensibly address those funding issues without addressing the income-generating and tax-raising elements of that.
We have to be realistic that that might not happen, but what will not change is our conviction that we need radical reform in local government finance.
Should the white paper be delayed until after Lyons?
We are where we are. It would be nice if all of life could always follow a logical and rational sequence. But that's not how it is. I think, taking together Lyons, the white paper and the 2007 CSR, we do have reasonably coherent opportunities.
We shouldn't be under any illusions – I think we have an optimistic future, but there isn't going to be a sudden new dawn; that's not how service improvement works. But steadily, I think we will correct the imbalance between the centre and the locality in funding, services, and political leadership.
What are the key measures you want to see in the white paper?
We want the government to agree 30 key national outcomes, which will then be reflected in every council's workplan, and as part of that we want to see a massive streamlining of the regulatory and inspection burden.
We'd also like the government to support us on our improvement work. We've published some comprehensive proposals on performance management post-Comprehensive Performance Assessment.
We've also set out a strong development agenda for councils, highlighting the importance of council leadership and the challenges it faces if it is to have credibility with the public and government.
We have a comprehensive set of proposals which we have summarised as constituting a new settlement for public services. We think the white paper needs to be bold and radical in the pursuit of better services for people.
PFaug2006
