A missing ingredient in the white paper was the 'right to challenge' by those on the receiving end of public services
The open public services white paper contains many restated government policies and some new ones. There is much to welcome in the paper but also some sense of disappointment and not much sense of anything radically new.
Whilst there is a clear commitment to promoting the rights and opportunities of service users, the proposals could have been much more radical in tpromoting their use. Much of the content focuses on fostering alternative suppliers rather than on empowering users to challenge existing providers.
The government could propose to place a statutory duty on commissioners to engage service users and their representatives in all commissioning and procurement processes and decisions.
Similar rights could have been extended to staff and their representative bodies – many public bodies already do involve staff in procurement processes but not all of them do so.
The government is promoting 'the right to challenge to supply' to the providers of all sectors – though the detail is yet to be agreed and this in itself may prove very challenging. This could enhance commissioning decisions but runs the risk of raising and dashing provider expectations and over amplifying provider influence.
However, the government could also have proposed that service users could have the right to challenge the performance or indeed the continuation of the role of current service providers from whatever sector they may come. Such an approach could be extended to include a right to challenge commissioning and procurement decisions.
The commitment to more choice, personalisation, extending personal budgets, and community and neighbourhood control of budgets and the commissioning of services are to be welcomed. These proposals will require a greater diversity of supply and it is vital that the public sector is recognised as one of the suppliers.
Where there are public service markets these markets have to be regulated in a manner proportionate to the potential operational, financial and commercial risks to protect service users and the public sector itself. There is also a wider role for some form of regulation to secure wider policy goals – for example collaboration between services, equity of access or work force standards.
We need to avoid a race to find who can be the employer with the worst terms and conditions or deliver the cheapest and nastiest service– this is hardly an edifying outcome. These matters are not addressed in the white paper but could have been.
For personalised budgets to work effectively people must have adequate personal budget to buy services which are of high quality, reliable and sustainable. They need access to credible information to make real choices. Some will require advocacy support. To that end the government should support user co-operatives as much as supplier co-operatives – but such bodies are not mentioned in the white paper.
The white paper rightly promotes the need for greater transparency and accountability in public service commissioning, procurement and delivery. However, the opportunity has been missed to require all providers (from all sectors) to be totally transparent in their operational and financial performance; declare senior remuneration; with independent external audit. Means need to be found to ensure that commissioning and procurement are transparent and that those responsible for these processes are fully accountable.
Public sector staff are being encouraged to set up 'employee co-operatives' to run their services. Service users and not just staff and management must be involved in the decision-making - as they should in all commissioning and procurement. Why not extend this right to employees delivering services which are currently contracted to private sector and other providers as well.
The open public services programme could have been more radical to signal that the government is intent on a programme of reform and not simply one of outsourcing and cutting expenditure.
John Tizard is director of the Centre for Public Service Partnerships
