17 September 2004
As councils prepare for ministerial pronouncements on the implementation of the Gershon agenda, Unison, Britain's biggest union, has expressed fears that the target of £6.5bn of savings by 2008 could decimate services and impact heavily on local economies.
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is yet to publish full details of the efficiency package, which will outline exactly how the £6.5bn figure should be met in local government. The department said a date had still not been set.
But Unison general secretary Dave Prentis told a fringe meeting he feared Whitehall's cost-cutting was simply a 'privatisation agenda masquerading as a drive to free up resources for frontline services'.
Heather Wakefield, Unison's national local government co-ordinator, later told Public Finance that the extent of the savings targeted left the union in little doubt that it would impact on the delivery of local services.
Wakefield said councils were already stretched by the demand for 2% efficiency savings annually under Best Value and would struggle to meet the additional Treasury requirement of more than 2% per year.
Chris Keates, acting general secretary of the National Union of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers, said she was concerned that schools' advisory services delivered by local education authorities would suffer.
'Local support structures for schools are crucial and we fear that schools could enter into a legal minefield if, for example, local LEA specialists were axed.'
But it is the threat of a new wave of privatisations across councils that is the biggest cause of concern. Wakefield fears councils will be forced to contract services 'in bulk' to companies working with other authorities, creating regional, and possibly national or international, delivery structures.
'The "off-shoring" of some council support services to India as is happening at Westminster council is a real threat. If the major contractors know they can secure services supported by cheap labour overseas, they will.'
That, Unison argues, could decimate local economies because council activity supports a network of ancillary industries across Britain.
'The impact on local economies could be significant because many councils have policies of procuring goods and services locally and these savings would threaten that,' Wakefield said.
Retirement age will not rise to 70, vows Johnson New Work and Pensions Secretary Alan Johnson has said the government will not raise the state age of retirement to 70 the first time a minister has made a firm commitment on the issue since it was floated.
Johnson's comments came during his first public address since taking over from Andrew Smith, whose resignation sparked the recent Cabinet reshuffle.
Speaking to the conference on September 14, he said: 'This government will not raise the state pension age. This government will not force people to work to 70 years of age.'
That was seen as a blow to the CBI business lobby, which had pushed for the radical change to offset escalating retirement funding problems and shore up occupational pension funds.
TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said it was a 'clear rejection' of the employers' proposal, which amounted to a 'work 'till you drop' plan that would have seen thousands of pensioners die before they reached retirement.
Johnson also announced that a clause would be added to the Pensions Bill next spring, enabling the government 'to ensure that 50% of pension scheme trustees are member nominated'.
The new guidance is likely to apply to public sector schemes with trustees, but will not compel funds to meet the 50% target.
A spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions told Public Finance: 'There are so many changes to pension provision that it was felt compulsion would be over-intrusive. But powers will be built into the Bill enabling the government to compel schemes to adopt this approach if necessary.'
Nurses want targets to reflect care for patients
Beverly Malone, general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, has called for the introduction of 'patient-sensitive indicators' to replace NHS targets.
She later told Public Finance she feared the current focus on efficiency across the public services could lead to a string of separate targets drawing attention to back-office functions to the detriment of frontline services.
Speaking at a fringe meeting, hosted by the Social Market Foundation think-tank on September 13, Malone said the use of some targets in the NHS, such as those for waiting lists and cancer care, had helped improve standards.
But she claimed PSIs would reflect core patient concerns better and would keep nursing and medical staff focused on measurements leading to consistently excellent care.
PSIs could reflect measurements of patient mortality rates, accidents and the incidence of infections, Malone said. Others could measure patients' 'functional independence'.
These changes, she believes, would end the situation whereby NHS staff spend vital time and resources working out how to 'get around' targets.
PFsep2004
