29 September 2006
Union leaders are warning the government that it faces losing the next general election unless it radically rethinks its policy on public services and halts the march towards marketisation.
The warning came as delegates at the Labour Party conference in Manchester gave ministers a bloody nose over health service reform.
At the key public services debate on September 27, billed by the unions as a 'showdown' with the government, Labour's health policy paper was voted down by conference delegates. They, instead, backed a composite motion that sharply criticised the current health service reforms.
Trade union anger, which has been steadily building for months at the pace and direction of public sector reforms, boiled over as key figures from the public sector unions queued up during the debate to denounce the NHS reforms being pushed through by Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt.
Unison general secretary Dave Prentis, who proposed the motion criticising the government, spoke to Public Finance immediately after the vote. He said he expected the government to honour the vote and called on ministers to launch a full review of health policy.
Specifically, Prentis is calling for no further extension of payment by results; more time for trusts to achieve financial balance; and an end to the outsourcing of contracts to the private sector, including the imminent privatisation of NHS Logistics, which purchases and delivers supplies to the health service.
'We want to talk to the government about the real concerns of Labour members who see in their local areas closures and job cuts. We urgently need to find a common approach to the reform of the health service.
'People are mobilising to save their local health services and if the government doesn't listen, it will lose the next election,' Prentis warned.
Brendan Barber, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, was equally grave in his assessment of the consequences should ministers ignore the vote.
He warned there were 'real flashpoint issues' between NHS workers and the government that had to be dealt with, because morale was dangerously low.
He told PF: 'This is not a debate about whether there should be reform, but about how it's delivered. We want to see it done in a way that involves proper consultation with staff. It's damaging the morale of staff and it will lead to a political price being paid.'
Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt told PF that she acknowledged the 'real concerns' felt by staff at the pace and direction of the health service reforms.
Striking a conciliatory tone, she conceded that the workforce had not been consulted as fully as they might have been and pledged to correct that. 'We need to do more to engage staff in working through these difficult decisions,' she said.
But Hewitt also made it clear that union and workforce opposition would not derail the controversial reform programme. 'We have a manifesto which everyone agreed just 16 months ago,' she added.
Her comments echoed those of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who used his valedictory speech to the conference on September 26 to mount a staunch defence of his public service reform programme.
He argued that patients and parents wanted 'power in their own hands' and expected to be able to access public services at a time and in a manner convenient to them.
He said the reforms were based on progressive values and, if successfully enacted, would guarantee the Labour Party's role 'as the custodians of our public services' for another generation,
'The Google generation has moved beyond the idea of nine to five, closed on weekends and bank holidays. Today's technology is profoundly empowering,' he said.
'Of course, public services are different. Their values are different. But today people won't accept a service handed down from on high. They want to shape it to their needs and the realities of their lives. These same global forces that are changing business are at work in public services too.'
PFsep2006
