There are two things we need to do to dig our way out of recession, one is spend less but the other is make more. It often occurs to me that whilst most of my time is taken up deliberating over the first part of that equation very little is spent on the latter. Yet social enterprises are manufacturing, against the odds, and some like Divine chocolate are breaking into International markets where the big gains for the UK economy need to be made. This is important stuff and although a demonstration against unfair International trade agreements or the effects of the rapacious money markets on those who trade Internationally is unlikely to need policing, these issues should be of consuming interest to all of us.
What does resonate is the effect of spending cuts on public services. On Tuesday I was speaking at a Guardian newspaper event for the public sector and following Lord Wei for what must be the third time in recent weeks. We exchanged a laugh about that and although Nat had to go as soon as he had done his bit on Big Society, he has since contacted me to set up a meeting for a more in-depth conversation. I will be able to report on SEL member's views and experience around the Big Society, if any of you have specific observations or issues you want me to raise please let me know. It was a good debate with some great contributions from such respected bodies as the National College and recorded for Radio 4 to be broadcast on January 8th. I hope my views are represented in the round. Whilst I think the need for a new narrative on Big Society and its role in the public sector is pressing, talk of volunteering in that context is particularly unhelpful, the central message of empowering staff and consumers to work together to redesign services and deliver them as independent providers is timely and one we can build on.
On Thursday I participated in one of the most interesting meetings I've ever been to. Our hosts were NESTA and the subject was the future of public services and routes that will maximise social value. Contributions from the Innovation Unit, the Office for Public Management, Local Partnerships the fabulous Paul Corrigan dubbed "the quiet revolutionary" by the Guardian, Ben Lucas Director of 2020 Public Services Trust and NESTA led to some electric brainstorming and some really nifty ideas or "whizzy" as Paul had it. More, much more on that later.
Showing posts with label Local Partnerships. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Local Partnerships. Show all posts
Saturday, 11 December 2010
Tuesday, 23 November 2010
Public service reform: Silk purse or sow's ear?
At last week’s launch of the Mutuals Information Service, a sign poster for staff in the public sector interested in setting up staff-owned mutuals, or co-ops, Secretary of State for the Cabinet Office, Francis Maude said some interesting and alarming things.
I wasn’t there, but at the launch of this great service, put together in partnership between the Cabinet Office, Local Partnerships, Employee Ownership Association and Co-operatives UK, some participants came away with a growing sense of disquiet. Listening to the SEL Board, made up of 17 of some of the country’s leading social entrepreneurs, as they recalled the speech and debated its contents, I was struck by how seminal his words were. Out of my board’s animated discussion 3 key concerns have emerged, these deal breakers are pensions, OJEU requirements (Official Journal of the European Union) and contract length.
I understand the general theme of the address was to call for more independent providers in the delivery of public services that embrace the values of the mutual and social enterprise movement, so anyone listening would have been forgiven for thinking our fortunes would go up in the world and we have the support of Government in creating a growing social enterprise sector across public services. However in the content eyebrows were raised as obstacles were thrown into the paths of those that we hope choose to follow the footsteps of GLL and recent No 10 Big Society award winner, Central Surrey Health.
In the matter of pensions the Secretary of State said that this was an ongoing issue so he felt that little could be resolved around it just yet. Pensions and the legalities and financial implications of their transference are a mine field. Public sector pensions vary from local to central government, and the models used by the services that have already spun out of the public sector vary in terms as well. The one thing all successful spin outs share is their ability to continue to offer a state pension to all existing employees, and in some instances even new recruits. Without this reassurance staff will quite rightly question the extent of their vulnerability in any proposed new management model. We need clarity on this and something more attractive to offer staff putting their future on the line and we need it fast.
Secondly the Secretary of State talked about OJEU extension for a limited time mentioning the three year term in vogue for health contracts at the moment. There are 2 issues here, firstly the OJEU exemption. For those of you not immersed in procurement, OJEU is the Official Journal of the European Union where all contracts that are deemed eligible for Europe-wide procurement are advertised. This means that after the initial contract length any and all comers, Europe-wide, will be pitched against you. Not a prospect most public sector workers developing their business model and experimenting with the idea of entrepreneurialism will relish. You cannot sidestep OJEU but you can extend the initial contract length to give newbie’s time to get their act together. Otherwise its social enterprise for three years and the private sector thereafter.
Which brings me to the final killer issue, that of short contracts. As Mark Sesnan, Managing Director of one of the UK’s largest social enterprises and SEL co Chair said “The private sector wouldn’t cross the road for a 3 year contract”. In order to capitalise your business and give the new entity time to innovate, consolidate, and grow, Mark and other leaders like him are calling for minimum contracts of 5 to 7 years. These are the lengths of contract that should be encouraged. Not such a big ask if you consider that 15 to 25 year contracts are still common for the private sector delivering public services. Who can forget the school meals debacle when social entrepreneur Jamie Oliver exposed unhealthy school meal providers only to find out that with their 25 year contracts, nothing could be done about them for a very, very long time.
We were encouraged to hear the Minister talking of the “Right to provide,” as he did at the recent Guardian Social Enterprise Conference. This seems to resemble the right to request which was exclusive to health, and extend the offer throughout the rest of Government.
The broadening of the principle that encourages staff who want to set up as standalone providers under the mutual and social enterprise principles, and support for initiatives like the Mutuals Information Service and SEL’s Transitions document that gives prospective entrepreneurs advice and guidance, is all very welcome. But you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, and you can’t expect public sector workers to invest their personal capital into new service models without even a cash-strapped Government meeting them half way.
I wasn’t there, but at the launch of this great service, put together in partnership between the Cabinet Office, Local Partnerships, Employee Ownership Association and Co-operatives UK, some participants came away with a growing sense of disquiet. Listening to the SEL Board, made up of 17 of some of the country’s leading social entrepreneurs, as they recalled the speech and debated its contents, I was struck by how seminal his words were. Out of my board’s animated discussion 3 key concerns have emerged, these deal breakers are pensions, OJEU requirements (Official Journal of the European Union) and contract length.
I understand the general theme of the address was to call for more independent providers in the delivery of public services that embrace the values of the mutual and social enterprise movement, so anyone listening would have been forgiven for thinking our fortunes would go up in the world and we have the support of Government in creating a growing social enterprise sector across public services. However in the content eyebrows were raised as obstacles were thrown into the paths of those that we hope choose to follow the footsteps of GLL and recent No 10 Big Society award winner, Central Surrey Health.
In the matter of pensions the Secretary of State said that this was an ongoing issue so he felt that little could be resolved around it just yet. Pensions and the legalities and financial implications of their transference are a mine field. Public sector pensions vary from local to central government, and the models used by the services that have already spun out of the public sector vary in terms as well. The one thing all successful spin outs share is their ability to continue to offer a state pension to all existing employees, and in some instances even new recruits. Without this reassurance staff will quite rightly question the extent of their vulnerability in any proposed new management model. We need clarity on this and something more attractive to offer staff putting their future on the line and we need it fast.
Secondly the Secretary of State talked about OJEU extension for a limited time mentioning the three year term in vogue for health contracts at the moment. There are 2 issues here, firstly the OJEU exemption. For those of you not immersed in procurement, OJEU is the Official Journal of the European Union where all contracts that are deemed eligible for Europe-wide procurement are advertised. This means that after the initial contract length any and all comers, Europe-wide, will be pitched against you. Not a prospect most public sector workers developing their business model and experimenting with the idea of entrepreneurialism will relish. You cannot sidestep OJEU but you can extend the initial contract length to give newbie’s time to get their act together. Otherwise its social enterprise for three years and the private sector thereafter.
Which brings me to the final killer issue, that of short contracts. As Mark Sesnan, Managing Director of one of the UK’s largest social enterprises and SEL co Chair said “The private sector wouldn’t cross the road for a 3 year contract”. In order to capitalise your business and give the new entity time to innovate, consolidate, and grow, Mark and other leaders like him are calling for minimum contracts of 5 to 7 years. These are the lengths of contract that should be encouraged. Not such a big ask if you consider that 15 to 25 year contracts are still common for the private sector delivering public services. Who can forget the school meals debacle when social entrepreneur Jamie Oliver exposed unhealthy school meal providers only to find out that with their 25 year contracts, nothing could be done about them for a very, very long time.
We were encouraged to hear the Minister talking of the “Right to provide,” as he did at the recent Guardian Social Enterprise Conference. This seems to resemble the right to request which was exclusive to health, and extend the offer throughout the rest of Government.
The broadening of the principle that encourages staff who want to set up as standalone providers under the mutual and social enterprise principles, and support for initiatives like the Mutuals Information Service and SEL’s Transitions document that gives prospective entrepreneurs advice and guidance, is all very welcome. But you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, and you can’t expect public sector workers to invest their personal capital into new service models without even a cash-strapped Government meeting them half way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)