Online brainstorm: Low Impact/Low Likelihood issues

From Future of Local Services to the Public

Jump to: navigation, search

The following direct responses were given by Chief Execs in the online prioritisation exercise as to why they had rated certain issues as relatively high impact and low likelihood. 

Why do you believe that (ISSUE) is a potential low impact / low likelihood issue for the delivery of local services to the public over the next 10-15 years?


A new generation of "facilitative" leaders re-energises local services and places

  • Because of the way the county operates - community leaders are already there, and new people emerge all the time, we are not short of people.
  • I think most effective leaders in local government over the last couple of decades have been facilitative rather than command and control leaders - they just haven't been recognised as such. If there is to be a huge growth in facilitative leaders then we will need to see fundamental changes in the political electoral system and I see little evidence that that is likely to happen.
  • It is unlikely that a new generation of facilitative leaders will emerge in this area.
  • Leadership is poorly reported and analysed and facilitative is a meaningless word symptomatic of this. It's hardly a new concept, just a new label.
  • No evidence of this despite the backdrop of real apathy in the current democratic system. Individuals need a support system even to become moderately credible alternatives and truly facilitative, plus an interested audience. The "have's" already have. The "have more's" have no barriers. The "have less's" don't seem motivated enough to demand change.
  • People don't generally want to be facilitated. They want to be either lead or served.
  • These are very London policy based terms. They mean nothing here until / unless they are made tangible. The interest in existing leaders is very low so even if they emerge (a training / development / willingness to serve issue ) their impact will be low
  • Whatever the leadership the services provided will be led by demand. The way services are delivered may change but the services themselves will probably not be affected.
  • Who do they think these people are? There don't seem to be any round here at the moment!


Apathy attacks: the double devolution agenda stalls due to citizen apathy

  • Apathy is already rampant, so we are already dealing with the impact. An increase in apathy seems unlikely.
  • Double devolution not driven by citizen apathy but government policies - no real evidence of firm commitment at national level to local democracy that would impact highly in terms of citizen engagement.
  • I see no evidence of apathy in my district in respect of the issues that concern people or the demand for quality services.
  • I'm not convinced that government can deliver it essentially, despite the rhetoric
  • We have high levels of social capital in this area and so this is unlikely


Behavioural economics: a new understanding of social complexity and how people make choices changes the way we provide services

  • Because the time lag within which theories of human behaviour permeate practice is longer than 10 years.
  • Behaviour change, co-creation of services and outcome is important and making it happen would have high impact. Current vogue for social psychology/behavioural economics might pass and only make small contribution to what is a longer haul journey and needs to be closely integrated to other changes in structures, service design, value systems.
  • I don't see this as likely to happen and do not see local government leaders anyway making use of this kind of knowledge.
  • I don't think this part of the world is particularly socially complex
  • I think there are too many other pressures and solutions to problems being sought for this one to have the priority in the academic and government circles that would be needed for it to become a reality.
  • I think this is a new pseudo scientific/ideological fad
  • New understanding is unlikely to be widespread due to high levels of apathy. Even if this changes it is unlikely in itself to affect services
  • Not convinced that it sheds light on complex interactions or provides the basis for an effective new way of working - many of the actions look like marketing dressed up in new clothes.
  • Other issues such as finance will over power gains in behavioural economics
  • The past history of 'new towns' 'planned' environments is not an all singing all dancing success - I am not convinced by this approach
  • This is a fad. People make choices out of economic financial or personal self interest nudging or behavioural economics will only have a marginal impact and most councils will not waste much time on it.


Devolution and local empowerment through personal and community budgeting becomes a reality

  • Cannot see this being a core means of decision making. Useful on the fringes but not mainstream
  • Don't believe empowerment will ever really happen
  • Insufficient national and local leadership on this matter. Related to other issues like revenue raising and distribution, and direct accountability. Cannot see where the momentum for such significant change will come, even with a potential change of government.
  • Local communities are not really interested.
  • The description of devolution was not recognisable to me in terms of the actual current of current Govt proposals. This is an area where transformational change in Govt policy towards local Govt is needed for real impacts to occur.
  • The low impact aspect is because so much of local authority spending continues no matter who is in control including greater resident involvement - the bins still need to be emptied and the roads swept etc. The low likelihood aspect reflects the unwillingness of Governments over the last century, despite their rhetoric, to allow any real power to the people.


Digital Britain creates dividends and divides for local residents

  • Always overestimate potential have/have nots e.g. mobile phones, You Tube, digital TVs. Levels of digital take up high already


Green energy pressures

  • This is a relative judgement - in the scale of other issues I believe it is less relevant.


Growing ethnic, social and economic disparities increase tensions in local areas

  • In South Somerset, although it is a concern that cohesion issues should continue to be addressed, there is not much evidence that there is a growing tension as numbers of migrant workers increase. On the whole data shows that it is an area where people of different backgrounds get on well together. There are health inequalities across the district - these are identified and being monitored. Once again the severity is less than in other parts of the region, which tends to be better than the national data
  • The rural south west is not high on the list of destinations for immigrants from other cultures.
  • There are no such tensions in the Borough at present and no reason to believe they will emerge as long as the Council and its partners continue to maintain and improve the area
  • This area has strong and cohesive communities which have responded well to increasing diversity, albeit in relatively low absolute numbers. I am more than generally optimistic that this trend will continue and that for this area, social cohesion is, and will remain strong


Housing shortfalls cause severe pressures on local authorities and services

  • Growth agenda incorporates this and risk is being minimised
  • My answer reflects the position within my own local area in the north east where homelessness is not an issue of significance and is unlikely to be without major change to population or to the housing market. - It would be very different in an urban area in the south east.


Local Area Taxes: finance of local government revolutionised with the end of council tax

  • A national government issue and no one has found a solution yet or been brave enough to implement.
  • Because I don’t believe that there is or will be the political appetite in any of the two major parties at a national level for wholesale change to the local government finance system.
  • Because I don't see either of the major political parties introducing this in the next 10 to 15 years and if they did the total funding for local government is unlikely to change significantly.
  • Conundrum of business rates in areas that are currently net gainers. Simply too difficult to implement and will still be large reliance on central government funding.
  • Does not seem likely to happen in short term and expect this Council to be low funded under any scheme
  • I think this is so far removed from where we are, and would require a whole new mindset amongst staff, politicians and the general public, that it would take a long time to introduce. Concerns at post code lotteries, etc need to be overcome before this would be a vote winner.
  • I'm not convinced it will happen - too politically sensitive, and in any case any impact will largely be blamed on Govt rather than council
  • No-one believes local taxes will come about- there are no votes to be gained, and it is seen as a political own goal. Consequently there are no real thoughts it will happen.
  • The UK does not have a series of isolated local economies in which a system of local taxation could have much impact - even if it happened - it would even out across areas as the more mobile moved to lower tax areas (schools a good example of this). So - while impact may be some initial disruption - it will be at the margins - at for a short period of time (another case study on this is the introduction of the Euro - initial problems - then s smoothing effect).
  • Unclear to me what impact would be so hard to score, hence low. I don’t see it happening either.


Mayors on the march: mayors elected to lead local government

  • Again, little appetite in this area
  • Although an elected mayor will bring a different focus and relationship in terms of the democratic process and speed up decisions etc, the decisions about service delivery and how to address the key issues will be the same.
  • Because it is an irrelevancy
  • Difficult to see desire for a mayor in a metropolitan, closely balanced council.
  • I do not believe they are relevant to vast unconnected communities in Councils like Northumberland or indeed that they can do much to engender cohesion- but then again I did not believe there was a demand for such communities to be linked together in a single Council.
  • I don't think it will happen in this area and if it did then there is little room for manoeuvre.
  • I have detected little appetite for this model locally.
  • I understand that mayors are supported by both major political parties but are more attractive to city/ urban area communities. West Dorset is a large rural area with a very sparse population and 130+ villages who, I believe, wouldn't favour a single executive mayor.
  • In our area, there appears little interest in a mayoral system. Nationally, I cannot see much evidence that this has made much in the way of inroads.
  • In rural areas it would take a lot for the concept to catch on when leadership is about leading communities of communities. This is largely seen as an urban model and is not being taken onward with other reforms that are a necessary consequence of moving down the mayoral route.
  • In this area [rural/sparse/market towns] there are no large cities/urban areas and there is no enthusiasm for the mayoral model as proposed by Govt.
  • Low levels of interest in elected mayors in two tier shire area.
  • Mayors are a joke! The political ethos in this country is not designed to support mayors. The political system works through the anonymous "we" or "the committee". Until the political ethos changes, so that we have a republican system like France or the US, the mayoral system is a dream. Without a political ethos to support what they do and how they operate, mayors will remain relatively unwanted, ineffective, and impotent.
  • Not likely to happen unless changed is forced upon us.
  • Not sure how this applies to Wales?
  • Old idea - good leaders emerge regardless of structures.
  • Political apathy and lack of community trust in local politicians to bring about real and lasting change.
  • There are more important issues to face.
  • There is little enthusiasm for elected mayors among the public or councillors. Central Govt pressure will not bring about a change in these views.
  • There is no appetite for this approach in our area and I see no likelihood that that will change.
  • There is no demand for a local mayor here. I find it hard to see how this will change things dramatically in terms of services.
  • Unless there is a major push by Government this is not a local issue.
  • Unlikely to happen, particularly in rural areas such as Norfolk. Most likely in cities/urban areas.
  • Whilst the current government seems to want to extend this model there does not appear to be an ongoing enthusiasm for it amongst others.
  • Won't happen here.


Online social networks and Web 2.0 reinvigorate local democracy and transforms services

  • Demographically we have a high proportion of elderly residents at present who are likely to be less enthusiastic about these new methods of communication.
  • I am not really persuaded that these developments will be as pervasive as promoted - based on personal view rather than any evidence I'm afraid.
  • It is not an issue that causes any excitement or interest in this area. Has more interest and impact in cities and mets than districts.
  • Online social networks will increase over time but I do not foresee the use of these significantly impacting on service delivery. The use of web based services will continue to grow but the overall impact is low when compared to other budget and demographic issues.
  • People are likely to continue to want to access services face to face and over the telephone for some time to come.


Partnership working becomes increasingly complex but real and successful

  • It won't become a reality as long as public services are delivered by different agencies, with different legislative frameworks and different masters. The Government won't bite the bullet and insist on the ending of unitaries, nor will they give control of police or health to local government. So we will continue to duplicate and muddle as well-intentioned staff fail to work effectively together because of influences outside their control. For example, our CDRP can't work honestly n partnership when the Home Office sets priorities and targets for the police and then tells us partners to set local priorities and targets - provided they happen to be the same as those set by the Home Office!
  • Two tier working is not only complex but expensive and inefficient.


The culture of managerialism in central and local government inhibits creativity in shaping local services

  • Because I don't think the basic premise is correct. There is a greater emphasis on performance management but not at the expense of service delivery or more creative ways of delivering them.
  • Because it is not in itself the problem, the problem is how performance is managed not whether it is managed. It goes to the heart of style and the leadership debate.
  • Because the ties are being loosened and we should have developed approaches that value and reward creativity whilst recognising the legitimate role of the centre.
  • Central may have an adverse impact but local tends to redress the balance and get things done.
  • Creativity in shaping local services comes from across the whole organisation - not just from managers. CAA and LAA's and the focus on real outcomes for local people - together with the associated PRG funding - is fostering creativity in many areas. There is a joint will across all tiers of local government and public service providers to make a difference. Lack of resources has been a hindrance which has resulted in the need to retain a focus on statutory services rather than those which actually make a difference in local areas.
  • Experience locally is that managerialism has been not the norm and that Leaders have been focussed on using performance to promote creative approaches.
  • I don't believe this is a real barrier now. Good management will encourage creativity without anarchy/chaos.
  • I don't think that good performance management inhibits anything.
  • I think that local government is a lot more pragmatic and practical outside of inner London and the metropolitan areas. There are many more small Councils who just get on with life and don't get caught up with the managerial culture, we just don't have the time or the resources. I think that the "movers and shakers" such as LGA / IDEA etc don't properly engage with the smaller Councils , they only work with the big ones who tend to be big on management and talking and slow on engaging with their residents and getting things done. This is reflected in the local government press and creates the perception of this vast managerial culture. Christchurch had the 2nd highest customer satisfaction level in the country in the BV general survey 2006 - we got it because we delivered - we don't have time for all the claptrap!
  • It's not so much low impact as not taking advantage of the transformational change which might be possible with a more innovative approach. I'm sure we will move to become more innovative, but it will be a slow, gradual process.
  • Performance management is always opposed by low performing organisations. Most government is low performing. They are unable to implement performance management and lack the motivation so to do.
  • Strong performance management should not stifle creativity.


The Petabyte revolution: the power of instant data in an information rich would presents problems and opportunities for local services

  • Although petabyte revolution may well change the way we store and manage data its impact will be lesser on local services - data needs to be viewed against softer issues and more qualitative analysis.
  • Data speed is less important than knowledge.
  • I don’t think that it will impact in such a way as to change local services but information will be more accessible and that will have impact. Perhaps I don't understand it enough but we have had an information explosion already and I don't believe the impact has been anywhere near as high as expected. We are not good individually or collectively in processing such data. Tesco has been doing it for years but not central or local government and I don't see that changing quickly.
  • The economic recession we will experience will throw these development back a decade.


The value of the ageing population is successfully harnessed through the third sector

  • I am doubtful about the likely availability of many active senior citizens to deliver local services and I am unconvinced that the third sector has the organisational skills to deliver such a programme even if such senior citizens were available.
  • There will never be enough people interested in volunteering to make a big difference. If people are staying well longer they will probably want quality leisure time instead.
Retrieved from "http://communities.ipsos-mori.com/lgawiki/index.php/Online_brainstorm:_Low_Impact/Low_Likelihood_issues"
Personal tools