Online brainstorm: Low impact/High Likelihood issues

From Future of Local Services to the Public

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 / high likelihood issue for the delivery of local services to the public over the next 10-15 years?

A major economic, terrorist or environmental disruption prompts a rethink of local contingency planning

• Our area is on the coast at risk of flooding etc so the events are more likely to occur. But we are, with partners already rethinking our approaches to contingency planning so I hope the public service and the local community will be better prepared.
• A new generation of "facilitative" leaders re-energises local services and places
• Some of them are around now and it is likely that there will be more of them. It is also likely that there will be more decisive, single leaders. Each is right at the right time for a locality.
• Taking leaders to be both managers and elected members, unless we: re-energise the democratic process and stop the process by which an unfavourable inspection rating means the Chief Exec is to blame (like a football manager), there will be too much emphasis on bean counting type of performance and less on working innovatively with a range of partners, including our citizens, to make a real difference to their lives.

• Low impact because we already have such leaders; high likelihood, as success breeds success.

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

• Cannot see this agenda being sustainable. Central Government speaks the good talk but basically devolves little and the same applies to local government. See very little general public interest in the agenda.
• Apathy is highly likely because I believe that all people really want at the end of the day is `for their bins to be emptied' properly at a low cost. The drive for efficiencies and better service standards will probably mean that basic services will be delivered fairly well, so I can't see any counter force to shock people out of their traditional disinterest in getting involved. Impact low because that's how it has always been. Only a small minority of people want to be actively involved in local decision-making and public service issue, according to a major report published by Ipsos MORI.
• I'm not sure that 'apathy' is the right word. Generally people have no need to contact their local council if services are being provided to a good standard. Forcing people to participate is a backward step and I believe most will 'switch off'.
• Because the delivery of services is already carried out within the context of high apathy, so a little more won't make much difference.
• It is not far removed from where we are now and we will continue to develop strategies that enable to system to work around this.
• Double devolution is a flawed policy and bears no resemblance to what it is like in a rural two tier area. Its demise will not even cause a second thought. The jargon means people do not know what it means anyway!
• People generally just want their services to be delivered well, and not much else to do with it. There is not the appetite for involvement at a local level generally-people have better things to do with their lives than getting embroiled in local politics and local issues, unless these are clear and present problems, which need clear action to sort out. In such cases, they really just want public service providers to get in there and do the job they pay them to do.
• I believe that the Government's stated desire to devolve power both to and beyond Town Halls is unlikely to happen in practice. The belief that there are vast reservoirs of citizen engagement waiting to be tapped is in my view naive and unrealistic. I do not expect their proposals, if enacted, to have much impact but neither do I see that as a big problem.
• Our work to date suggests little widespread appetite for greater devolution at anything more than a theoretical level. (And with the exception of some specific’ pockets' of interest). I've scored it low impact because services will continue to be delivered and provided.
• There is huge apathy now largely due to cynicism with National Government. Despite what CLG hope that is not going to change and all efforts to engage communities will have only limited success. But the likelihood of apathy will not have much impact on councils who are now well skilled in providing services that are responsive to specific customer wishes arising from bespoke consultation of service feedback.
• Because people don't want and managed market capitalism doesn't give them the time to be empowered; they want good services provided by the people they have elected and empowered to deliver them.
• Because we are trying to engage with people on a model which is no longer relevant to their lifestyles or wishes.
• Because this area is relatively engaged and is likely to remain so.

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

• Increased demand for social driven by government policy but with restraints on funding a reduced ability to deliver.
• This is an important trend nationally as current govt struggles with how to incentivise behaviours that move beyond simple self interest. However, I don't think it is likely this will impact on local service delivery.
• My view is that people don't necessarily have significant discretion in terms of public service commissioning and choice, meaning that unless the current policy drivers to create greater public choice and ownership of public sector spending and delivery becomes real, then the impact of such discretion is unlikely to materialise. We also need to consider the fact that those sections of the population more likely to engage with participatory budgeting, etc. are most likely to be those with the time and inclination to do so, meaning that decisions could ultimately be skewed because of apathy for such issues by the majority of the population.

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

• Yes - increasing personalisation agenda and devolving power down to local level
• Topical and popular with government but of little practical benefit.
• Aspects of that already in place in fully parished area. Personal budgeting unlikely to change spending levels on housing and care. Impact on cultural spend relatively low impact in context of overall public service
• There is an appetite for it in some areas only. Generally the well organised, articulate middle classes are most likely to take advantage of the opportunity. Many deprived areas are urban, unparished, and not good at sustaining community working without external support - support that Councils are financially struggling to provide.

Digital Britain creates dividends and divides for local residents

• I find it hard to imagine what this would look like or its impact. It seems more likely to be an issue in the much longer term as today’s teens/twenties grow into adults likely to have much contact with local councils.
• This is last years issue - we have developed a range of channels for services including mediated access to overcome this. However, hard to reach communities will remain so but not because of a digital divide
• Because of the lack of broadband and poor connectivity, people will not bother to participate in the digital revolution, but will continue to soldier on. It will then be difficult to move forward with service delivery.
• Overstated as a potential for service delivery
• In my area, we already have one of the highest rates of broadband penetration in the country. However, this does not translate into electronic access of either services or information to any great extent. I accept that there may be a divide between the e-enabled and others but not that it will have the affect of denying service provision to the have-nots.
• Historic low take up in the area and little interest in the digital agenda amongst large sections of our community
• Because I believe that society will adjust relatively quickly and embrace the changes. Partly this will happen because of lifestyle trends but also because the cost of technology drops in real terms very quickly once innovation embeds.
• While organisations will want to move to lower cost models of service delivery, customer expectations of local service delivery will remain the same without national leadership and reform. Access to digital services will be limited for those on lower incomes and with lower skill levels, typically in areas of higher deprivation

Funding Squeeze: with funds from central government dwindling, local areas pass more of the costs on to local residents

• Tax capping and floor payments will make this an absolute necessity. I detect no appetite from Government for either a massive inflow of funds into local government, nor to lift the controls on Council tax, nor for councils to make wholesale cuts to services. Increasing charging regimes then pretty much becomes the default option
• There will be a funding squeeze (there already is with 1% real increase this CSR but 4% LG inflation) but in the context of long term growth of about 2% p.a. this should not create real problems - it's just our perception and ability to deal with them as a society.
• We have had a period of expansion which has led to the expectation both inside and outside the authority that things will be done and funded and things will constantly improve. As we move forward it becomes more likely that services will have to be reduced or cut back. We have few people with experience of this and the public will find this unacceptable.

Green energy pressures

• Fuel pressures are here now. I think that we will respond to and manage the challenges.
• Global warming is inevitable. he only reason I scored it as low impact s that this borough is a beacon Council for climate change and is already focussing much of our efforts on it, so it won’t be new to us.
• Many councils have already taken the lead in responding to green energy pressures. It is likely we will need to do more.

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

• I believe that we are getting better at dealing with the higher end of the ethnic, social and economic disparities and such things as race riots are less likely. Having said that the lower impact issues of a less severe nature (local squabbles etc) are still likely to occur.
• My district is already one of contrasts being mainly affluent but with relatively small pockets of deprivation. Current economic conditions suggest a worsening employment situation and widening of the gap between the haves and the have-nots. The impact will be lower here than in many parts of the country as we start from a relatively good position but I expect impacts to be felt to some extent in all parts of the country. The growing elderly population will be an increasing draw on local authority resources.
• This is occurring but being managed

Housing shortfalls cause severe pressures on local authorities and services

• High likelihood because of demographic/population trends and spatial planning policies
• We are already not supplying enough houses. Population will outstrip supply and we will be faced with major housing need issues in 10 years

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

• Just don't believe any government that is likely to be in power over the period is serious about local area taxes against massive public resistance nobody wants to alter funding
• There will be increasing political pressure to replace council tax and central government will also be seeking to reduce their contribution to local authority finance. Change will only have a high impact on services if the overall funding to local authorities alters significantly

Mayors on the march: mayors elected to lead local government

• Government policy. Complacency of local people. Inability of a local mayor to make a real difference in a District like ours with a wide range of socio-economic issues that need to be addressed.
• In a dispersed rural area, (with existing Mayors and Chairmen from the Parish Councils) the impact will be low, although I think the likelihood of more mayors in major towns is high.
• Pressures for this model of visible leadership likely to continue even with change of govt. On its own, without other fundamental change in local govt's power or constitutional position mayors won't make that much difference
• With Lab and Cons both keen on elected mayors there is a good chance of this scenario happening. As we already have an elected mayor the impact here will be low.

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

• Its high likelihood because it’s already happening - increasingly the stories that hit my press office have originated from talk on "blogs" rather than the local newspapers. Low impact because, perhaps optimistically, I think we will adjust our own approach to communications to absorb it -with some residual risks of exclusion however.
• Public increasingly demanding services electronically - expectations are high but technology will advance to ensure such demand is met
• Technological advances have had a dramatic effect on LA business in recent years. This is likely to continue but I believe that Local Govt will lack the resource, the specialist skills and the appetite to do much about the next generation of communication.

Partnership working becomes increasingly complex but real and successful

• Can only speak for my area; although we have a network of successful local partnerships in the area the geography and demography of the area does not allow them to build a critical mass which builds sufficient financial and social influence on the area in their own right - therefore, their impact in the context of the question is limited. However, there is a very positive feel good factor which exists in terms of communities having constructive dialogue and feeling listened to in their dealings with the Council. We expect this to grow. Each area is different and there is a need to celebrate the diversity in arrangements up and down the country.
• Hopefully to reduce crime and social isolation in this area
• Real strength in Bolton but to tackle the wicked issues, we need to work differently with our partners - makes this more challenging and complex
• We are getting much more adept at partnership working, overcoming the typical "learning to crawl" problems. In an age of collaborative advantage we will have to be able to manage the complexity better to access real advantage - both in LAA/CAA performance, and financial terms - to each of the participants.

The costs of mobility mount up: fuel costs, congestion, poor infrastructure and environmental impact bring transport systems to breaking point

• I think we will pay the penalty for decades of underinvestment in infrastructure - it will be expensive and therefore difficult to catch up.
• Insufficient investment in the future to deal with mistakes of past
• People will be forced to use public transport services and those services will be improved as a result.

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

• Whilst managerial structures in the past have not always built the best relationships, the move in Wales towards the creation of LSB's means that these traditional barriers are being challenged from the very top. If leaders agree to move towards collaboration then this culture of mangaerialsm is challenged sufficiently to deliver a new way of working, hence have a low impact.

The dependency squeeze means an ever-greater focus on service provision for the elderly, health and social care

• Signs of this today
• Though demographic change is underway and irreversible, I believe there may well be a move back towards family care for the elderly, alongside changes in central government policies for support for the elderly.

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

• Because nature will normalise the ageing ratio over time

Workforce and recruitment problems in local government and other partners undermine the quality and effectiveness of services

• High likelihood, in that I do not see the quality of recruits coming through; low impact may be a bit misleading, but I expect that we will collectively find other solutions - secondments, outsourcing etc
• Not sure I do - quirk of the process! It will always be thereabouts as an issue but one we can foresee and plan for.
• We have a good local partnership plan!