Workshop notes
From Future of Local Services to the Public
AB – climate change
KW – NCVO – funding…
CW – what’s happening in rural economy and agric impact – impact op local
PS– work-life balance…RURALITY – or housing – rurality is ignored in everything we do – we’re urban centric
JB – oil peak – running out of oil – massive consequences – urban rural relationship and the interdependence between the two…
Missing:
AB: Timescale – how many years?
KW – GLOBALISATION IN TERMS OF THE PROVISION OF SERVICES – health – and health tourism – as people become more or less satisfied – increasingly access other services, perhaps abroad
PS – concept of obsolescence – creates demand and expectation – i.e. you change your car but don’t need to – change for the sake of change…we are more mobile, wealthy etc – things become obsolete before they’re no longer functional…can’t recognise now when enough is enough – we’re into the cusp of having improved dramatically – need to differentiate the drivers for future improvement – in some areas we’re talking about fine grain – 80-20 rule
KW – like the Olympic cycling team – small difference
PS- need the recognise the issues that make a big difference but also the fine grain issues…market place
JB – e.g. changing governments every ten years…
PS – basics – lands end to john o’groats – need basics…can always describe what a decent home looks like – from the centre we need the idea rather than the detail – we can fill it in locally – we tailor it at the local level.
JB – the risk of this is that it’s a shopping list – we have to get a small core number of themes – then floor standards – shouldn’t specify ceiling standards but should specify floor standards – govt needs to grapple with loose tight problem…we need to be tight on a few things e.g. adult literacy and numeracy and then loose on everything else…theme about multi level governance is crucial…
KW – what we just haven’t got right – population as sulky teenagers – expectation have changed radically in the last 10 years…decisions about drugs and Nice ETC – wouldn’t have happened ten years ago…
PS – most surveys now are happiness surveys – i.e. how people feel on the day…are people happy with their local council – no but they? are happy that the streets are clean – disconnect – seem to be in the perceptions business and not the hard facts business…we’re moving into a different phase and the way people communicate becomes different…
JB – we’re adolescent in terms of individual expectations but Infantile in terms of individual responsibility and taking responsibility for these issues…MORI approach – individual polling is problematic because we need to think in terms of collective responsibility…
KW – is MORI’s way of working a reflection of the shift from citizens to consumers?
JB – a strength but also a major limitation because we have no means of grappling with large issues…
KW – possibly against that – doesn’t seem to be a great deal about how technologies drive new expectations –
PS – we underestimate the public – don’t bother about health services until you need it…everyone wants to get engaged with everything - NO – people don’t – if people want to change something they will – in the last 6 months talked about intro car parking fees – the public have mobilised…different expectations for us…public is largely content most of the time…small cadre of people that want to get engaged e.g. voluntary – whole idea of mass voluntarism is wrong
CW – Hereford – high levels of voluntary behaviour but parish councils uncontested..
PS – asked parish councils – do they think devolving parish councils is a good thing – yes – does anyone want it – no!
PS – millions vote on a Saturday night on x- factor but it’s a different issue to local government…phone communication e.g. instant communication…people don’t conceptualise what 10 years time looks like
JB – massive effect on traditional forms of democracy – if younger people are used to communicating instantly – patterns of rep democracy are inc seen as old and antiquated…
PS – I’m going to have to go to public meetings to pretend to be accountable where people don’t want to turn up anyway – if you want engagement you need to decide what the issues are that people want to engage in – we’re overrepresented now…slash the number of MPs in half…
PS- today – chief exec and local councils both accountable…in ten years TIME I WANT TO go on stage and say these things are being done well but these are not – the two or three things that we spend a lot of resource on – relative to place…all this stuff you expect of us is being done but all the bells and whistles not…
CW – mobile phone coverage across the whole country –
PS – to try and inform choice – did an exercise – gave them a shopping list of isues – and saying to people that if you want us to do more of this you are going to have to have less of this…the public are very sophisticated in their choice…as a consequence – they want cleaner streets…as a result – they’re…
[CP: don’t want to game this but sounds really as if they’re up for participatory budgeting? – but apparently Kirstin was saying that the prof (JB?) in particular has a v specific agenda about community involvement and empowerment]
JT’s GROUP
3. Enriching the Wiki wall
IN SYNDICATES: Intros and initial response (10mins)
o Group introductions round table (present issues and concerns)
o P, HSC partnership with Local Authorities – service delivery concepts in local govt; as a big regulator he is worried that it looses site of actually providing a service.
o PC LGA, worried about the consequences of continuing to take action that we (those in Local Govt) think ‘matters’ but never touches the public as they do not think it matters. Obviously it matters to govt popularity, but is the overall consequence if this continues to happen or even grow!? Real world vs policy maker’s world. Will the public become concerned in a revolutionary sense that services are not delivering what they want. Is there a difference in demographics and understanding the different needs and how to reach those needs. Do we expect younger people to become like older people as they grow older or do we expect them to remain the same?
o SA – strategy at cabinet office: need to continue to make progress in productivity – maybe more resources in prevention; managing innovation; what can/should you do to promote shared responsibility
o KW – CE Hull: increasing polarisation as wealth increases; as a port city and 95% below sea level worried about climate change, how do you get people to make the right changes themselves and not expect the state to do it, how do we get better at using and developing the science of behaviour change that lies behind that. What is individual responsibility and how far should the state go down this route? Why is the public already there to meet policy makers with some legislation eg smoking in public or car seatbelts and therefore act on it, and not there on others.
o MB- X city council: Web 2.0 – US presidency Obama vs Clinton – collective will being organised in a new way, the community self organising. Will web 2.0 interaction and activism become more mainstream, citizens are using ‘youtube’ to make complaints about housing; are the employees of local council going to be happy to stick to writing big reports or will they want to produce wikis etc, wanting to work in different ways. Top down vs bottom up measures.
o KW, ‘wowed’ by how sport lifted the city without the council doing anything (Hull reaching the premiership), how do you ride that wave?
o PC, the limits of bureaucracy to achieve goals, as it is none of the above, therefore do we need to draw back on the bureaucracy to stop crowding out the spontaneity.
o SA, different groups respond in different ways relating to bottom up involvement. Therefore in places of low aspirations it should be more about building the opportunities and capabilities analogy of building Hull a football stadium and then letting them get on for it. Therefore what is the role of the state?
Enriching the Wiki wall
GARY’S GROUP
Group introductions round table
Spontaneous reactions. Himalayan ice cap shrinking – Indian rivers dry up over next 40 years, which would mean migration at a scale not previously known – how manage this?
Migration and climate change – make new challenges and also new opportunities – not all bad. Idea of local authorities increasingly deciding to get together to provide services, pool resources. It is a challenge as some like to do own thing but can work.
Joint pension services – no one bothered about that but when you discuss the idea in relation to other services, people get very worried.
With increased personal choices, how are we equipping people to make informed choices. How do we ensure that the capable people take advantage of choice and those who most vulnerable not get left out. Sense of fairness?
IT – voice recognition, so much IT developed by engineers for engineers. Would not have imagined in the past that everyone has two pcs. But we don’t make the most of the technology available. Fairness – who can afford to have the most tech advanced – screen on front door telling us when the bus is coming.
Not agree that the society is more fractured than in the past. The same problems in the past. Thinks the level of mobility is better now.
Gang members – not been on London eye etc – there are extremes re mobility.
Grammar school was supposed to encourage mobility, student fees discourage mobility.
Sunderland sees its agenda about the local society fracturing. Local economy driven by IT, automotive, - now more people employed than in past but the society has changed so much. In the past, if you lost your job not expect another. Now, people lose their jobs and find another (Northern Rock). Created more mobility in one sense but is fracturing community relations at the same time.
It is more positive, even in Sunderland now. But positivity and satifaction rates doesn’t translate into levels of trust and satisfaction. Response to council doesn’t change. Fracturing = strong bonding capital in prescribed local communities, still strong sense of communities but there is no bridging capital – they won’t work with other defined communities. They have tried to encourage bridging – through youth services – designed efficiently to provide for more than one community but not work as two communities won’t work together.
Communities that have low level jobs, they don’t have high aspiration, need to build communities self-esteem. Up north, communities define themselves as ex-mining communities.
Judgements of economic well-being is relative depending on where they are etc. Aspirations are wider than just economic well-being.
Are we receptive to gangs who appoint their own leaders? If they were to approach us, bottom-up, this is how we think this problem should be solved – do we have systems that respect and identify these people and what they say?
Yes we do but we don’t just rely on that. We contact people who can articulate these views.
Service customer recovery – important as lots of evidence that says if you turn a situation around, you’ve gained a loyal customer (eg flight).
Always more we can do to work together, partnership working – linking together services. Not interested in choice, interested in fairness. Locally, politically, not bothered if out-sourced, as long as good quality, meets the issues.
Role of local authority to develop local economy and increase choice – no point if there isn’t a local choice of provision provider.
Climate change – existing buildings emit most emissions and 87% will still be there in the future – how to plan for that?
Ben’s Group
Session 1: Enriching Wiki Wall
How to operationalise the issues? County Council capacity huge, but how to free it to deal with the issues?
Found ‘personal touch’ stuff interesting in Ben’s presentation but, how can County Councils do this? The ‘how’ is important. Different role for Local Authorities.
Most important is the general relationship between public services and community. ‘The Nudge’ is about persuading residents to change behaviour but outcomes hard to get to. Also difficult to persuade politicians e.g. tackling congestion.
Issues of staffing and employment important. Also issues of recruitment and associated issues for the future is knowing what skills are going to be important. Demographic change, aging workforce…
LGA challenges in terms of the members. The people who are involved is a managerialist issue. Is polarisation a proxy for the politicians? Rise of the individual, first name terms with politicians, the personal bit important. Labour struggling with getting the personal touch.
Are politicians as fractured as the public? Is it harder for politicians to sit in the middle ground? (Polarisation amongst politicians)
Rise of independents related to this, there are collections of wards with policies determined by local issues and no common ground to develop wider policy.
In Harrow - no Muslim and Hindu parties but a Muslim school, example of growing community fractionalisation.
People will start to approach public services by wanting to pay only for what they are getting out of society. No interest in paying for a universal state. A bit like the postcode lottery stuff…
Are we prepared to pay for services for all? ie universal services (fractured society).
People are much more aware of what they want and what they are getting.
Money lack – breaking down barriers between public services and collective spending across services eg, health and social care. Can silos be kitted together organically without legislation? (Agreement of this as an issue)
Health and Social care particularly, world class commissioning implications, coherent offering to the public, what will the commissioning look like in the future?
Joined up funding for officers in town centres, time off given to council staff to spend time working as Special Constables.
PLENARY – THEMING AT THE WIKI WALL
WIKI WALL ROUNDUP - DISCUSSION
WHAT WERE WE MISSING?
Food
Energy
Biotechnology
Technology – impact of and ability of technology…
--
What do we expect from our institutions? Schools increasingly expected to be parents and families? What do we expect from our educational institutions.
--
Technology on a more basic level than bio mimicry – mundane and pervasive use of technology – use of RFID chips and chips on bins – empowering people to measure the effects of their own behaviour [ and be aware of the effects, impacts of their own behaviour]
--
Information usage…
Supermarkets example – should consult them on hoe to collect information and deal with customer focus…
--
Development and planning process – missing issue here – People expect this to be prominent – a change in this area can transform experience…
--
Rural- - Urban split
tendency for urban focus – too much of a focus on the urban in fact…[general agreement from everyone] Polarisation of economy – London money and that in the south east is one thing but the possibilities for rural economies e.g. cottage industry are not discussed enough or considered enough…
sentimentality about rural areas – assumption that rural areas are not going to be areas for innovation or possibility…
urban bias and rural myths…
--
Information and behaviour change
Tesco don’t change behaviour (SA) [arguable!]
Issue about increasing amounts of info around the use of that info – potential to target and personalise services – deal with problems but barriers to this also – ETHICS – key barrier – need to have smarter use of information…and barriers to. Identity management issue –
--
space and surrounding areas
local infrastructure…non-urban infrastructure also – don’t forget…retrofitting of buildings…hugely expensive – huge aspirations but lack of funds…
--
role of citizen and state – politics and politicians…
using technology to organise
difficult – self-mobilisation – in ‘mobs’…flash mobs and smart mobs – can inform public but no longer control…
--
tension between participative and representative democracy –
(GENERAL AGREEMENT)
What are political parties for? do they do more harm than good?
Making voting easier – “lipstick on a pig”
US republicans can capture biggest collection of interest groups…widest range…greatest diversity [?]
CONTINUE WITH POST-ITS…
--
at the end of representative democracy?
Actually political parties are marginal to people’s lives
What are political parties for?
Representative democracy has scope for reinvigoration…need to make local government sexy? [! This is an old idea..]
JB – feeling that there is an increase in individual choice in consumers/votes…but we’re poor at dealing with communal and collective problems…[coordination and collative problems]
Need for strengthening communal decision-making but maybe political parties aren’t the right way to do this…
--
Greenwich – facebook network – self-organising youth group – about protecting Greenwich park – built momentum and now have to be taken seriously…
--
current position – at the moment we’re in a situation of UNCERTAINTY
we’re in a moment of change and our options are varied…we could plausibly go down a number of different roads…authoritarian or centralisation / devolved/ localised…we just don’t know yet…
--
new politics – individual selfishness nothing to do with mainstream politics…
--
representative democracy:
voting system – range of choice in terms of political parties is very narrow – BUT very dangerous to downgrade and diminish representative democracy – what to replace it with?
Citizen engagement? Could be naïve and dangerous to do so!
There are basic services we all expect – BUT – what are the new influences?
The key to the future is to identify new political issues…find half a dozen issues that are the core issues people/the public engage with and will exercise them…
--
about systematic service delivery – inhibition on politics? Utilising information to enhance collective behaviour…
--
BIG THING – use of info towards personalisation…
--
we are moving from an age of ‘how to ?’ to an age of politics being about WHAT - a smaller number of things to prioritise and concentrate on…
--
bottom line is that the current distribution of spending is not sustainable
big politics of WHAT coming because there will be serious questions about what to spend money on – prioritisation.
--
JB – managerially – we need outcome measuring…public value – assess trade offs…
--
fragmentation is a problem in politics at the moment – politicians simply have to stand down if they fail…different mindset needed – too risk averse at the moment…
--
TRUST – waiting for the day when NAO praises a noble failure, normally they just kick people when they’re down!
--
proposition
Californian system – can put single issue on a vote and bind the legislature – an e-enabled society might allow this to happen – possible dangerous – could capture large single issues…?
--
KEY ISSUE –What do local people want?
“One person’s innovation is another person’s bread and butter” - especially in local government
[INNOCENTIVE as model? – harness technology ]
innovation is doing it for the first time and making it work – don’t care of it’s not my idea…
need 3, 4, 5 issues that are the key issues – have biggest impact on quality of life…if you want the innovation then central governmenet shouldn’t tell us what to do
--
the most powerful innovation within the sector would be the power to effectively COLLABORATE – what do we need to do / change to get the sector to do this?
This is a real opportunity area…need to decide what innovation in this area would look like…
--
WIKI WALL THEMES
Internal culture – opportunity to organise in different ways – reports are too long – meetings are too long – sector still v reluctant to throw the rulebook away and start over…
--
Systems approach to sustainability…what would such an approach look like?
e.g. flooding – what would a systems approach to the specific problem..
--
danger of being managerial – right staff should be the right people…representative and participative…
