Another well-argued, open-minded post. Well done!

“One audience member asks: “I just want to ask your opinion about a speech by David Cameron,” clearly wanting to draw attention to the yawning gap between Cameron’s red Tory rhetoric about community and local power, and realities on the ground.”

Well, presumably they have the power to vote the Tories out?

That said I would like to see more use of local referendums.

No doubt if the people of Barnet are rising as one to oppose the council’s plans, the tories will lose the next election there.

I shall bookmark and remind myself to return when the results are in next May.

This is why Brown is being selfish by staying on in office. It is quite clear the public don’t want him as Prime minister, and are not listening to him. But all the while his position is allowing the Tories a free ride on what they are really about.

But no one is paying attention, so what we get from both New Labour and Tory is socialism for the rich, and corporations. We become more like America everyday where we pour billions of tax payers money into the hands of greedy, lazy shareholders. This also is a big issue for Democracy because it creates a culture of corporate entitlement. It also encourages the companies to start donating big cash to those politicians who will protect their cash cow contracts. You end up with corporate lobbying for more deregulation and more no bid contracts.

Evening all,

CHT – you sound like Mike Freer… alas, the Tories are all too likely to win next year’s elections, both local and national – not because they and their policies are fresh, innovate, or even popular, but because nobody’ll be voting Labour, so the likes of Mr Freer will win by default… (think he’s headed for Westminster anyway).

Which I’m sure you know.

By all means, bookmark though. I’ll do it as well. We’ll both end up being right.

Sally – all the way, sis. The corporatising of public services means an end to democracy in many ways. At the local level, we’ll get to the point where a couple of councillors will meet a couple of times a year, chuck cheques at a few big contractors, and that’ll be the end of it. Public services were put in place so that people who couldn’t afford to pay for health and education, etc, could still access those services. How ironic that we’re heading there again.

…and cheers Kardinal.

Kate

The Conservatives are up to it round my way (Lancashire) as well. See the story at http://www.bickerstafferecord.org.uk/?p=1169 , and do feel free to come up and do interviews and press coverage with your journo hat on. We’ll pay your bus fare.

Kate –

The corporatising of public services means an end to democracy in many ways. At the local level, we’ll get to the point where a couple of councillors will meet a couple of times a year, chuck cheques at a few big contractors, and that’ll be the end of it. Public services were put in place so that people who couldn’t afford to pay for health and education, etc, could still access those services. How ironic that we’re heading there again.

Never a truer word said – which leads to the more ironic Tory mantra that it is they who are all for smaller government and much more democratic accountability.

But, as they are as blind as bats on this issue, I cannot wait for the 3rd/early 4th year of their term in office when the British people realise soundly the mistake they made electing them into power.

Not to forget that the morning after they are elected I can see grown men and women weep while remembering Thatcher and her ilk.

I cannot reiterate enough that I DO NOT want a nuLab government ever again – we need a real left, a left that can inspire people – the whole people to look forward to a greater and more egalitarian future, that is where democracy should lead us, not into the hands of Tory corporatism.

Paul,

Very interested – will be in touch.

Will – with you there.

Had to add this – I see Alan Rusbridger bemoaning this morning the decline of local journalism, and in particular, local news… why doesn’t he start sending the likes of Tanya Gold to local council meetings, instead of, um, Glasto?

A whole strata of society – in which many of us are included – are losing our access to public services, and to the right to say anything about it, and it’s left to a handful of bloggers to cover it. The Guardian could win Labour the election if it exposed the Tories on this stuff – and do society a reasonable turn for once in the process. Council may be boring, but it ain’t that boring. Things are going to be grim when the Tories get in, so now’s the time to highlight that.

Grrr.

Kate @9

look forward to it – have emailed you

Paul,

My email back to you keeps bouncing – have you got another address you could send me through the contact form?

The officers in many councils deposited spare cash with Icelandic banks by following the instructions given by Central government on how to maximise returns. Some individuals warned that there were risks but, quite frankly, very few and almost invariably too late for any council which put half its council tax receipts on a six-month term deposit to pay salaries in the second half of the year (and even the Audit Commission got stung). There is no noticeable relation between the political colour of local councils and the choice of banks. One might also note that Brown, having expropriated all the UK assets of the Icelandic banks, loaned the Icelandic government money to repay all the (voting) individuals but none of the (non-voting) local authorities, businesses or charities. It is unfair to blame Barnet Council’s Finance Officer for obeying orders (disguised as guidelines and recommendations) from central government.
FYI: Capita was set up by a group of former senior local government executives to provide services to local government, BT started its existence as a nationalised industry, and BUPA was a friendly society until it demutualised. I should have expected a Tory Council to have employed at least one genuine capitalist when it was looking to improve efficiency.
Thirdly, New Labour’s cuts (in real terms) in block grants to Conservative local authorities coupled with demands for continually increased quantity but not quality of services to be provided by local authorities and a cap on increases in council tax DO actually put a squeeze on all local services that are not mandated by central government.

My point is, though, that private provision isn’t the answer. It isn’t enough to say that Barnet of course got a capitalist in to manage its programme – I’m asking if there was any point getting a capitalist in in the first place. Barnet acknowledges itself that its contract writing and management skills are weak and will need shoring up (at god knows what cost) as it pursues what I imagine will be a wholesale outsourcing programme. It has been badly burned by relationships with the private sector in the past. It also acknowledges that the savings it estimates from its programme are at the moment very rough estimates – no evidence is given for its claims and the benchmarking exercise PWC carried out on its behalf had a lot of holes in it – the biggest one being that the benchmarked councils were at a very different stage of IT rationalisation.

I note that Guardian is running a front page story this morning about the upcoming savaging of public services – now’s the time to start talking about the best and most cost effective ways to provide those services. I do not believe that outsourcing is the best, cheapest and most efficient option, and am working on a piece at the moment which looks at working alternatives.

I would agree with you that New Labour has been at least questionable in its relationships with the private sector – if memory serves, Labour made a relatively recent change to the LGA which allowed for increased partnership options. Pretty sure that’s right.

I’m pointing out that they have not, repeat not, got a capitalist in the first place. Just follow your own link and it says Max Wide is a long-term local government worker until poached by BT to act as liaison with local government.
The best option is not the cheapest: a Rolls-Royce or Mercedes costs more than a Ford or a Vauxhall but councils are continually pushed to go for the cheapest until something goes disastrously wrong (e.g. Haringey) whereupon everyone blames them for not running a Rolls-Royce. However, unless you are going to spend millions on lawyers or extra staff to supervise and check the quality of outsourced services that you didn’t need when the work was done by council employees, outsourcing will save money through economies of scale and rationalisation of work and journeys in the area around the borders of adjacent local authorities, not to mention reaping the benefits of capital investment in labour-saving machinery that councils almost never carry out. Of course estimates of future savings are rough estimates – they depend on future wage rates, oil prices etc. which cannot be known in advance.
Rather than rant at outsourcing per se, which you cannot stop unless you move into 10 Downing Street, you should demand quality controls with a low-cost inspection team that only does spot checks without giving notice and that the private sector partner takes all the risk on its own costs (general, central government-caused-inflation excepted). Demand that PFI provide services at least as good at lower cost with the risk dumped on the contractor. Of course some “partners” may shy away, in which case you know they are the ones you do not want.