The Water Industry Commission has published its annual report.
The report gives more evidence of the benefits of having water as a public service in Scotland. Stable prices, improved customer service and reducing leakage this year.
The report makes some fanciful claims about the benefits of competition in the business retail sector. There is little here that could not have been achieved by a water efficiency programme. We could have saved the millions spent on regulatory systems, rebranding etc.
There is much emphasis in the report on cost savings at the WIC. Not surprising after a series of investigations by the The Herald has highlighted lavish expenditure. The latest was spending about £1000 a month ferrying around senior executives, including trips home from an expensive restaurant for its chief executive, Alan Sutherland.
The WIC Chair, Sir Ian Byatt is leaving the Commission this month. This former privatisation advisor to Margaret Thatcher was a very bizarre appointment to this post. He has campaigned relentlessly in favour of privatising Scottish Water and has cost the water charge payer a small fortune for stepping well outside his remit. Again we can thank The Herald for investigatory persistence.
As I have called for Sir Ian's dismissal on several occasions the decision to replace him is very welcome. I am not expecting an invite to his leaving do. Cherio Sir Ian, you will not be missed!
Tuesday, 7 June 2011
Saturday, 4 June 2011
Too many councils?
The discussion on public service reform in Scotland quickly focuses on the number of councils, police boards etc. The argument goes that we have too many for a country of 5 million souls. This was repeated by the Independent Budget Review and others. While we do have a lot of different organisations delivering public services, do we really have too many councils?
If we take a wider European perspective the answer is clearly no. Scotland actually has the smallest number of councils per head of population in Europe. Similar size Scandinavian countries can have between three and six times more councils. Even in England, councils are on average nearly a third smaller. By the way, they have more councillors as well.
The big difference is that they don't have all the unelected quangos or other fragmented provision that we have in Scotland. Services are integrated at a local level under democratic control. Even services like policing that some in Scotland argue can only be run on a national basis.
The other big difference is finance. Across Europe local government raises much more of its finance for local services locally. In Scotland and across the UK councils are heavily reliant on national governments. Since the Council Tax freeze Scottish councils are now entirely reliant on national spending decisions. This also breaks the link between voting and paying for services. When you make that link issues like the so called 'postcode lottery' become less significant.
Finally, does any of this matter if the outcome is the same? While a direct causal link is difficult to establish, it is the case that countries with more decentralised local government achieve better outcomes for all their people. It is at least arguable that this is because they have a better focus on the needs of very local populations. Many of Scotland's councils are not 'local' at all, they are regions.
In the current public service reform debate there is a risk that we take a simplistic view of the structure of public services. The picture is more complex, but it is clear that a strong, democratically accountable local government is an important part of the solution. By European standards Scotland has a relatively weak local government structure.
If we take a wider European perspective the answer is clearly no. Scotland actually has the smallest number of councils per head of population in Europe. Similar size Scandinavian countries can have between three and six times more councils. Even in England, councils are on average nearly a third smaller. By the way, they have more councillors as well.
The big difference is that they don't have all the unelected quangos or other fragmented provision that we have in Scotland. Services are integrated at a local level under democratic control. Even services like policing that some in Scotland argue can only be run on a national basis.
The other big difference is finance. Across Europe local government raises much more of its finance for local services locally. In Scotland and across the UK councils are heavily reliant on national governments. Since the Council Tax freeze Scottish councils are now entirely reliant on national spending decisions. This also breaks the link between voting and paying for services. When you make that link issues like the so called 'postcode lottery' become less significant.
Finally, does any of this matter if the outcome is the same? While a direct causal link is difficult to establish, it is the case that countries with more decentralised local government achieve better outcomes for all their people. It is at least arguable that this is because they have a better focus on the needs of very local populations. Many of Scotland's councils are not 'local' at all, they are regions.
In the current public service reform debate there is a risk that we take a simplistic view of the structure of public services. The picture is more complex, but it is clear that a strong, democratically accountable local government is an important part of the solution. By European standards Scotland has a relatively weak local government structure.
Wednesday, 1 June 2011
Panorama and the care industry
Last night's Panorama was a shocking example of abuse in a private residential unit for people with learning disabilities and autism.
It is one of many stories about the privatisation of care that I have highlighted in a blog this morning on the UNISON Scotland site. This all adds up to an urgent need to review our approach to care in Scotland in the context of a population that will be increasingly dependent on care.
Let us be clear, there are thousands of dedicated care workers in the public, private and voluntary sector. Incidents such as those highlighted in last night's programme are thankfully the exception.
However, looking at the cases that cross my desk as head of legal services in recent years, I have become increasingly concerned over the treatment of staff and the impact on care. There are too many cases of very poor treatment of staff in the private and the commercial end of the third sector. If staff are treated badly then it must have an impact on the quality of care.
All of this means we should take a careful look at care policy in Scotland and the UK.
It is one of many stories about the privatisation of care that I have highlighted in a blog this morning on the UNISON Scotland site. This all adds up to an urgent need to review our approach to care in Scotland in the context of a population that will be increasingly dependent on care.
Let us be clear, there are thousands of dedicated care workers in the public, private and voluntary sector. Incidents such as those highlighted in last night's programme are thankfully the exception.
However, looking at the cases that cross my desk as head of legal services in recent years, I have become increasingly concerned over the treatment of staff and the impact on care. There are too many cases of very poor treatment of staff in the private and the commercial end of the third sector. If staff are treated badly then it must have an impact on the quality of care.
All of this means we should take a careful look at care policy in Scotland and the UK.
Tuesday, 31 May 2011
Libraries and Books
A new experience for me today. I find myself supporting the views of David Gray, principal of Erskine Stewart's Melville Schools, Edinburgh. Now normally I would have little in common with private school teachers, but his piece in today's Scotsman is spot on.
Firstly, he makes the case for the school library. "As places, they have retained an aura of reverence and quiet study, and for young people in good schools, they are at the heart of intellectual thought and reflection."
Secondly, he makes the case for books. "There is also incipient evidence that the reader of the screen does not assimilate information as accurately or as effectively as in applying his (or possibly her David!) mind to a book which always involves steady, persistent concentration, a key to effective assimilation, analysis and evaluation."
This must be right and that is why we need to come together to defend our libraries. Many councils are looking to cut back their library provision. In particular there has been a move towards reduced opening times and employing less qualified staff. In a UNISON survey more than 40% members reported cuts in service and two-thirds felt staffing levels were inadequate. Nearly 90% indicated public support for the service, but nearly two-thirds felt that the service was not valued by their local authority.
Since the start of the recession libraries across Scotland are reporting increases in visits and lending issues. 30 million visits last year, bucking the trend. Libraries have diversified with the introduction of downloadable audio files and e-books, but the value of the book should not be underestimated.
You can love Scottish libraries by signing this online petition today.
Firstly, he makes the case for the school library. "As places, they have retained an aura of reverence and quiet study, and for young people in good schools, they are at the heart of intellectual thought and reflection."
Secondly, he makes the case for books. "There is also incipient evidence that the reader of the screen does not assimilate information as accurately or as effectively as in applying his (or possibly her David!) mind to a book which always involves steady, persistent concentration, a key to effective assimilation, analysis and evaluation."
This must be right and that is why we need to come together to defend our libraries. Many councils are looking to cut back their library provision. In particular there has been a move towards reduced opening times and employing less qualified staff. In a UNISON survey more than 40% members reported cuts in service and two-thirds felt staffing levels were inadequate. Nearly 90% indicated public support for the service, but nearly two-thirds felt that the service was not valued by their local authority.
Since the start of the recession libraries across Scotland are reporting increases in visits and lending issues. 30 million visits last year, bucking the trend. Libraries have diversified with the introduction of downloadable audio files and e-books, but the value of the book should not be underestimated.
You can love Scottish libraries by signing this online petition today.
Thursday, 26 May 2011
Taking Scotland Forward
Whatever stance you take on the First Minister, it has to be admitted that he does the 'vision thing' very well. His speech today setting out the Scottish Government's vision for the next five years was full of vision, even if the detail was a little sparse.
The comparison with what the Con-dem coalition is doing in England was good. We need a different vision and we got it. However, he did try to give the impression that we are already exempt. "budgets slashed, priorities changed" is happening in every council, health board and quango in Scotland, not just 'elsewhere on these isles".
Constitutional issues "are a priority", but not such a priority that it will be addressed before "well into the second half" of this parliament. Points on the Scotland Bill will generally be supported - except Corporation Tax.
The social wage/social contract line is generally fine and worthy of further development. I particularly liked the attack on Thatcher's "no such thing as society" and the reference to 'the market" and "crazed ideology". However, not at all sure "people understand that public spending must be restrained". Elements perhaps of Thatcher's economics that the FM has praised in the past? There is a better way First Minister!
The juxtaposition between the wage freeze and the Council Tax freeze was not very clever as the STUC has pointed out. In may be politically popular but this is a regressive tax cut that does little for our low paid members.
The £250m Scottish Futures Fund is being stretched very thin over five different initiatives. All welcome but I hope this isn't more presentational spin. Core budgets being cut at the delivery end while ministers parade a series of new announcements. All administrations have been guilty of this in the past.
Good lines on sectarianism, bigotry and booze. These are certainly not compatible with the Scotland we all want. Investment in housing would be welcome, but this had one of the biggest cuts in the current budget. Jobs, emerging markets and the low carbon economy is a good vision, delivery will be more difficult in the current world economic environment.
Overall, good on vision, but something of the proverbial curates egg on the detail.
The comparison with what the Con-dem coalition is doing in England was good. We need a different vision and we got it. However, he did try to give the impression that we are already exempt. "budgets slashed, priorities changed" is happening in every council, health board and quango in Scotland, not just 'elsewhere on these isles".
Constitutional issues "are a priority", but not such a priority that it will be addressed before "well into the second half" of this parliament. Points on the Scotland Bill will generally be supported - except Corporation Tax.
The social wage/social contract line is generally fine and worthy of further development. I particularly liked the attack on Thatcher's "no such thing as society" and the reference to 'the market" and "crazed ideology". However, not at all sure "people understand that public spending must be restrained". Elements perhaps of Thatcher's economics that the FM has praised in the past? There is a better way First Minister!
The juxtaposition between the wage freeze and the Council Tax freeze was not very clever as the STUC has pointed out. In may be politically popular but this is a regressive tax cut that does little for our low paid members.
The £250m Scottish Futures Fund is being stretched very thin over five different initiatives. All welcome but I hope this isn't more presentational spin. Core budgets being cut at the delivery end while ministers parade a series of new announcements. All administrations have been guilty of this in the past.
Good lines on sectarianism, bigotry and booze. These are certainly not compatible with the Scotland we all want. Investment in housing would be welcome, but this had one of the biggest cuts in the current budget. Jobs, emerging markets and the low carbon economy is a good vision, delivery will be more difficult in the current world economic environment.
Overall, good on vision, but something of the proverbial curates egg on the detail.
More on pensions
A follow up to yesterday's blog on pensions following the publication this morning of the Westminster Public Accounts Committee report on public service pensions. I was interviewed on Radio Scotland this morning on this issue.
We should welcome the PAC's warning that the Treasury has not tested the impact of the changes underlying their cost projections on public service pensions. Changes could lead to additional spending elsewhere including demand for means tested benefits.
In 2008 we reached agreements with the Scottish and UK governments on the future funding of public service pensions. The new UK government has unilaterally slapped an unaffordable 50% increase in employee contributions at a time of pay cuts and rising inflation. We warned that this will lead to further opt-outs from pensions, placing new burdens on welfare benefits.
The PAC report also says that officials appeared to define affordability on the basis of public perception. You would have hoped, that in the Treasury at least, Lord Hutton’s report buried once and for all the myth of gold plated pensions. But the UK government clearly thought this was an opportunity to grab more cash from low paid public service workers. This is on top of cuts to pension benefits by 15% as a result of the switch of index from RPI to CPI and plans to make everyone work longer.
The contributions issue in particular is an unwelcome agenda item for the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, because this is a devolved issue. The message is the same to both governments - public service workers are being asked to pay more, work longer and get less. That’s not acceptable and will be resisted.
We should welcome the PAC's warning that the Treasury has not tested the impact of the changes underlying their cost projections on public service pensions. Changes could lead to additional spending elsewhere including demand for means tested benefits.
In 2008 we reached agreements with the Scottish and UK governments on the future funding of public service pensions. The new UK government has unilaterally slapped an unaffordable 50% increase in employee contributions at a time of pay cuts and rising inflation. We warned that this will lead to further opt-outs from pensions, placing new burdens on welfare benefits.
The PAC report also says that officials appeared to define affordability on the basis of public perception. You would have hoped, that in the Treasury at least, Lord Hutton’s report buried once and for all the myth of gold plated pensions. But the UK government clearly thought this was an opportunity to grab more cash from low paid public service workers. This is on top of cuts to pension benefits by 15% as a result of the switch of index from RPI to CPI and plans to make everyone work longer.
The contributions issue in particular is an unwelcome agenda item for the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, because this is a devolved issue. The message is the same to both governments - public service workers are being asked to pay more, work longer and get less. That’s not acceptable and will be resisted.
Wednesday, 25 May 2011
Pensions
Big focus on pensions for me this week as I am running a series of training courses for our new branch Pensions Champions. Nearly a hundred have signed up for courses across Scotland.
The main aim of the course is to get our branch leads up to scratch on the big pension issues. The key focus is on the Con-Dem coalition's attack on public service pensions that can be summed up as - pay more, work longer, get less. But let's not forget the proposed changes to the state retirement pension. Sounds good on paper, but it is as yet unclear what will happen to the contracting out arrangements. If these go to pay for the £140, then that will be a further tax on employees and employers. In the public and voluntary sector we can do without even more cost pressures.
In the public service schemes the main concern is the planned 50% increase in pension contributions. Members on the course this week confirmed our concern that this will result in a major opt out of the scheme. Members simply cannot afford that sort of increase when they are facing real term pay cuts and rising inflation. The consequences will be more pensioner poverty and greater reliance on welfare benefits.
Whilst the initiative for these changes comes from the UK government, implementation will largely fall on the Scottish Parliament because public service scheme regulation is a devolved matter. Something that was clearly not well understood by commentators and politicians during the election debates. Latest on these issues can be found in the new edition of our Scottish Pensions Bulletin.
The main aim of the course is to get our branch leads up to scratch on the big pension issues. The key focus is on the Con-Dem coalition's attack on public service pensions that can be summed up as - pay more, work longer, get less. But let's not forget the proposed changes to the state retirement pension. Sounds good on paper, but it is as yet unclear what will happen to the contracting out arrangements. If these go to pay for the £140, then that will be a further tax on employees and employers. In the public and voluntary sector we can do without even more cost pressures.
In the public service schemes the main concern is the planned 50% increase in pension contributions. Members on the course this week confirmed our concern that this will result in a major opt out of the scheme. Members simply cannot afford that sort of increase when they are facing real term pay cuts and rising inflation. The consequences will be more pensioner poverty and greater reliance on welfare benefits.
Whilst the initiative for these changes comes from the UK government, implementation will largely fall on the Scottish Parliament because public service scheme regulation is a devolved matter. Something that was clearly not well understood by commentators and politicians during the election debates. Latest on these issues can be found in the new edition of our Scottish Pensions Bulletin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)