There’s no shortage of new thinking going on about how to deliver public services. And as we try to find ways forward after our defeats in Crewe and Glasgow, there will be even more suggestions for policy changes. Yet it seems that every time someone proposes new ways of providing healthcare, education or welfare benefits, the cry goes up that we’re betraying our principles or engaging in creeping privatisation.
These reactions seem inevitable whenever we look to involve the private or even the voluntary sector in the provision of services. It’s not just trade unions seeking to protect their members’ interests who throw around accusations of privatisation but also individual Labour party members who are not involved in representing the interests of organised labour.
One reason why it’s so difficult to have an open-minded discussion about new ways of delivering public services is that we are being asked to consider new policies without having fundamentally re-thought our attitude to the state, whether national or local.
For too long, we have sought power in order to do things to people rather than give them power over what happens to their lives; whether it’s the council that won’t let them paint the door of their council house in the colour they want or having no effective choice but to send their children to a poorly-performing school.
Our attachment to the state arose in the 30s and 40s when it was seen as the only means of engaging with mass capitalism and the huge social and market failures of those decades. That was fine then because our policy approach fitted the circumstances of the time.
But today’s circumstances are vastly different and require a different approach. People are much more individualistic and more questioning of what they are offered by the public services. They want better quality services and ones that are more responsive to their preferences.
The state will and should always have a role in providing public services but that doesn’t mean that only the state can do so. The consumers of public services have no hang-ups about how we organise their provision or who provides them, they just want know whether or not it works.
If, for instance, private sector provision of GP services or independent treatment centres carrying out routine operations can give patients better access to primary care or quicker treatment for specific problems then we should welcome that and not worry about the effect on the sectional interests of the medical profession.
It’s the interests of those who consume public services that should come first not those who provide them. Greater pluralism in who provides public services should be welcomed as that can help shift the emphasis from the producers to the consumers.
We shouldn’t be looking for the withering away of the state. What we need instead is more openness to other agencies having a role in delivering public services with the state setting standards and enforcing regulation. That way, we can improve both the quality of public services and the accountability of those who provide them
Richard Olszewski is a former special adviser to Rt Hon John Reid MP