The green shoots are certainly stirring. ‘Beyond Beveridge’ provides some of the light and space they need to flourish. We want a serious and diverse debate about the future of public services. Though we’ve called for consensus around the key principles for any lasting settlement, we realise that values and political judgements will – and should – shape the final outcomes. As Kate Green rightly points out, tensions and contradictions exist, and ultimately it’s the job of politics to make the choices. We believe that our analysis and our principles allow for honest and informed debate, particularly because, as Kate recommends, we start from purposes not services.
Have we put too much faith in localism? When our full report – Delivering a Localist Future – is published on March 23, people will be able to judge for themselves. We don’t dismiss the risks of localism lightly, including risks around equality, but we point out that our centralised settlement has offered an illusory uniformity that it has never actually been able to guarantee. (We’ll be examining equality and cohesion in more detail in a dedicated research report to be published in June).
So after ‘Beyond Beveridge’ there’s still a lot to debate to be had, and the Commission on 2020 Public Services has still got much more to say. What we think is beyond debate is the need for fundamental reform. Without it, protections for our most vulnerable citizens will simply wither and fail.