Choice in Local Government Services

March 16, 2004

Rt Hon Nick Raynsford MP
Minister of State, ODPM
NLGN Conference

Introduction

I am delighted to be here today. To have an opportunity to talk about how we can make choice count.



The choice agenda is certainly very topical. Reports and articles about choice seem to appear in the press every week. I’m pleased that people are keen to engage constructively in the debate.



But let’s not forget, choice is not a new phenomenon. It is one of the Government’s four Principles of Public Service Reform, set out by the Prime Minster a little over two years ago. And as such, it is one of the key drivers for improving public services.



Whilst there has been much agreement and progress on three of those principles – national standards, devolution to the front line, and flexibility to respond to local circumstances. There has been much less consensus around the fourth principle – increased choice. I’d like to explore the reasons for that, and offer some ideas for how choice might be increased.



Why is choice important?

To take a step back for a moment, user choice played little part in the ethos of the welfare state that emerged in the early part of the 20th Century. The focus was on providing decent minimum standards for all.



But society has moved on. Increasingly people now expect choice in all key aspects of their lives – where they live, what job they do, and where they go on holiday. It is unrealistic not to expect people to have similar aspirations when it comes to public services.



The penalty for denying this choice is clear. If public services do not evolve in ways that reflect changing expectations, people who can afford alternatives will opt-out. Leaving public services increasingly appearing as the second-best option.



Instead, services must be driven by what users want. Not what providers can deliver. This is key to our long-term vision for local government.



What are the benefits of choice?

Evidence shows that by offering users more choice, services can be re-invigorated and better outcomes can be secured for local people.



Take for example choice based letting schemes – such as the one at Newham that you heard about earlier this afternoon. These have dramatically improved customers’ experience of councils’ lettings service. Applicants can visit an advice centre and see images and descriptions of available properties, alongside details of the qualifications they need for the property. Customers feel engaged in the process, not excluded from it. As a result, satisfaction has improved and service standards have risen.



In the field of social care, direct payments are helping to improve people’s quality of life. They offer users freedom to obtain essential equipment and support from a variety of providers. Innovative authorities, such as Essex County Council, have helped to develop direct payment systems that really transform people’s lives.



Where it is not possible to offer individual choice, communities and groups of users are taking decisions about their local services. For example, Tenant Management Organisations empower tenants to take decisions about their housing management services. Similarly, park trusts, such as at Milton Keynes, enable the community to decide service delivery arrangements for their open spaces.



Evidence also shows that choice can improve job satisfaction. Particularly where staff have traditionally acted as gatekeepers, controlling access to services. Under choice based letting schemes, the relationship between housing officers and applicants has changed. Staff now play a more constructive and empowering role, actively exploring ways of helping applicants find solutions to their problems.



How can we increase choice?

Given these positive outcomes, it is surprising that providers do not offer choice in a wider variety of services. This may reflect a suspicion that change will threaten traditional services. Or possibly that offering choice might raise customer expectations which cannot always be met.



I accept that introducing choice is not easy. There is no blueprint. No single model of choice can be applied to all services. A range of approaches will be needed to meet different circumstances. Each will need to address the key issues of:

• how to ensure equity and fairness;

• the capacity is necessary to deliver choice; and

• the level and quality of user support.



There are no easy answers to these issues. But by looking at what works, and applying the lessons, it is possible to develop positive approaches.



Dealing with each in turn. Concerns have been expressed that choice schemes may be unfair and inequitable. That they favour those users with the greatest ability to ‘work the system’. And that they disadvantage vulnerable or socially excluded groups, particularly where supply is limited.



This need not be the case. Under the choice based letting scheme, vulnerable individuals are given priority in bidding for properties. And when we first introduced the scheme critics said that it would not be viable in areas of high demand. However, the participating authorities in London have demonstrated how the process can be managed when properties are over-subscribed. They have shown how choice can empower users to take decisions whilst enhancing equity.



The capacity of service providers to offer genuine choice has also been questioned. It has even been suggested that insufficient capacity is a valid excuse for not providing choice. However, this risks perpetuating outdated and inefficient ways of delivering services. It is perhaps best illustrated in social housing, where housing provided by local authorities and RSLs can command significantly different rents – largely reflecting building costs. This really makes little sense to tenants looking for a home.



Of course, price signals cannot be ignored, and the different approaches to offering choice will need to ensure that issues of capacity and cost are properly addressed.



Choice schemes will only work if users are given the right information and support. This will vary, depending on the circumstances. For example, it could involve providing literature explaining the options available. Or it may require far more intensive support, such as the ‘personal assistants’ or ‘independent advisors’ who help the recipients of direct payments. Getting this quality of support right is essential to the success of the scheme.



In considering these issues, I wouldn’t want to imply that offering users more choice necessarily requires dramatic new approaches or innovative concepts. The fundamental point is that service providers should respond to needs and aspirations in ways that make sense to users.



How can we make choice count?

So how can we make choice count? I see a number of opportunities:



First, I would urge all authorities to introduce choice based lettings. Independent research has shown that these schemes are successful, and we have set a target of 100% of authorities adopting a scheme by 2010. This is ambitious, but I am sure that local government will rise to the challenge.



Second, I would encourage all authorities to explore opportunities for offering collective choice. This has great potential for those services where it is simply not practical to offer choice at an individual level.



For example, it is not realistic for individual householders to choose their own bin collectors. The economics and logistics of refuse collection don’t allow this. However, there is no reason why providers cannot offer variations in the service provided. Perhaps even offering more frequent collections in areas where there is demand.



Similarly, thinking about libraries or museums why can’t people be given more choice over opening hours and the range of services offered?



Third, there is scope to offer more choice about who provides the service. For example, through consultation with users when service contracts come up for renewal.



Or by giving more encouragement to users and communities to set up tenant groups, resident associations, park trusts, or other neighbourhood groups. By delegating decision-making to these groups, authorities can directly empower communities to take choices about the provision of local services.



Fourth, service providers should be exploring opportunities for offering greater choice about the way that services are accessed. People want to be able to deal with councils in ways that suits them. Be it over the counter, Internet, or phone. And they want to access services at times that are convenient to them, not just during office hours.



E- Government will help. But the more innovative councils are going further. They are joining-up public services. So that residents can benefit from seamless services, rather than being shunted from pillar to post. East Riding’s CitizenLink and Sunderland’s People First initiative are two excellent examples. They show how councils are joining-up services to make it easier for the public to access essential services.



Fifth, Government has an important role to play. Through a range of measures we are helping councils and providers to improve services and offer choice.



- For example, we are piloting 22 Business Improvement Districts in England and Wales. These will enable local authorities and businesses to choose projects that improve local areas, parks and open spaces. They will also provide a focus for services to be tailored to better meet local needs and priorities.



- Through the beacon council scheme, we are helping to promote good practice. One of the themes for next year will be “Getting closer to the community”. This will focus on best practice in consultation, area-based decision-making, and integrated delivery of local services. I hope to see many innovative schemes coming forward under this theme which offer user choice.



- And through our Strategic Partnering Taskforce we have developed a range of models for partnerships with organisations across the public, private, voluntary and community sectors. Such partnerships can facilitate new ways of responding to the needs of communities. And have potential to play a key role in offering choice.



- We are continuing to deliver our commitment to give local authorities more freedom to deliver quality services. Most of the provisions in the Local Government Act 2003 will come into effect next month, including a raft of financial freedoms.



We remain committed to removing any barriers standing in the way of improved performance. Indeed, I am happy to consider suggestions for overcoming barriers that appear to prevent users from exercising choice.



Sixth, if we are to make choice count, we must seize all opportunities to share good practice and learn from others’ experiences. We need to look closely the examples of choice identified in recent studies, including the New Local Government Network report “Making Choices”. So that we can understand what works, and how the barriers have been overcome. This will be key to developing the range of approaches to choice that I mentioned earlier.



Finally, and most importantly, we must genuinely engage with users. So that we can better understand their needs and expectations. We must be open-minded when listening to their views. And work in partnership with others to improve services in line with users’ expectations.



Conclusion

I hope that you have found today’s conference stimulating. And feel inspired to offer choice.



By doing so, you will be strengthening and renewing local public services. Making a real difference to the quality of services. That will be good news for those of us who want to keep public services at the heart of our communities. More importantly, it will be good news for everyone who relies on public services.


Explore More