Best Value in Local Government

[Mitch]

I think it's important to understand the policies and theory behind the push towards increasing casual work, and the complicity of the State in this. We have to know what we're dealing with -

What is ‘Best Value’

Although ‘Best Value’ may represent a ‘Third Way’ or Communitarianism in the sense that it is demanding consultation with the public before decisions and priorities are now decided in local government, there is evidence in this research that ‘moving closer to the customer’ represents rhetoric rather than reality. The consultation methods for eliciting public feedback involving large scale surveys and public meetings are giving the impression of much activity occurring in the public sector, particularly as the results are translated into Best Value Performance plans in percentage figures. What is occurring in practice, however, is increased central government regulation of priorities, which is supported by a rigorous inspection and measurement framework to achieve more surveillance and control over local government employees.

Perhaps the main conclusion drawn from all parts of this research is that ‘Best Value’ means different things to different people in various groups operating within the framework and that these perceptions and definitions are conflicting with each other. ‘Best Value’ is primarily a performance management framework with performance indicators at the core. The legislation (the two Local Government Acts, 1999 and 2000) encourages local authorities to develop corporate strategies and Best Value Performance Plans stating achievements for the year and targets for the following year. The legislation bears the threat of intervention by the Secretary of State for poor performing authorities and it strengthens the role of the Audit Commission in the inspection and reform process. In terms of practice ‘Best Value’ is prescribing widespread benchmarking with other authorities, the private sector and other parts of the public sector, but in the city council in this research only benchmarking with other authorities was observed to be taking place. ‘Best Value’ is changing the form and approach to ‘competition’, but competition remains the priority. Through developing awards within the initiative such as Beacon Status and the Public Service Agreements it is promoting and indeed demanding increased ‘partnership’ with the private sector as a prerequisite for such awards. The Modernising Agenda, in which ‘Best Value’ sits, contains other changes which fit with a general ethos of increasing managerialism including freeing up authorities to set their own council tax rates and to be more responsible and accountable for setting their own budgets. The committee structure is being ‘thinned down’ and corporate centres in authorities are being advised by agencies such as the Improvement and Development Agency and the Local Government Association to become more ‘businesslike’ and use tools traditionally used in the private sector such as the Business Excellence Model and Process Mapping to elicit quality improvements. Again preconditions for the award of overall Beacon status demands that authorities demonstrate they are using HRM strategically and that they have strong strategic corporate plans linked with new Community Plans specific to their local area.

[Mitch]

(continued)

‘Best Value’ wants more for less out of authorities, demanding quality improvements as well as a 2% cost saving across departments. Quality improvements will be unachievable without increased investment, and as this is not forthcoming from central government it has to come from the private sector. Those larger authorities who are working more effectively in ‘partnership’ with the private sector to elicit investment (for example Leeds, Knowsley and Tameside) appear to be faring better with ‘Best Value’ than some smaller districts such as district council 1 in this research.

There is also evidence that project teams are being set up to head ‘Best Value’ reviews. These teams, chaired by members of the Best Value Team in the central city council case study, use the language of individual empowerment (what works is what counts) but in reality are telling departments what they must do to elicit quality improvements. No evidence of ownership of the ‘Best Value’ process was perceived in the review of leisure services, legal services and development control in the central case study. Rather the imposition of ‘Best Value’ was causing considerable work intensification and stress amongst managers in departments, who by extension stated that their employees were also ‘stressed’ by the process.

The initiative denounces Compulsory Competitive Tendering, replacing it with new procurement strategies. CCT, however, remains as a possible option if considered appropriate after benchmarking activity and will probably take some time to phase out if this will indeed be the trend. As yet this is unclear. ‘Best Value’ is encouraging an increased emphasis on equal opportunities and fair access to services, but this is to be achieved through a process of redistribution, rather than through increased investment in local government overall. Comprehensive equal opportunities programmes are a prerequisite for overall Beacon Status and are given new emphasis in initiatives such as ‘Investors in People’ which is receiving new attention in the public sector as many of its objectives overlap with ‘Best Value’. How this ethos is actually enacted in performance indictors within the initiative is however narrowly focused on targets for recruitment numbers and numbers of certain groups at senior level. Also, an emphasis on redistribution of resources is not occurring alongside a commitment to increased investment in local government. ‘Best Value’ is a quality revolution which wants more for less from what appears to be an already overworked and demotivated workforce in the central case study.

[Mitch]

(continued)

When considered thoroughly ‘Best Value’ as a whole initiative shows little evidence of reversing trends which have gathered pace in the public sector over the last 20 years including increasing managerialism, the use of ‘hard’ HRM and the blurring of the public/private sector divide. This research points to an increase in pace to achieve these objectives, albeit with a ‘soft’ veneer of culture change programmes. ‘Best Value’ offers a slightly different way to dismantle the welfare state, rather than reverse the trend. This different way is through ‘partnership’, with a rhetorical emphasis on fair access, social inclusion and equal opportunities.

(As part of this research I did interview the Best Value Manager at Burnley Borough Council - interestingly they were having problems implementing Best Value - and there was much resistance from frontline workers here. Wonder how they're getting along now? These conclusions drawn here are pretty tame compared to what I think now as a result of my activist experience. Now I see more clearly the corruption of the State and the complicity of local government as well as unions - I'm pretty convinced that a separate anti-casualisation revolutionary union is now needed, working with already active activists in community groups and people in the community to support and bolster up their challenges).