Cabinet presses the reform button again
Public services should be tailored to people's needs and decided at local level, under plans agreed in Downing Street
REUTERS
The Brown blueprint will 'embed and advance' New Labour's reforms since 1997. One radical option being considered is to put core entitlements on a statutory footing while devolving as much other work as possible to local government.
The Cabinet agreed yesterday to press ahead with a new round of reforms to public services as Gordon Brown tries to fight back after seeing off an attempted coup by Labour MPs.
A blueprint for economic recovery and "personalised" state-funded services tailored to people's needs, will be unveiled by the Prime Minister the week after next. "Building Britain's Future" will cover all areas of government, as Mr Brown answers critics who claim he has not offered a forward-looking "vision" two years after succeeding Tony Blair. The plan was discussed at a three-hour "political" meeting of the Cabinet yesterday – without civil servants present. One minister said: "The key is to go down the personalised route, giving greater access to education and health and tailoring this to individual needs.
"We are talking about real and radical reforms, but not boldness for its own sake, which would be stupid."
The Brown blueprint will "embed and advance" New Labour's reforms since 1997. One radical option being considered is to put core entitlements on a statutory footing while devolving as much other work as possible to local government.
The upside is that Labour would finally make good its repeated promises to decentralise power from Whitehall. It could also enable Labour to scale back its plethora of public service targets, which critics say distort priorities by forcing frontline staff to "tick boxes" rather than improve services.
The downside is that it would provoke criticism for creating a "postcode lottery", with different standards of services in different areas.
The document is expected to promise more apprenticeships and college places for school-leavers, a major housebuilding programme, extra investment in clean, green energy, and a new "innovation fund" to back the industries of the future. Mr Brown will argue that reforms are needed to ensure Britain emerges strongly from the recession, and extend opportunities to all. But the decision to embark on a new round of reforms less than a year before a general election will be greeted with scepticism by commentators who believe the big issue is how to cut public spending to balance the nation's books.
Labour's blueprint will draw a "dividing line" from the Tories by rejecting cuts in vital public investment and national infrastructure. A row between Labour and the Tories erupted this week as they accused each other of planning to cut most Whitehall budgets by 10 per cent.
There were also reports yesterday of tension between the Chancellor Alistair Darling and the Schools Secretary Ed Balls – who had hoped to succeed Mr Darling at the Treasury in last week's reshuffle. The tension was reported to be about how open Labour should be on the need to make savings. Mr Darling wants to acknowledge the need for a squeeze, while Mr Balls is itching to launch a full-scale assault on "Tory cuts".
Brown allies resent long-standing criticism by arch-Blairites that he is an obstacle to reform. After what No 10 described as a "very positive" cabinet meeting yesterday, the Prime Minister called in the Blairite Transport Secretary Lord Adonis for one-to-one talks on the reform agenda.
Plans to devolve power are being pushed by Blairite ministers including Liam Byrne, the new Chief Treasury Secretary. But some Labour insiders are sceptical.
Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the RSA think-tank and Tony Blair's former head of policy in Downing Street, said: "Labour's reform plan won't be taken seriously, nor will it deserve to be, unless it involves a profound shift in the way policy is made at the centre. I would find it impossible to believe in any plan to decentralise power that did not commit to a substantial reduction in the number of government ministers."
He added: "There are far too many ministers, all of whom think it is their job to generate initiatives. Ideas are allowed to be developed and launched without any reference to those at the front line, change management and the time it takes is not treated seriously, there is complete lack of realism about how far the centre's intended messages actually reach."
1. IT'S TOO LATE
After 12 years in power, a sudden rush of new reforms would raise the question: why on earth didn't Labour implement them before now? Time for legislation and implementation is running out because a general election must be held by 3 June 2010.
2. THERE'S NO MONEY
Reforms might improve savings in the long run but normally cost money in the short term. With the public finances facing a massive black hole, there seems little scope for "front-loading" spending. The pressure will be for spending cuts.
3. THE BROTHERS WON'T ALLOW IT
Trade unions contribute up to 90 per cent of Labour's funding at present. With Labour Party membership and big donations falling, the unions will try to use their muscle to block unpalatable changes – notably when the party draws up its election manifesto.
4. BACKBENCH REVOLTS
Labour MPs are in a fractious state after pulling back from a coup to topple Gordon Brown. They are set to win a delay over Lord Mandelson's plans to sell a 30 per cent stake in the Royal Mail and could rebel against other proposals.
5. HOW RADICAL IS THE CABINET?
Blairites Lord Adonis, Andy Burnham, Tessa Jowell, Ben Bradshaw and Liam Byrne were promoted in the reshuffle. But Brown and allies such as Ed Balls were never great fans of some of the market-based reforms on Tony Blair's agenda.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited


Comments
Labour are in disarray and on the retreat, any policy ideas they come up with in retreat are ill-considered and fail to appease. The Tories smell blood, quarry flushed and the chase is on, a massive victory will open the coffers of this country and make most people work to fill them again and again.
The only honest action by any MP now could be to promote the cause of National Government because NO SINGLE PARTY can be trusted to safeguard our Democracy.
http://www.gopetition.co.uk/online/2564
The irony is that decentralisation of services will be a cover for public spending cuts. The Politburo will set "entitlements" and "rights" centrally but then require local authorities - of which very few are still Labour - to implement them. And surprise, surprise, they won't fully fund the implementation, which will then be a hit on Council Tax. This is a sly, underhand, diversionary ruse in the making.
If they have no money for services then start clamping down on the immigration and asylum industry that is costing us dearly - for example:
Labour has FAILED even to deport FAILED asylum seakers.
Labour has FAILED to accept the need for any immigration control whatsoever.
Labour has FAILED to deport criminals that have committed serious crimes such as murder of UK citizens. Remember those damning statistic published 2 years ago about this very matter?
Labour has FAILED to develop an immigration policy that benefits the citizens of the UK.
Labour has FAILED to insist that immigrant integrate into our way of life - and now we are seeing the results of that little experiment, arn't we!
Labour has FAILED to stem the huge numbers of people steaming into the UK through so-called arranged marriages.
But most of all Labour has FAILED - no REFUSED - to listen to the repeated calls from the people to halt unfettered immigration. Instead it chose to denigrate those people who were raising the concerns. Well they now have their answer. Someone IS listening and it is the BNP. All of us have New Labour to thank for THAT little gem.
The British people demand and end to immigration by means of arranged marriages (an outmoded primitive religious custom). They demand an END to all immigration from people who are unskilled or unqualified or whose professions are not required from an economic perspective. They demand that all immigrants have a medical exam and if they are unhealthy their residency refused on the grounds of public cost. They DEMAND that illegal immigrants are deported no matter how long they have managed to avoid detection.
When New Labour has dealt with these matters that threaten the very fabric of our society THEN - AND ONLY THEN - they can start making reforms in other areas.
Yet, Brown chooses to launch hugely complex and controversial proposals that have absolutely nothing whatever to do with the urgent needs of the people. This is a collosal distraction from the issues which he should be concentrating his energy. He is completely out of touch.
If he were really concerned about the constitution, why didn't he recognise the electorates demand for a referendum on the EU, which imposes the majority of our laws????
The public should look at his record since 1997 as both Chancellor and Prime Minister and decide whether he has been a success or not.
Let us see an end to celebrity politics and go back to basics, is Gordon Brown 'fit for purpose'?
One clown to find him
One clown to screw them all
And in the darkness bind them
In Labour Party
Where the failed Socialists lie.
Before NuLabour even think about standing at the next election they need to undo every policy decision since 1997. Stand trial for numerous criminal offences, including war crimes, treason, fraud, child grooming, misappropriation of public funds, accepting bribes, negligence and a thousand and one other offences too many to mention.
NuLabour may have lost every County Council seat in the country but millions still voted for them in the EU elections. 16.09% according to Google. It's worrying to think that 16 people in the country voted for NuLabour, never mind 16.09%. Who benefits from a NuLabour government apart from gypsies, homo's, illegal immigrants and migrants?