If we continue to run the public sector as a business, another scandal is inevitable

It is very possible that another crisis is being kept quiet somewhere now. When public servants are scared to speak out, something is rotten

Six years ago today, the public got answers over the death of Peter Connelly – known then as Baby P. Ed Balls, then Children’s Secretary, sacked Sharon Shoesmith, Head of Haringey Children’s Services, live on TV. Other social workers were suspended and a doctor was charged with misconduct; the issue seemed to have been dealt with.

Three years ago today, the Francis inquiry wrapped up its investigations in to the scandal at Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust, where 1200 people died needlessly between 2005 and 2009. A public inquiry costing £10m should, one hopes, reassure people.

When the next public sector scandal comes to light, our politicians will take their usual oaths. They’ll say “this must never happen again”, vilify individuals involved, and, if they can, play party politics, as Jeremy Hunt did when he said: “Labour can and will be held accountable for what happened at Mid-Staffs”. But they won’t change the culture behind the story.

Peter Connelly’s social worker, Maria Ward, was responsible for 18 children when guidelines indicated a maximum of 12. Dr Sabah Al-Zayyat, the doctor driven to a nervous breakdown by the vicious coverage of her role in Peter’s death, was under qualified and working in a horribly understaffed department. So we should be shouting, loudly, about the recent General Medical Council report which says that nearly one in 10 trainee doctors have reported experiencing bullying in the workplace, and that there has been a dramatic decline in the number of patient safety concerns raised this year. When public servants are scared to speak out, it suggests that something is rotten.

To get to the root of this, we need a change of ethos. At the moment, we think of the public as the equivalent of shareholders in a business, for whom we must maximise visible value, and users as consumers. But a business’s relationship with its customers, who can withdraw trade, is different from a public service’s relationship with its users, who rely on it. And shareholders can measure success on balance sheets, unlike services designed to serve the collective good of people. A business cultivates its customers to provide value to those in charge; treating service users this way inverts the point of public service, in which we should be using available resources to do the work of society, rather than bosses or politicians.

Running a public service as a business means that those who work within it exist to help an individual public body’s management in their competition with others, instead of to do a public good. The “culture of fear and bullying” which the Francis report heard of at Mid-Staffs was terrible for patients but excellent for managers, who achieved their strategic goal of gaining Foundation Trust status.

Telling teachers, doctors or social workers that their loyalty is to an academy chain, an NHS trust or a local authority also suppresses any instinct they may have to tell the public the truth about the reality in their workplace. It is very possible that another crisis is being kept quiet somewhere now. Cases such as that of Dr Raj Mattu, a cardiologist who shone a light on the impact of target culture in Coventry over a 15-year period and whose employers spent £6m trying to silence him, shows that there are deeply ingrained barriers in the way of whistleblowers raising the alarm.

The corporate model of public services also means holding people to account in a way that serves politicians, not the public. So public servants do what employers expect of them and meet targets. When they face an intractable conflict of interests between serving society and serving their superiors, politicians respond by bringing in ever-tighter so-called standards to enforce the will of the powerful. The bitter irony is that attempts to enforce the ideology of free enterprise stifle any sense of individualism among our public sector workers.

As in business, it is also increasingly fashionable to see working in the public sector as a career path. This is promoted by Labour as well as the Conservatives – hence Tristram Hunt, the Shadow Education Secretary, suggesting that “master teachers” will help to cure the ills of our education system. But creating hierarchies takes the focus away from those whom the system is supposed to serve, and encourages ordinary workers to tow the line from above in anticipation of the next promotion.

In such an environment, functioning unions – however imperfect they may be – should have an important role, to give a voice to ordinary workers who see the impact of top-down policies. But it suits the interests of managers to silence collective voices which speak uncomfortable truths to power. Witness the pointless recent attempt to remove an elected representative, Julie Davies, in Haringey’s schools – and the subsequent attacks on her, and those striking for their right to elect her, in the press (that’s Haringey, not Hong Kong).

Everyone would benefit if we remembered that public service involves providing something which society needs in order to remain functioning, civilised and democratic. But for those who still cling to that ideal in Britain today, it’s a lonely and unhappy existence.