Monday 4 March 2019

Some Encouraging Signs

Following Friday's damning NAO indictment of TR, views are divided as to whether TR2 will proceed or common sense will prevail and probation restored to something like its former state. As the situation continues to deteriorate, and we may yet see further CRCs fail under Interserve, here's some encouraging analysis from Will Hutton writing in the Observer yesterday:-   

At last we are turning away from our mania for hiving off public services


The Tredegar Workmen’s Medical Aid Society was a mini self-help medical co-operative established in the late 19th century on the principle that anyone in Tredegar should get free health as they needed. It is always credited as giving Nye Bevan, who worked there and sat on its board, the inspiration for the NHS. But it also inspired the author AJ Cronin, who also worked there, to write his 1937 bestseller The Citadel.

It was this book, more than any other, that persuaded the English middle class that far from socialist, a national health system based on the same co-operative principles of mutuality was what everyone needed. Health was a lottery and those unfortunate to suffer illness should receive free help from, in effect, a vastly upscaled version of what worked in Tredegar.

Cronin’s hero was an idealistic Dr Manson, who works in a fictional self-help hospital in a town in the Welsh valleys, but whose talent propels him to London, where he becomes temporarily seduced by the fleshpots of private practice. But appalled by the ethics of doctors driven only by personal enrichment, and the way the then medical establishment protects them, he risks all to accuse an incompetent surgeon of murder; he vindictively countersues.

The scenes at the resulting hearing are Cronin’s finest writing – and Manson wins. But what is most telling, causing a sensation at the time, is the vivid portrayal of the incompatibility of values – profit-maximising as opposed to co-operatively organised medicine. It wasn’t only the soldiers in 1945 who voted for the NHS – it was their officers who had read The Citadel. It spoke to a lived truth. Values stood behind how health was delivered.

In the wave after wave of attacks on the NHS launched by the right, the issue of values is brushed aside. The monopoly of the NHS must be broken. Forget the principles of the co-operative: in practice, runs the argument, it becomes an inefficient monopoly of production and delivery that must be challenged by private sector competition. The NHS can still be free at the point of use, but the structures that provide health must be the closest simulacrum to a market as possible. The NHS can be reduced to a brand that houses a hyperefficient network of private sector deliverers competing for contracts.

Hence the Andrew Lansley health “reforms” in 2012 that compelled the NHS to outsource delivery. But the same thinking informed the Tories’ engagement across the public sector. Thus justice secretary Chris Grayling’s probation service “reforms” in 2013 and the normally sane Philip Hammond, as defence secretary, agreeing that army recruitment could be contracted out to Capita in 2012. Tory antipathy to the public sector was given free rein, the lush public outsourcing industry was turbo-boosted – and the public sector fragmented.

Last week saw the death knell of all three “reforms” and with it a pillar of thinking that sustains the current Tory party. Thursday’s call by NHS England to repeal section 75 of Lansley’s Health and Social Care Act, which requires every significant contract worth cumulatively more than £600K to be outsourced in any circumstance, replacing them with a best value test, is a watershed. It will empower commissioners to weigh up whether the loss of an integrated, co-operative service by outsourcing offsets any short-term financial gain. A health system is a structure of interconnected moving parts that requires co-ordination, backed by the overriding principle that the alpha and omega of decision making is care, not maximum profit.

The scathing reports, also last week, from the National Audit Office on Grayling’s contracting out of probation and from the public accounts committee on the contracting out of army recruitment were the coup de grace for outsourcing. Probation, and the rehabilitation of offenders, is a vocation requiring patience, resources, dedication and emotional intelligence. If a private company is to enter the lists, it needs to be founded explicitly on those public benefit purposes and accorded necessary resource, otherwise outsourcing is bound to be a fiasco.

Grayling, an incompetent ideologue (see also his squandering of £33m of public money on the Brexit ferry fiasco), just believed the Tory mantras. His proposed community rehabilitation companies turned out to be a front for firms that overclaimed what was possible in absurdly demanding contracts focused only on hitting short-term targets. The result: ballooning reoffending rates. The whole scheme wound up early at a £500m cost to the taxpayer.

Similarly, the idea that young men and women could be persuaded to sign up for a career of service that might lead to death by an outsourcing company using digital platforms is plainly bonkers. You need former soldiers to explain to young people face to face what is involved, via recruitment offices owned by the armed services, or the system collapses into a mercenary relationship. We get paid to hire you; you get paid potentially to die. The deal that inspires is to want to serve your country, not Capita’s recruitment targets. Of course the firm is failing to recruit and the army has been hollowed out. Values matter. What’s more, none of it works as a business model. Companies can’t deliver more for less and still make a return: it is the fantasy land of the right. Outsourcing companies Carillion and Working Links have collapsed and overindebted Interserve is fighting for its life. The whole sector was founded on an impossibilism that is now being reversed.

Capitalism is not the answer to everything. Even on its own terms, markets have to be designed, companies carefully constituted, values asserted and incentives regulated. Privatisation cannot be unleashed, unfettered, on areas from health to army recruitment, which have duty and citizenship at their heart. We pay the taxes necessary to run the public services we want – and if we want diversity of delivery invite organisations with a charitable or public benefit mission to take part. The organisational principles and values of the Tredegar Workmen’s Medical Aid Society were right for then and right for now.

Will Hutton is an Observer columnist

29 comments:

  1. From Hold The Front Page Website:-

    Aides of transport secretary Chris Grayling have asked a regional daily to stop calling him by the nickname “Failing Grayling,” a celebrity news website has claimed.

    Gossip site Popbitch has alleged that representatives of the transport secretary have contacted the Yorkshire Post over the newspaper’s continual use of the term in its pages. The Post was the first newspaper to use the ‘Failing Grayling’ epithet which has now been taken up by large sections of the print and broadcast media.

    Post editor James Mitchinson declined to comment on the claims when approached by HTFP, but admitted on Twitter that the newspaper’s appearance in Popbitch had been a “proud moment” – adding he had “long been a fan” of the site.

    The Post has previously called for Mr Grayling, to resign over what it describes as the “contempt” he has shown for its patch over ongoing problems with the rail network. He has also recently come under fire for awarding a ferry contract to a company with no ships.

    The Popbitch post states: “Poor Grayling is clearly struggling to cope having become the whipping boy for everyone with a mean word to say about this government. Apparently his people have been in touch with the Yorkshire Post, asking them to desist from always calling him ‘Failing Grayling’ as he really doesn’t like it.”

    Linking to an opinion piece entitled ‘The Yorkshire Post says: Failing Grayling – Theresa May put on spot over ferry deal’, Popbitch added: “It doesn’t seem to be working though…”

    In addition to the response by James on Twitter, the Yorkshire Post opinion section’s official account posted: “Be happier still when Chris Grayling – or Failing Grayling as we dubbed him before any other media outlet – gets his P45. No longer a joke for all those lives ruined by his mismanagement of railways.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe an urgent question on his Eurotunnel payout today?
      And as for encouraging signs, today's Guardian in a piece about the above mentioned minister concludes saying quite emphatically that the 'probation experiment is over'.

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/03/the-guardian-view-on-chris-grayling-the-joke-is-on-the-voters

      'Getafix

      Delete
    2. He was dubbed Failing Grayling here long before the Yorkshire Post got mithered about their local train service!

      Delete
    3. From end of Guardian piece:-

      It’s good to see policies change in response to outsourcing failures. The probation experiment is over; NHS bosses are making the case against competition in the health service. But if ministers aren’t held to account for such wasteful exercises, people will feel justified in their cynicism. Politicians should instead be doing everything they can to counter this. Failing Grayling is not funny anymore.

      Delete
  2. FE weekly.

    Markets aren’t the panacea for public services

    Markets aren't the panacea for public services
    The failure of the provider should prompt us to reflect seriously on the role of the marketplace in learning and skills, says Stephen Evans

    Working Links’ fall into administration is bad news for the people they support and their employees. Its case is different to that of learndirect and other providers. But together, they should give pause for thought about the nature of markets in learning and skills and their limits.

    Firstly, commissioners need to be realistic. A large part of Working Links’ problems came from its struggling probation contracts. Its management and staff bear responsibility for bad practice, such as assessing probation users as lower risk to avoid putting sufficient resources into helping them. But the government should have heeded the warnings at the time of procurement that you couldn’t cut huge amounts of money out of the system without affecting the service. Added to a focus on price, rather than value, this leads to a vicious circle where providers either put in unrealistic bids or face going out of business.

    Ultimately, good public services cost money. We should always strive for greater efficiency, but procurement isn’t a sort of inverse magic money tree – sometimes you get what you pay for.

    Secondly, this looks like the end of what was meant to be a new type of provider. Working Links started as a large, national partnership between the private, public and voluntary sectors in the New Labour years, intended to be the best of all worlds. It was sold off in 2016 to a private equity firm. Inevitably this leads to a push for higher profits at the risk of its social mission. The same can be said of learndirect, whose worst excesses (such as spending taxpayers’ money sponsoring a Formula One team) were rightly exposed by FE Week.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can't copy and paste the rest for some strange reason.
      Whole article here.

      https://feweek.co.uk/2019/03/04/markets-arent-the-panacea-for-public-services/

      Delete
    2. it contiues...

      Perhaps the future is more local? We’re already seeing that shift in the employment sector, where a greater proportion of opportunities are now locally commissioned. Does the contraction of the large outsourcers mean the rise of the local specialists? The devolution of the Adult Education Budget in parts of England could hasten this.

      Thirdly, markets need managing and have their limits. Contracts and targets drive behaviour, whether set out through a procurement or managing an in-house public service.

      That’s why we need effective monitoring of quality, including through Ofsted, and service standards. But you can’t write everything in a contract and you can’t monitor everything. The same is true of a service delivered in-house by the public sector of course.

      Empowering employers and individuals can help in this. What are the minimum levels of service standards people can expect and what do they do if these aren’t met? The Apprenticeship Levy has the potential to shift the dial for employers – putting them in greater control through their levy accounts. Learning and Work Institute has argued that Personal Learning Accounts could empower individuals, and I’m pleased that the Welsh government has committed to trialling them. Bottom-up accountability to customers can complement top-down regulation.

      The NHS ten-year plan for England argued that regulations requiring services to be tendered were holding back the integration of services that patients, often with complex conditions and needs, required. I wonder if we should start to make the same argument for learning and skills?

      The lack of an overall vision and principles guiding decisions doesn’t help. Nor does seeing each service or contract in isolation. Learning and Work Institute will shortly be launching a project exploring how we balance a focus on integrated services with ensuring that we don’t lock out people with fresh ideas.

      The decline and fall of Working Links and other providers is sad for all involved. It also raises big questions about how to build learning and skills systems that work for people and employers. We need a diverse range of high-quality providers. But we also need to recognise that markets have limits.

      Delete
  3. "Probation, and the rehabilitation of offenders, is a vocation requiring patience, resources, dedication and emotional intelligence."

    Mr Hutton must have read this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  4. NAO report

    Recommendations

    21 The Transforming Rehabilitation reforms have had a profound impact on the probation system. Our report comes at a critical juncture; there is limited time between now and the termination of the existing contracts at the end of 2020, and, in light of its past experience, the Ministry needs to think carefully about its next steps.

    The Ministry should:

    a - pause and reflect on its proposed approach to provide assurance that this is both deliverable and consistent with its strategic aims for the probation system. In doing so it should evaluate thoroughly the responses to its consultation, be explicit about its risk appetite for provider failure and variations in the quality of probation services and consider how it will respond to the risks set out in this report;

    b - in parallel, work with the Reducing Reoffending Board to publish a crossgovernment strategy that spells out how it will work with other bodies to reduce reoffending. This should include setting measurable objectives and clarifying accountability for different services across probation providers, local authorities and central government departments; and

    c - develop a detailed plan for managing the wind-down period of the existing contracts, refining its approach to contract management and assurance so it focuses on the areas of greatest risk. This should include obtaining assurance that CRCs deliver services to at least minimum expected standards, that any service credits due are identified and collected, and any material breaches of contract are enforced.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NAO report

      3.3 In July 2018, the Ministry announced it would terminate its contracts with CRCs 14 months early, in December 2020. It concluded that activity volumes and reoffending rates would need to change by “unprecedented” levels for CRCs to become profitable. The Ministry judged that losses could result in CRCs withdrawing services, unacceptable further deteriorations in performance and potential multiple provider insolvencies. It also identified risks to the continuity of probation services, owing to the scale of the challenge in bringing services back in-house in the event of multiple provider failure. Its preferred commercial response was to:

      • terminate contracts with no compensation payable to providers (except for paying providers reasonable sub-contractor breakage costs and redundancy costs), a requirement set by HM Treasury;

      • improve the frequency of contact between probation officers and offenders at no cost to the Ministry, recognising HM Inspectorate of Probation’s (the Inspectorate’s) criticisms;

      • improve CRCs’ provision of financial and workforce management data at no cost to the Ministry; and

      • improve CRC delivery of Through the Gate (TTG) services against an enhanced specification, at a cost of £43 million to the Ministry up to December 2020

      Delete
    2. NAO report - Problem? Then why not just hire more contract compliance jobs:

      3.20 The Ministry has so far relied on ad-hoc exercises to understand CRCs’financial positions... It is considering recruiting additional staff to help it manage future contracts effectively. In our 2016 report we highlighted that the Ministry had invested in contract management, which accounted for 2.1% of its total contract spend. In 2018-19, contract management costs (excluding operational assurance functions) are 3% of total contract spend.

      Delete
  5. https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/Justice/correspondence/David-Lidington-Reducing-Reoffending-Board.pdf

    Lidington in Aug 2018: "I chair the Board, which has a standing core membership of the Secretaries of State in the Ministry of Justice, Home Office, Cabinet Office, HM Treasury, Department for Work and Pensions, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, Department for Education, Department of Health and Social Care and the Wales Office."

    No further details of any meetings, reports, minutes or the RRB's existence seem to be available anywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 3.11 In October 2018, the Ministry was approached by the owner of Working Links, Aurelius, to discuss the financial situation of Working Links and its three CRCs. Aurelius was concerned about the financial position of Working Links and asked the Ministry to consider Working Links’ exit from the contracts prior to the December 2020 termination date.

    3.12 The Ministry considered a range of options for contingency plans, which it narrowed down to two:

    • create a government company to take over probation services in Wales and the South West – transferring staff and assets into a government company managed by HMPPS; or

    • ask another CRC to take over probation services in Wales and the South West – transferring staff and assets to that CRC under the same contractual arrangements as their existing CRC contract.

    3.13 The Ministry evaluated these options and explored the extent to which existing parent companies would be willing to take over the services of Working Links’ CRCs, whilst maintaining the principle that no parent company can control more than 25% of the total market. On 5 February 2019, Aurelius announced that it would be selling the remaining parts of its public sector business in the UK, including its ownership of the three CRCs. On 14 February 2019, Working Links and its three CRCs went into administration and, on the next day, the Ministry varied the contract of Kent, Surrey and Sussex CRC, owned by Seetec, to transfer staff and services in Wales and the South West to Kent, Surrey and Sussex.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NAO report clarifies:

      £467 million comprises the following:

      the Ministry of Justice sought to stabilise Community Rehabilitation Companies’ financial positions in 2016-17 and 2017-18 through interim payments of £88 million;

      adjustments to contracts in 2017-18 to reflect higher fixed costs, worth an estimated £207 million to termination in December 2020;

      and at least £171 million early termination costs.

      Delete
  7. Amazingly, the government send the health secetery to answer Graylings transport questions.
    How bad does it have to get?

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/grayling-brexit-ferries-statement-transport-avoid-mps-health-secretary-a8806626.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beleaguered Chris Grayling has risked fresh criticism after failing to personally answer questions from MPs about the Brexit ferries fiasco.

      Matt Hancock, the health secretary – rather than the transport secretary – will face the Commons over Friday’s shock £33m payment to Eurotunnel to settle the controversy over cross-Channel contracts.

      Labour immediately condemned the decision, claiming Mr Hancock would be acting as Mr Grayling’s “human shield’ later today.

      Delete
  8. Interserve's shareholder in-fighting continues:


    Struggling outsourcer Interserve’s biggest shareholder, which last week threatened to sue the company over its handling of a rescue deal, has written to the board to propose new terms for the restructuring.

    Coltrane Asset Management, a US hedge fund and 27 per cent shareholder, has been railing against Interserve’s suggestions of a deal with its lenders for the last month because it originally stripped existing shareholders of 97.5 per cent of the firm's, instead handing that equity to lenders.

    When Interserve suggested new terms on Wednesday which doubled shareholder value to five per cent, Coltrane’s directors were so incensed they threatened to sue the outsourcer, calling it a "terrible" deal.

    The fund, owned by financier Mandeep Manku, on Monday suggestested a new deal which involves issuing at least £110m of new shares in the company, to be offered to shareholders pro rate and underwritten by Coltrane.

    http://www.cityam.com/274121/interserve-biggest-shareholder-issues-fresh-demands-rescue

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Meanwhile, back at Interserve Towers:

      My way or the highway: Interserve stock plunges again as chairman says revised rescue deal is 'only viable option'

      There was more misery for Interserve investors on Monday as shares plummeted nine per cent in morning trading, after chairman Glynn Barker said the firm’s controversial proposed rescue deal is the “only viable option”.

      http://www.cityam.com/274098/my-way-highway-interserve-stock-plunges-again-chairman-says


      Shares are currently down 12%, back down to 15.65p

      Delete
    2. It's no wonder our management within Cheshire and Greater Manchester CRC behave as they do backed by the board of Interserve to constantly bullshit, bully and oppress staff

      Delete
    3. John Wiseman had to go it's a matter of time. Tr2 will fail.

      Delete
  9. To recap in advance of the new 10-area-format TR2:

    Working Links - 3 CRCs - now handed to Seetec... (0)

    ... Seetec - KSS CRC, but now + DDC, BGSW & Wales (4)

    Interserve - HLNY, WYorks, CGM, Merseys + HantsIOW (5)

    MTCNovo - TV + London (2)

    Sodexo - Northumbria, C&L, SYorks, BeNCH, N&S + essx (6)

    RRP - SWM + DNLR (2)

    ARCC - DTV (1)

    EOS - WWM (1)

    ReplyDelete
  10. update the list rrp is now owned by an australian company apm.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Market share will be capped at 30% of caseload and
    a maximum of 2 contract package area"
    According to the Management Engagement reports. Where does that leave the CRC's with multiple areas?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It will be a max of 2 of the newly defined 10 areas.

      Delete
    2. New areas & possible constituents:

      1. North East - northumbria, dtv
      2. North West - c&l, cgm, mersey
      3. Yorks & Humberside - wyorks, hny (lincs to move?)
      4. West Mids - wwm, swm
      5. East Mids - dlnr, lincs? bench to split? northants?
      6. South West - ddc, bgsw
      7. South Central - beds? hantsiow, tv
      8. East of England - n&s, essex, cambs?
      9. London - london
      10. Kent Surrey Sussex - kss

      Seetec 6 & 10
      Mtc 7 & 9
      Sodexo 1 & 8
      RRP/APM - 4 & 5
      Interserve - 2 & 3

      Delete
    3. Anon20:55 (below) has it dead right. And at what further financial + emotional cost? HMPPS/MoJ staff don't care. They're "just doing their job".

      NAO, JSC, PAC - don't let the charlatans get away with it AGAIN. You're meant to be the oversight, the check & balance. Stop this nonsense NOW!

      Delete
  12. Farting about with the contracts is such a stupidity. Taking the CRCs into NOS would be an important but only first step. Lord, the NPS is a dysfunctional hellhole to be working for or supervised by, but it would be a start

    ReplyDelete
  13. http://www.cityam.com/274062/hs2-hit-legal-claim-american-engineering-giant-bechtel-over

    ReplyDelete
  14. In our office NE, most of us Pos are working at 130 - 140%. We have no videolink because someone failed to renew the contract, staff are going off long term sick with stress, morale is at an all time low. Yesterday, we get an email from the Deputy Director CBE!! T
    telling us how proud she is and how we should be too. So patronising, you just haven't a bloody clue.

    ReplyDelete