As the Total Place agenda gathers pace, The MJ held a round table event with local authority chief executives and some of their partners to understand more about the barriers and benefits of joining up – and what will happen if they don’t. Heather Jameson reports
Listening to those assembled at last month’s Be Birmingham – the city’s local strategic partnership (LSP) – seminar on Total Place, there is already a paradox emerging.
Birmingham, a Total Place pilot, has drawn together delegates from across the private sector – together with some ‘real’ people who access services – to share their experiences of joining up services so far.
What emerges is that councils are at the forefront of the initiative, since other partners and public sector bodies are only vaguely aware of the plans. For this reason, local authorities must take the lead, if Total Place is going to work.
However, it is also clear that they must lead without taking over – a fear raised by many of the non-council representatives at the event. It is an equal partnership which, thus far, only one partner is aware of.
After the seminar, The MJ hosts a round table debate with representatives from local government, the police, LSPs and other partners, to hear how the Total Place agenda is going, and what the barriers are to making this policy work.
Again, the paradox raises its head. ‘I don’t recognise that this is as great a priority in other parts of the public sector as it is in local government. I’m having to tell people that their ministers are interested in it. They are not hearing it directly from them.’
This is something which will have to be resolved – particularly for the larger partners. ‘If we don’t get health on board, it won’t work.’
It seems the barriers to the Total Place agenda are huge.
Like many initiatives from central government, it comes with a list of constraints. However, one chief executive warns that the public sector has a habit of being too restricted by government constraints. He refers to these as ‘more of a loose overcoat than a strait-jacket’.
Lots of energy is going into making things work, and to keeping the partners on board, with ‘too much time spent arguing across the boundaries’.
Another person adds: ‘Some of our partners have been a bit mundane.
‘We need to liven them up.’
An even bleaker picture is painted when local authorities look inwardly.
‘Most of my problems arise because of silo mentalities in the council – not even just across the partnerships.’
And, as ever, there are central government issues. When, we are asked, does the Government ever talk about grants as a single pot, rather than each department talking about its bit of the pot – and how to protect it to meet priorities?
However, it’s not all bad news. As one debater claims: ‘Total Place is a no brainer,’ while another adds: ‘It amazes me how people seem to connect to this so quickly.’
As one person puts it, there is an ‘a-ha moment’ – the point at which people very quickly realise that joined-up public services could be cheaper, more effective and more citizen-focused than the current mish-mash of service delivery.
How long the ‘a-ha moment’ will take is variable. ‘It is different in different places, but we mustn’t try to move everyone forward at the same place.’
Joining up the different cultures has its problems. For example, there are no efficiency targets for the NHS, while local authorities are judged largely by efficiency. What motivation will the health sector have to join up? For join up they must. ‘The efficiency agenda is not going to be made across organisations individually.’ Therefore, it is imperative that public services come together to save cash across the piece.
And the reasons behind the sudden push now are clear. ‘The real improvement driver is what will the state of public sector funds.’
One debater ventures an opinion that the recession has made the Government ‘desperate for things to do’ in an effort to rescue the economy.
That, in turn, has given more impetus to the Total Place agenda.
A shift towards the Comprehensive Area Assessments is also pushing this forward. The public services are an area which will be judged as a whole in future, so they will have to move towards acting like a whole.
But is the Total Place agenda really that new, or is it just a swanky re-branding of an old policy, in a bid to make it sound fresh and exciting? It’s not new for some, it would seem. ‘We pre-date what Michael Bichard has been doing by quite a long way, but I’m glad he’s doing it.’ And another delegate adds: ‘Strategically, it has not been happening, but operationally, its been going on for years.’
As one debater points out: ‘The name Total Place has created momentum and added more weight to it.’
Another adds: ‘There is almost a weariness across the country in some areas about LSPs... this is a potential energiser for LSPs.’
Staff are also ‘weary and resigned’ to yet ‘another government initiative’, but as yet, most are not even aware of Total Place. ‘There are lots of people whose jobs depend on the status quo. There will be a lot of passive resistance to change.’
As one debater points out: ‘We haven’t talked much today about members.’ So, how far have elected members bought into the idea of Total Place? In some authorities, there is an attitude of ‘let’s not bother their pretty little heads about it.’
But in reality, ‘politicians have been in it from the start. We are absolutely in the political terrain’.
It is not always as easy a sell. For many councillors, the idea of saving money for ‘someone else’ is not that appealing. They, too, have to be brought on board.
Politics will feature heavily in the agenda. One of the pilots tells us: ‘We have chosen our pilot projects on the basis that we know we can produce evidence from them in time for the pre-Budget report.’ Although some of them are the council’s priorities, not all are. It was seen as more crucial to get quick results to prove the scheme than to focus on the key issues.
However, this is not just about the pilots. Those around the table are convinced that we should not wait for the results of the pilots, and councils should just ‘get on with it’.
There is an urgency around the agenda, and it is clear there are a lot of other bodies to get on board.
Otherwise, as one of our debaters puts it, it could descend ‘from Total Place to total farce’.
Birmingham, a Total Place pilot, has drawn together delegates from across the private sector – together with some ‘real’ people who access services – to share their experiences of joining up services so far.
What emerges is that councils are at the forefront of the initiative, since other partners and public sector bodies are only vaguely aware of the plans. For this reason, local authorities must take the lead, if Total Place is going to work.
However, it is also clear that they must lead without taking over – a fear raised by many of the non-council representatives at the event. It is an equal partnership which, thus far, only one partner is aware of.
After the seminar, The MJ hosts a round table debate with representatives from local government, the police, LSPs and other partners, to hear how the Total Place agenda is going, and what the barriers are to making this policy work.
Again, the paradox raises its head. ‘I don’t recognise that this is as great a priority in other parts of the public sector as it is in local government. I’m having to tell people that their ministers are interested in it. They are not hearing it directly from them.’
This is something which will have to be resolved – particularly for the larger partners. ‘If we don’t get health on board, it won’t work.’
It seems the barriers to the Total Place agenda are huge.
Like many initiatives from central government, it comes with a list of constraints. However, one chief executive warns that the public sector has a habit of being too restricted by government constraints. He refers to these as ‘more of a loose overcoat than a strait-jacket’.
Lots of energy is going into making things work, and to keeping the partners on board, with ‘too much time spent arguing across the boundaries’.
Another person adds: ‘Some of our partners have been a bit mundane.
‘We need to liven them up.’
An even bleaker picture is painted when local authorities look inwardly.
‘Most of my problems arise because of silo mentalities in the council – not even just across the partnerships.’
And, as ever, there are central government issues. When, we are asked, does the Government ever talk about grants as a single pot, rather than each department talking about its bit of the pot – and how to protect it to meet priorities?
However, it’s not all bad news. As one debater claims: ‘Total Place is a no brainer,’ while another adds: ‘It amazes me how people seem to connect to this so quickly.’
As one person puts it, there is an ‘a-ha moment’ – the point at which people very quickly realise that joined-up public services could be cheaper, more effective and more citizen-focused than the current mish-mash of service delivery.
How long the ‘a-ha moment’ will take is variable. ‘It is different in different places, but we mustn’t try to move everyone forward at the same place.’
Joining up the different cultures has its problems. For example, there are no efficiency targets for the NHS, while local authorities are judged largely by efficiency. What motivation will the health sector have to join up? For join up they must. ‘The efficiency agenda is not going to be made across organisations individually.’ Therefore, it is imperative that public services come together to save cash across the piece.
And the reasons behind the sudden push now are clear. ‘The real improvement driver is what will the state of public sector funds.’
One debater ventures an opinion that the recession has made the Government ‘desperate for things to do’ in an effort to rescue the economy.
That, in turn, has given more impetus to the Total Place agenda.
A shift towards the Comprehensive Area Assessments is also pushing this forward. The public services are an area which will be judged as a whole in future, so they will have to move towards acting like a whole.
But is the Total Place agenda really that new, or is it just a swanky re-branding of an old policy, in a bid to make it sound fresh and exciting? It’s not new for some, it would seem. ‘We pre-date what Michael Bichard has been doing by quite a long way, but I’m glad he’s doing it.’ And another delegate adds: ‘Strategically, it has not been happening, but operationally, its been going on for years.’
As one debater points out: ‘The name Total Place has created momentum and added more weight to it.’
Another adds: ‘There is almost a weariness across the country in some areas about LSPs... this is a potential energiser for LSPs.’
Staff are also ‘weary and resigned’ to yet ‘another government initiative’, but as yet, most are not even aware of Total Place. ‘There are lots of people whose jobs depend on the status quo. There will be a lot of passive resistance to change.’
As one debater points out: ‘We haven’t talked much today about members.’ So, how far have elected members bought into the idea of Total Place? In some authorities, there is an attitude of ‘let’s not bother their pretty little heads about it.’
But in reality, ‘politicians have been in it from the start. We are absolutely in the political terrain’.
It is not always as easy a sell. For many councillors, the idea of saving money for ‘someone else’ is not that appealing. They, too, have to be brought on board.
Politics will feature heavily in the agenda. One of the pilots tells us: ‘We have chosen our pilot projects on the basis that we know we can produce evidence from them in time for the pre-Budget report.’ Although some of them are the council’s priorities, not all are. It was seen as more crucial to get quick results to prove the scheme than to focus on the key issues.
However, this is not just about the pilots. Those around the table are convinced that we should not wait for the results of the pilots, and councils should just ‘get on with it’.
There is an urgency around the agenda, and it is clear there are a lot of other bodies to get on board.
Otherwise, as one of our debaters puts it, it could descend ‘from Total Place to total farce’.
The panel
Stephen Hughes, chief executive, Birmingham City Council
Peter Hay, strategic director, Birmingham City Council
John Atkinson, managing director, Leadership Centre for Local Government
Stephen Taylor, director, Taylor Haig
Suzette Davenport, assistant chief constable, West Midlands Police
Andy Hancox, director, Improvement and Efficiency West Midlands
Jackie Mould, director, Be Birmingham
Barry Quirk, chief executive, Lewisham LBCJohn McCready, chairman, EKOS
Alex Rawlins, local government strategy adviser, Audit Commission
David Jenkins, chief executive, Dorset CC
John Sinnot, chief executive, Leicestershire CC
Michael Burton, editor, The MJ (chair)
Heather Jameson, deputy editor, The MJ
Stephen Hughes, chief executive, Birmingham City Council
Peter Hay, strategic director, Birmingham City Council
John Atkinson, managing director, Leadership Centre for Local Government
Stephen Taylor, director, Taylor Haig
Suzette Davenport, assistant chief constable, West Midlands Police
Andy Hancox, director, Improvement and Efficiency West Midlands
Jackie Mould, director, Be Birmingham
Barry Quirk, chief executive, Lewisham LBCJohn McCready, chairman, EKOS
Alex Rawlins, local government strategy adviser, Audit Commission
David Jenkins, chief executive, Dorset CC
John Sinnot, chief executive, Leicestershire CC
Michael Burton, editor, The MJ (chair)
Heather Jameson, deputy editor, The MJ
