The Reluctant Armchair Auditor

Sorting spending fact from fiction

Living in the past or Fantasy Island

with 7 comments

It’s probably an age thing but increasingly these days I seem to living in a state of perpetual deja vu. Suddenly it’s the early 90s or 80s again as fear and pestilence stalk public sector land. So much so that I am considering looking out my Don Johnson pastel jackets, raybans and ditching my pringle socks. Loafers don’t need socks.

In many ways it’s a great shame that our national predilection for dressing up in ‘historic’ costumes for ‘living history’ weekends does not extend to reenacting public policy screw-ups. Nope. Each generation of political leaders can re-heat whatever garbage they think the electorate has forgotten about before serving it up fresh.

No one out there is going to get all grumpy because they’ve suddenly remembered that the Big Society sounds eerily similar to the good old days of … well the good old days. Yes, I do mean Back to Basics and the spinster on her blessed bike still cycling to evensong. Although in the Big Society presumably she would have had to deliver some home care support, done a shift at the nearest community asset and filled in some pot holes before getting to church.

Of course ‘no more boom and bust’  has had more outings than an Australian XI. This is even-handed grumpiness on my part. I’ve worked with and for politicians of all views (and none so far as I could tell). What unites almost all of them though is an inability to see the perfectly forseeable consequences of a given policy decision. Or, if they do own that skill, to be pathologically unable to utter in public what they must know to be true.

My first day back post-Christmas with my abacus has found me trying to help clients deal with the impact of CSR2010. My attention was drawn to a highly – unintentionally so – amusing set of comments by a minister from CLG. I’ll not name names because I’ve come to the conclusion that it only encourages them and the SPADs with whom they spend too much time.

Apparently it is only ‘lazy councils’ that will go looking for frontline blood to let to implement the cuts in council spending that CLG was in such a hurry to agree with the Treasury. Here’s the quote from the Sunday Times:

If local authorities cut out excessive chief executive pay, share back offices, join forces to procure, and root out wild overspends, they can safeguard key frontline services. Only lazy councils will attempt to use residents to boost their bank balances.

Let’s run an armchair auditor’s rule over those frontline service savers in some more detail.

‘ … cut out excessive chief executive pay … ‘

A great ministerial favourite this one. Let’s examine the premise. Reducing all Chief Executive pay to let’s say £120,000 – that’s a good £22,ooo less than the garbage comparison of the PM’s pay – would stop 9% reductions in council spending hitting the frontline? Really? A client of mine is looking for around £3 million of savings in 2011/12. Deleting every post in the corporate management team would barely yield 10% of the savings figure needed.

‘ … share back offices … ‘

Procurement takes time. Good procurement takes even more time. Merging back office functions sounds easy doesn’t it? I’m not sure any businessman or woman who has tried it would agree. Getting the Morrisons/Safeways issues sorted took years. Few, if any, of the organisations I am familiar with have not already got various partnering arrangements underway. In any event there’s a perfectly respectable stream of thought that argues that maintaining integrated back and front line functions serves customers better and at less cost too.

‘ … join forces to procure … ‘

There’s always more that can be done on procurement as lots of reviews have shown over the years. So I would cede some ground on this one. But I would offer just one thought. Great procurement depends on clarity about knowing what you want as a customer and having outstanding service providers working with you to achieve just that. At the minute everyone is so focused on putting out the fire in their part of the public service woodland that it’s getting near impossible to see the forest as a whole.

Frontloading cuts to encourage councils to be super innovative sounds pretty clever in a sixth form debating society in the real world in defies believe. In the few weeks now available to sort the 2011/12 budgets scope for innovative procurement approaches will be pretty narrow.

‘ … root out wild overspends … ‘

No evidence was offered here for the sort of overspend the minister had in mind. The thinking behind the quote is the most interesting thing though because it does the thing that upsets Mr Redwood so much. It confuses a structural problem – CSR2010 – with a current account issue. Sorting out an overspend means you return to the spending level of the agreed budget. Of course what CSR2010 does is to lower the budget ceiling. So just sorting out the overspend is not enough.

There comes a time in the life of almost all political administrations when the contest between hope and reality gets too obvious to avoid. Administrations at the end of their lives tend to the fantastical to avoid facing inconvenient truths. The deeper the problems the wilder the statements. It’s unusual for a relatively young administration to be reaching for the hyperbolic but I suppose it shows the depth of the problems it thinks it’s got.

The trouble is that the ‘trouble’ has barely begun yet.

I boggled on Sunday while watching the PM on the Andrew Marr programme. He said that sorting out the public finances was last year’s problem. This year’s was all about growth. That’s an unusually stark illustration of the gap in experience of almost everyone in our national political life. Announcements, interviews, news releases and leaks do not deliver anything except sentiment.

The problem is that the public finances have not yet been sorted. Doing that depends on the work of ‘lazy’ organisations at the sharp end. It’s going to be bloody.

Advertisements

Written by reluctantarmchairauditor

January 11, 2011 at 7:47 am

7 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by PublicSectorBloggers, ReluctantAAuditor. ReluctantAAuditor said: Living in the past or Fantasy Island – musings from a reluctant Armchair Auditor on 'lazy councils' and spending cuts http://wp.me/p1cXFq-1Q […]

  2. Really, what kind of an (albeit reluctan) armchair auditor are you! Are you not aware of a much more significant policy dictate imposed by Mr Pickles? That of the change in the organisations name from CLG to DCLG. Given Mr Pickles’ appetite for transparancy and cost effectiveness, I wonder if you should put in an FOI request to see if they have undertaken an Impact Assessment into the costs and benefits of such a policy change, and if so, what is the net benefit/cost of such a policy change, and if not why not!

    Armchair potato

    January 15, 2011 at 1:44 pm

    • I hang my head in shame at making such a school boy error. There’s no defence or explanation sufficient to magnitude of the crime.

      Yours, a truly sorry Reluctant Armchair Auditor

      reluctantarmchairauditor

      January 15, 2011 at 11:47 pm

  3. […] Living in the past or Fantasy Island – This post takes a while to get going but offers an interesting dissection, from an auditor’s point of view, of Grant Schapps’ comment that appeared in the Sunday Times – […]

  4. I do entirely agree with the thrust of this article but sadly I have to audit your statements

    “A client of mine is looking for around £3 million of savings in 2011/12. Deleting every post in the corporate management team would barely yield 1% of the savings figure needed.”

    1% of 3 million is £30,000 – to be honest I’d be surprised if the whole of the corporate management team cost less than that. did you mean 10% or did you mean 30 million?

    damn auditors….

    realauditor

    January 22, 2011 at 9:52 am

  5. There are savings from joint procurment but a a lot has already been done. The NW has been working as sub-regional procurement hubs for some time with many £ms being saved. We have started to move into the social care space (£7m+ from foster care placements alone for a couple of councils) and more savings will come.

    One issue is a lot of this work was with pump primed funding from the RIEPs. (Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnerships). There funding ends in April this year so just when such effort needed the most they will disappear.

    neilhind

    January 22, 2011 at 1:52 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: