Power v Responsibility
When, many years ago, I studied the British Constitution at A level, I was told that, government is responsible for protecting its citizens and promoting their general welfare by providing public services. An elected government worked for the people.
That concept has long gone and governments now see themselves primarily as institutions of power. Once elected, our Members of Parliament and local Councillors rarely consult the communities they serve. They impose instead the party dogmas that they have played down in search of votes. We have replaced the concept of ‘member of parliament for X’ by ‘politician belonging to Y’. Sadly, the administrative arms of government have, over time, followed their masters – too many middle-managers in local authorities now pursue personal campaigns, such as cycling, climate change or planning, irrespective of local sensitivities.
In short, governments and their administrators, have replaced the noble concept of responsibility to their electorate by obsession with power. Modern government has lost touch with its people.
“Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why,..”
The top-down approach to management was used to command the Charge of the Light Brigade. ‘Them’ and ‘Us’ remains at the heart of government and has been shockingly exposed during the Covid pandemic through:
• the assessment debacle where government appeared to overrule its own advisors (an experienced teacher would never suggest using mock exams to award final grades). It was not even politically motivated – it simply showed total incompetence.
• announcing school returns without consultation. Teachers needed space and staff to deliver social distancing. The approach of ordering schools to do the impossible simply highlighted how little government knew about the profession it was ‘managing’.
• track and trace which, despite advice, ignored local networks for contact tracing. A national system of working with, and listening to, community leaders and locals on the ground has to be far stronger than a call centre of individuals, with no local knowledge.
• food vouchers during school holidays.
• the announcement that pub closing times were to be brought forward to a time when everyone spilled onto the streets.
This approach is not confined to Covid – there are many local examples and in fields such as defence and the development of large IT systems where arrogant administrators ignore the knowledge of specialists.
A bottom-up approach is a recognised management tool. Why does government not use it?
What can be done?
Maybe government will learn by its mistakes. Why not listen to the experts in assessment and in the NHS and local government? Why not, at an early stage, set up a group of respected teachers to plan and make recommendations to other schools on social distancing? Maybe…
Politically, this country has to mature. Ever-decreasing voting numbers highlight disenchantment with government. But politicians thrive on apathy and so we retain a Victorian, confrontational political system based on two sides standing up daily and shouting at each other. That is not reality – it is not how civilised people deal with disagreements with neighbours or solve problems at work.
There is no magic bullet, but we can make inroads through two approaches:
• Identifying and campaigning for simple actions that could make a difference;
• Setting up a research project to create a roadmap for change, building on existing structures.
Simple actions to make a difference:
• Members of Parliament are salaried and employed by the electorate. So, where is their CV? Voters for governors of hospital trusts, receive a single document from which they can compare candidates by seeing their qualifications, experience and policies in a standard format. Why not at elections?
• The media must challenge bland non-answers from government departments. The civil service now serve Ministers, not the country, so, when challenged with well-founded criticism their standard response is to state an irrelevant fact, which the media publish without question. A responsible news journalist should have the skills to notice when their question is not answered and should simply state “We approached [department] but their response did not answer our question”.
A roadmap for change
This cannot be achieved in 1000 words, but it should seek to identify the assets that we have and to work out how to create appropriate working structures. I have chosen to exemplify this with local communities – the approach is extendible to national government departments.
We have a strong base from which to build:
• Many communities have demonstrated that they enjoy, and are good at, improving their local environments. There is a need for a proper audit of the extent of such communities (and the gaps) and a classification of the various models that are used.
• Successful communities seem to have no shortage of volunteers and leaders. Again, we need to understand the extent, the gaps and the successful methods of recruitment.
• Plenty of projects can be achieved at very little cost and these should be identified and disseminated. But there may be a need for funds to support other projects. This should still represent good value for money –food banks are a prime example.
• The recent growth of websites such as Nextdoor should not be underestimated as a means of practical conversations between neighbours. From the base, formal structures, with clear responsibilities, need to be developed to connect all parties. In particular:
• Local networks could be developed around community forums, probably based on local electoral wards. • Every individual should have a point of reference and means of access directly into the leadership of their community.
• Core responsibilities devolved to communities need to be defined and funded. Litter and the local environment? Local recreation? ‘Keeping an eye’ on vulnerable residents? Local planning?
• Each community needs a named champion from their local authority, who would have responsibility for ensuring that the needs of the community were reported to the council and, where necessary, acted on.
How have we got to a point where such common sense seems so radical??
2255-11