The hallmark of this election has been the rush to commit billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to Government led plans of all sorts and by all parties- whether NHS, Education, Infrastructure, Climate Change etc. In the business world, and our domestic lives, the amount of spend is not a useful measure of anything worthwhile or a mark of success. It is as if quantity of money is the only test that government and the media have to measure the validity of its purpose. Is the public that stupid? Not in our view.
No independent third party regards any of the commitments as credible and Labour’s are the most incredible. Several of the commitments of billions are aimed at bribing sectors of the populace, such as cancelling student loans or compensation for retiring women, Waspis. Some, such as the Green’s spend on carbon emission reduction are without regard to the behaviour in the rest of the world- the UK to sacrifice billions to its own reduction while China increases its coal fired power. Will the fact the UK becomes carbon free in 2030 rather than 2040 make a big difference in the world when set against the possibility of allocating the resource elsewhere? These spends need context and analysis of what they will really achieve.
Who will manage all the spending? It is clear that Government Ministers and public officials are incapable of doing so as evidenced by the past and their inability to forecast the cost of any project?
Presumably we need senior executives in charge of the relevant “businesses” or projects on the ground with competent staff. Yet there is rarely a word from such people, about their view of needs and best ways to allocate spend. Take the NHS (which should cease to be seen as precious and cosseted). No debate seems to be permitted on how to make it viable, no forum exists for creative discussion on funding. There is no critique on what might be improved in the NHS, what services might be dropped or reduced. It is a bottomless pit into which Governments pour cash because, if they do not, they will be pilloried by those who use the NHS as a political football, not an asset and service to be changed and developed like any other. Perhaps, if those in charge of the spending, the bosses in the NHS, were more publicly accountable, they could produce more business-like solutions than merely demanding more money.
For example, there is no examination of the culture of the NHS. Any organisation which is given money on demand is likely to breed a certain culture and an attitudinal shift may be required. Is there a blame culture in the NHS, so people do not take responsibility? Is there a lack of transparency? Is best practice rolled out across the organisation? Or are there fiefdoms and territories? Matthew Syed’s book “Black Box Thinking “is worth a read, contrasting the cultures of healthcare and the aircraft industry. There is a question mark over the attitude within our Government run public services and the attitude of the public to them.
Within society, so many organisations breed a risk averse culture. Egged on by the media which loves to find people to hold responsible for any problem, swathes of society are blame oriented, and entitlement oriented, and unconstructive attitudes hold back progress.
In education, for example, how much time and energy is absorbed in compliance, box ticking and political correctness for fear of blame and liability, rather than teachers getting on with teaching and nurture.
When bad things happen (such as a child being abused at home), energies are devoted to who in the public services failed to prevent it, when the fault is all in the parenting.
Back to the NHS: how much resource is spent on treating illness or physical or mental harm caused by obesity, drugs, violence, alcohol and other people failings? Or on people unnecessarily attending A&E or their GP or calling out ambulances, or on cancelling appointments? Or on thrown away drugs and materials? The resultant wastage is not caused by Governments but by the public not acting responsibly. The same people who cause this wastage might see the treatment as their entitlement from their precious NHS. If the attitude of people toward the NHS were to change from one of entitlement to get healthcare free to one of gratitude and privilege, maybe a change of behaviour would result and the NHS would benefit, and it would be less of a drain on the public purse. Perhaps too a focus of spending some of the extra billions allocated to the NHS on causes of waste, such as obesity, would be money better spent in the long term- we do not know but these things need analysis and honest discussion.
Throwing money into these holes of spend will be repeated year after year as experience has shown, unless there is change. There must be forums for change where all ideas, however politically incorrect or novel, can be aired without recrimination: that is freedom of thought and speech will provide solutions. It is suggested that changes of attitude within Government funded organisations and in the public will be as valuable as cash, if not more so.
