Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more


  • Comment
Cost savings may not be enough to stop service cuts...
Cost savings may not be enough to stop service cuts

The Improvement & Development Agency's report on workforce planning illuminates how councils are facing up to the financial, political, recruitment and service pressures which will define the local government landscape for the next three years.

Progress on efficiencies is, to say the least, uneven. It is the two-tier areas that, broadly, are putting the most energy into finding workforce savings through collaborative working, driven by ministerial pressure to work more effectively together. But the IDeA appears sceptical that, in the areas pursuing unitary bids, the promised savings can be delivered.

In total they are promising£200m of unitary savings, mainly through overhauling back office and support services, but with few plans for partnering or outsourcing. History offers little hope this will work.

Across local government, support services such as human resources, finance and facilities management look likely to take the full force of the spending squeeze to be unleashed by the comprehensive spending review. Many fewer staff will be directly employed, with those remaining focused on strategic roles.

Any company trying to make money out of shared services will tell you there is more talk than action, the road strewn with local political obstacles. The IDeA report backs this up; while most counties and districts, for example, are discussing shared services, a district getting together with one or two neighbours is a far more likely outcome than a county-wide operation.

District fears for their longevity are evident in their preference for sharing services with little public visibility.

As for councils collaborating with primary care trusts and other partners, little of substance seems to be happening.

The report spells out what many have feared - most local government shared service arrangements are simply too small to generate the scale of savings the government requires in its spending projections. This greatly heightens the risk that avoidable service cuts will result from the financial squeeze.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.