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

Collaboration raises capacity query

  • 1 Comment

In deliberating how far Coventry City Council, Warwickshire CC and Solihull MBC can go in collaborative solutions for health and social care, we have arrived at an interesting point.

Essentially, our three trajectories are on broadly similar paths and we recognise the ‘big ticket’ solutions that would be secured by moving from three sets of operational models to one.

So one potential solution for services in learning disabilities, mental health, elderly dementia, autism and so on, begins to raise the question of what internal capacity we would need to consider to deal with critical events such as market failure. 

Traditionally, the dominant ‘provider’ philosophy in all of us has brought about a ‘provider of last resort’ view of the world.

As we race to strip out costs, the question as to whether a single organisation at a local level will be able to sustain capacity raises its head.

I do not yet know what minimum capacity we would need to cover risk of failure, and I’m not convinced by free marketeering ideas that in some obscure way the ‘market will provide’.

We need to resolve what our intervention as a commissioner of last resort looks like and I suspect that doing it as three authorities offers a more reliable future resource.

Interestingly, this debate has also now gained momentum in the schools/colleges agenda. I don’t think it is in the child’s interest that we are passive at a local level in arguing that we no longer have a role in an academised, ‘local government-free’ world.

Again, a three-authority solution is attractive where collective resources afford us the capacity to champion children in a way that is different from that encouraged by previous school-local authority interfaces.

There is a responsibility on us to ensure market failure in this brave new world is tackled with an understanding that there is no one else who has the capability or authority to do so.

Free market non-interventionism will diminish public service offers to citizens.

Jim Graham, chief executive, Warwickshire CC

  • 1 Comment

Readers' comments (1)

  • “It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. When you pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do.
    The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something for the risk you run, and if you do that you will have enough to pay for something better.”
    ? John Ruskin

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this 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.