| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Bernard Jenkin: In fairness to my right hon. Friend, I should point out that only a few words at the beginning of his speech touched on that matter. What took up so much time was the fact that so many Opposition Members seemed stung by what he said. The interventions went on and on.
Mr. Foster: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that intervention, but I shall not stray down the path of giving even more time to that subject now.
There are half a million civil servants, who spend £20 billion in public expenditure. Clearly, development and training must be central to the effective management of those huge resources. In the first sentence of his foreword to the White Paper on development and training, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster says:
The Deputy Prime Minister was at it again when he gave evidence to the Public Service Select Committee on 28 February. My hon. Friend the Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Gunnell) had asked him:
The management of change is becoming the most important challenge facing government. The civil and public services have been subject to wave upon wave of change--a state of affairs sometimes described as "permanent revolution"--with the next steps agencies, privatisation, contracting out, delayering, downsizing and the private finance initiative.
The privatisation of Her Majesty's Stationery Office, of Recruitment and Assessment Services, the Occupational Health Service Agency and the Chessington Computer Centre have already been announced. The other day the privatisation of the custody service was announced. Just imagine--Group 4 in charge of the Crown jewels and No. 10 Downing street. In just over 12 months the custody service has spent £100,000 on training--money from the taxpayer, from which the private sector owners will benefit.
Much of the change has been very poorly managed and has resulted in widespread demoralisation and a feeling of insecurity. In an interview in The Observer of last November, Sir Robin Butler said that the revolution sweeping Whitehall had sapped morale and created a climate of insecurity. The recently published FDA MORI survey revealed that 40 per cent. of senior FDA members expected to leave the service shortly and that morale was at a low ebb. The much more recent survey of civil servants conducted by The Observer found that 92 per cent. believed that civil service morale was quite bad or very bad, and 73 per cent. would not advise the next generation to join the civil service.
Those findings were underlined by an article in The Guardian on 13 June, which reported a 35 per cent. fall in fast-stream applications to enter the civil service.
Whenever and wherever I meet civil servants they speak of demoralisation and job insecurity. That will have to be tackled by a new Government from the outset, and development and training will be central to that task.
Permanent revolution will not be followed by permanent counter-revolution under Labour. There will be no return to 1979, to build a better yesterday. Indeed, for many reasons, the pace of change will not slacken. The first reason is that change is driven by international competitive forces. Secondly, the drive for efficient high-quality services will continue. Thirdly, Labour will inherit the electorate's wish for low taxes and better public services.
Fourthly, Labour will inherit very tight public expenditure plans. Fifthly, Labour will wish to abide by the Maastricht criteria for public expenditure and borrowing--
Mrs. Dunwoody:
That would be a mistake.
Mr. Foster:
I did not expect my hon. Friend to greet that idea with huge applause.
Sixthly, Labour will play a more constructive role at the heart of Europe. Seventhly, information technology will develop further, resulting in job losses and reorganisation of Government Departments and agencies.
In addition to all those pressures for change, Labour will vigorously pursue five culture changes to restore trust between people and government, and to reconnect citizens with their public services. Those culture changes will make further large demands on development and training.
The first culture change will be greater openness. Whitehall is reputedly the most secretive of all the developed democracies. The Government have taken some steps towards open government in the past four years, but the pace has been far too slow. Far greater momentum will be achieved when Labour assumes power, because of freedom of information legislation. Indeed, changes not requiring legislation will be introduced immediately upon our assuming power.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin:
What information does the right hon. Gentleman consider should be freely available which is not currently available?
Mr. Foster:
Again the hon. Gentleman invites me to stray from the main purpose of the debate. We shall debate that point with great pleasure on another occasion.
The second cultural change that Labour will introduce is devolution. Devolution to Scotland, Wales and the English regions may meet resistance in Whitehall despite the limited measure of decentralisation to regional Government offices.
Thirdly, we shall pursue another culture change--that of the user as stakeholder. The Minister touched upon that in his speech. Labour is determined to develop user-focused and user-friendly public services. That will involve deepening the charter initiative. For example, under Labour, users will be involved more in the design of targets. Public services will be encouraged to be less defensive about complaints. As in Marks and Spencer, complaints procedures will be used to improve the design and delivery of service. Such a culture change can succeed only with the enthusiastic co-operation of staff at all levels.
The fourth culture change that will place great demands on training and development will be the work force as stakeholders.
Mrs. Dunwoody:
I am most impressed. I had not realised that the Labour party planned to follow the line of Marks and Spencer. Does that mean that we shall extend the privileges and facilities offered to all low-paid civil servants into the provision of hairdressing, chiropody and other assistance within their places of work? It is an excellent idea and I am delighted to hear it.
Mr. Foster:
I am pleased to have such enthusiastic support from my hon. Friend. I shall consider her ideas carefully. They seem to be excellent suggestions.
Widespread demoralisation will be an enormous problem for Labour which must be addressed immediately upon assuming power. Labour is determined to involve staff at all levels in continual improvements in productivity and quality of service along the lines that proved so successful at Rover and Thorn Lighting where development and training is central. Labour aims to transform the morality of the workplace. Each member of staff has a crucial contribution to make and must be encouraged to make it in an atmosphere of partnership and teamwork.
The fifth culture change involves the citizen as stakeholder in an enabling state. For the first time, a Government will be elected seeking to share power with the British people. The present Government believe that the only power that citizens need is consumer power. To those without it they say, "Tough! Get some or remain powerless." Labour knows that it can pursue economic, constitutional and democratic renewal only by involving the people and drawing on their skill, experience and creativity.
Devolution of power to Scotland, Wales and the English regions is only a start. Those Parliaments and assemblies will be expected to share power with local authorities, which, in turn, must govern in partnership with villages and communities. Government at all levels will create partnerships with the private and voluntary sector, recreating a sense of pride in village, town, region and nation. Government will facilitate and enable action to be taken. Leadership within such a complex network of relationships will require different skills and qualities from those required by line management--again putting great demand on development and training.
With such an ambitious agenda, change under Labour is inevitable, but it does not have to be threatening. The test of the new Government will be the degree to which they prepare the country and civil servants to embrace change and manage it for the benefit of the many, not the few.
Labour had the courage to change itself and now it is poised to change the country. However, Labour will invite the British people--including civil servants--to join in partnership to manage change. Change does not have to be imposed from on high and used as a weapon to browbeat and intimidate staff into submission. The threat of unemployment and dismissal are blunt weapons in encouraging staff to change. Why should staff co-operate in doing themselves out of a job or preparing themselves to be pushed into the private sector when they clearly wish to remain in the public sector?
The rest of the private sector has abandoned macho management. Managers understand the importance of trust in the management of change, and they know that they must engage the commitment of staff to the organisation's objectives. They know that people are a company's most important resource and that, if the company can harness the skill, energy and creativity of the work force, productivity and the quality of the product can be transformed. They recognise the importance of teamwork. Above all, they know that training and development--investing in people at all levels--is central to creating a flexible and adaptable work force capable of responding constructively to change. Under such leadership, change is embraced and shaped for the benefit of all.
Trade unionists can and do join in enthusiastically. Partnership at the workplace can become a reality and the work force can become stakeholders in the enterprise.
In his foreword to the White Paper, the Chancellor of the Duchy described civil servants as special. I believe that they have been treated as special mushrooms--they have been kept in the dark and showered frequently with the genuine article. After 17 years of such treatment, it would not be surprising if civil servants regarded the White Paper as an afterthought or the sign of an approaching election. The Government have at the eleventh hour grasped the fact that 500,000 civil servants and their families might represent some 1.25 million voters, many living in marginal constituencies. In my view, no one represents middle England better. It will be a crucial battleground, on which the next election will be fought.
In my naivety, I would have expected any large organisation--certainly one of 500,000 people--to have been keen to discern staff morale, but Sir Robin Butler stopped the Treasury and Civil Service Committee carrying out a survey of civil servants. He also tried to prevent civil servants from responding to The Observer survey funded by the Public Service, Tax and Commerce Union--the PTC--and the Institution of Professionals, Managers and Specialists. Perhaps Sir Robin was trying to hide the uncomfortable truth from his political masters, knowing how much they have lost touch with reality. To do him justice, I suspect that he is the instigator of the White Paper, although it was first suggested by the Chancellor of the Duchy at a conference to celebrate the silver jubilee of the Civil Service College last November.
The right hon. Gentleman boasts that it is the first ever White Paper on development and training in the civil service. I welcome that, but if training and development are so crucial, why has it taken 17 years to produce a White Paper? Why have the Government issued a White Paper within 10 months of a general election? What has gone wrong with training to make a step change necessary now? Is it not true that departmental plans will not be drawn up until November 1996 to be incorporated into the annual budgets for implementation on 1 April 1997? Is it not also true that action cannot be taken on the White Paper until 1 April 1997? Therefore, is not the White Paper nothing more than a wish list for the next Government to implement?
I have dubbed the White Paper "the longest apology in history", for is it not an admission of widespread demoralisation? Is that not why it has been produced? The Government's stated aim is to ensure that the civil service
is equipped and trained to meet the challenge of an increasingly competitive global environment, and, in the words of "Continuity and Change",
Paragraph 1.9 of an early draft of the White Paper says:
No one should be surprised that Labour places training at the centre of its approach to managing change. For many years, it has been central to Labour's crucial supply-side measures for economic renewal. In "New Labour, New Life for Britain", which I am sure Ministers carry with them all the time, the centrality of training and development is made plain. It says:
Development and training must be informed by the long-term influences on the shape of the civil service. When Lady Thatcher assumed power in 1979, the civil
service was 750,000-strong. One of her objectives was to reduce the size of the state. That gathered momentum, driven by the Government's pursuit of low inflation and reduced public expenditure. The civil and public services were reshaped by privatisation and contracting out, and down-sized to 500,000--and further reductions are planned.
If the Chancellor's party remains in power, it will further hollow out government. It believes that individuals and businesses must be set free from the burdens of government. Some extreme interpretations of the minimalist state maintain that the Government should be responsible only for monetary policy and the defence of the realm.
If Labour takes control, it will create an enabling state. Labour expects the Government to be involved in a very wide range of problems in pursuit of economic efficiency and social justice, but the state will not be the monolithic state of wartime and early post-war years. Nor will it be the corporatist state of the 1970s. Labour will create an enabling state at national, regional and local levels. The Government will work in partnership with the people, the private and voluntary sectors and communities. That will do much to restore the trust between people and government, which is so badly fractured.
Further demands on training and development will arise because Labour will pursue a more constructive role at the heart of Europe--once the Prime Minister's objective. Europe will increasingly affect the workings of Whitehall. Brussels and Whitehall will increasingly co-operate, irrespective of whether economic and monetary union is delayed.
The Chancellor mentioned information technology. That, too, will make great demands on training and development. It has already had a major impact on private sector services, with individual banks, for example, losing 20,000 or 25,000 employees. Information technology is already making a major impact on Whitehall, but its biggest impact is yet to come. It will be enormously beneficial--the Chancellor made reference to this--in developing user-focused and user-friendly public services.
However, it would be surprising if information technology did not result in further job losses in the next five to 10 years. It may also result in major reorganisation of Government services. Labour recognises that the Government have a responsibility to prepare staff to embrace change and manage it for the benefit of the many. That, too, can be achieved only with development and training being central to the management of change.
"The people who work in the Civil Service are special."
I agree, and civil servants will be delighted to hear that the right hon. Gentleman says that. It stands in marked contrast to the way in which civil servants have been treated and spoken about over the past 17 years by Conservative Ministers. They have had to suffer continual denigration at the hands of Ministers; they have been told
that they are second rate, and it has been implied that if they were any good they would be in the private sector making loads of money.
"Under that you do take the view within that section"--
that is, that section of his reply--
"that you have always believed that many tasks carried out by the public service would be better done in the private sector, do you not?"
The Deputy Prime Minister replied:
"Yes".
My hon. Friend then asked:
The Deputy Prime Minister answered:
"Do you believe that private sector practices are inherently better than public sector practices?"
"in many cases, yes."
His approach seems to send the message, "Until morale improves, the flogging will continue."
The private sector has continually been held up as being able to solve all the public sector's problems--although in my view the United Kingdom private sector does not have an outstanding record. The long-term rate of economic growth under the Conservatives has been well beneath the 2.5 per cent. per annum achieved by the United Kingdom since the industrial revolution, and certainly beneath the long-term rate of growth in the 1950s and 1960s, which were so despised by Lady Thatcher as the years of consensus.
"to make better use of the Civil Service's most important resource--the staff of departments and agencies--by providing the prospect for a career with a good employer, offering challenge and reward; by developing their skills to meet the managerial, technical and competitive challenges they face; and by ensuring equality of opportunity for all members of staff, irrespective of background, gender, race and disability."
Those fine words must stick in the craw of civil servants in view of their experience in recent years.
"the Government recognises that it is not an easy time to be calling for extra effort and investment in training and development in the Civil Service. Annual running costs are being reduced. Reductions in staff numbers across the Civil Service are inevitably giving rise to uncertainty and unease. Those reductions, combined with the action being taken to take out layers of management, also put additional pressure on staff--making it difficult to find time for training and development opportunities. Indeed the pressures that have led to the present difficult climate are exactly those that make it so important to motivate and develop staff to continue to raise levels of performance."
That has been diluted in paragraphs 1.12 and 1.13 on pages 6 and 7, but, even so, it is the first public recognition by the Government that staff have been going through difficult times. Perhaps it is the Chancellor's way of saying to 500,000 civil servants that "It hurt but it didn't work". He must not be surprised if civil servants react to those fine words in the White Paper by referring to the recent leader in The Sun:
"same old Tories, same old claptrap".
Is it not the truth that, after 17 years of privatisation, contracting out, delayering and downsizing, civil and public servants no longer have confidence in a career in the civil service, as the FDA-MORI and the Observer surveys show? That is why Labour's plans for training and development will be at the heart of renewal of the civil and public services--not an afterthought.
"this is the era of learning through life--adding economic value for improved skills. Technology and scientific change render our skills rapidly out of date. Many jobs are now computer orientated and an adaptable workforce requires a quite different approach."
The Government have been hopelessly slow to recognise the potential of new technology in transforming the availability of high-quality learning. People can now learn at home and at work through the new interactive information super-highway. This new Labour approach is based on partnership, on stakeholding, rather than on old-fashioned war between bosses and workers. It recognises the value of co-operation as well as competition, but it is hard-headed, practical and geared to making us more successful in the global marketplace.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |