Ed Vaizey

The former Health Secretary Alan Milburn gave an interesting speech last week.  Despite the opportunities provided by the internet, I have been unable to find the full text until now.  I had to get from Alan Milburn!   I won’t reproduce it in full here, because it is too long and I am not clever enough to provide a link, but if any one wants a copy, just ring his office.

Anyway, I noticed a coupe of news stories on it.  Matt D’Ancona bigged it up in his column in the Sunday Telegraph, describing it as one of the best speeches he has heard in years and that it should worry the Tories.  In fact it doesn’t worry me at all - it merely confirms my view, long held, that there are many Blairites with the right analysis, it’s just their party will never deliver the changes they call for.  Milburn, for example, is miles apart from centre-left thinkers like Neal Lawson, from Compass, who have the most influcence on the Brown-ite agenda.

I have liked some of the things Milburn has said in the past.  I was very struck, when he was Health Secretary, by his call for the NHS to be a regulator, not necessarily a provider, and his push to get more private providers into the NHS.  Despite Milburn genuflecting to party tribalism, any one who reads this speech will see an endorsement of the new Tory agenda.   I have selected a few key quotes below, but in essence, Milburn’s speech adopts the new localism agenda of the Conservatives.  He calls for fundamental reform as well as resources for public services - which of course is what we have been saying.  He effectively echoes Cameon’s call that “we are all in this together”, attacks local education authorities, calls for more localism, and even endorses our call for elected Police Commissioners.  On these grounds, Alan Milburn would be much happier working for David Cameron than he would for Gordon Brown.  Go on Alan, admit it. Or am I being too tribal?

HERE ARE SOME QUOTES:

“reform alongside resources in the public services, tax reforms in the welfare state, devolution in the governance of our country” 

“reforms to the old paternalistic relationship between State and citizen.  A grown up relationship is what is required in which as much power as possible is moved outwards and downwards from centralised states to individual citizens and local communities. So that citizens get more power and take on more responsibility.  This should be our explicit purpose”. 

“Too often governments – including New Labour – have fallen for the fallacy that once the commanding heights of the state have been seized, through periodic elections, progressive change automatically follows.  In truth this works neither for citizens nor for governments. People are left confused and disempowered. Governments end up nationalising responsibility when things go wrong without necessarily having the levers to put them right. Progress in the future depends on sharing responsibility with citizens. And that means openly sharing dilemmas.  Life is complex.  We make a mistake far too often of pretending it’s easy.  If we are going to get the public bought in to radical solutions they have to be insiders not outsiders as the recent Power Inquiry report rightly argued”.

“There remains at the heart of New Labour an unresolved ambivalence about the role of the State.  You can see that in our approach to local government.  It has veered between centralising distrust and grudging devolution.  The same ambivalence is reflected in our evolving approach to public service reform.  In the first term the accent was on top-down targets and prescription from the centre. I for one quickly learned that improving services run by caring professionals cannot happen through finger pointing or blame gaming.  So in the second term there was a welcome change in language towards greater devolution and diversity…The old State monopolies have been replaced by greater organisational independence and new competitive incentives to improve services.  But with the notable exception of the choice programme in the NHS these reforms have empowered institutions not individuals.  Diversity, devolution, even democracy (in the case of NHS Foundation Hospitals) on their own do not empower the citizen.  Only giving individuals real power will make that happen.” 
 

As a parent I don’t want power in the hands of either councils or schools.  As a patient I don’t want it in the hands of either managers or hospitals.  I want it in my hands.  This is the new political agenda. 

Take the idea of extending choice to individuals over how they receive public services.  This is more than a kneejerk pandering to consumerism.  There is a compelling social justice case for doing so.  For too long those who can afford it have been able to buy choice over health and education.  Those without, do without. .. State control has not guaranteed equality of outcome.  A top-down monolithic structure of public services has favoured those with a strong voice which only some have. .. That is why I believe parents with children in schools that are failing – invariably serving the poorest communities – should be given new rights to choose a different school which should receive a premium payment for educating them.  

“Social mobility has slowed down when it ought to have been speeding up.  There is a glass ceiling on opportunity in our country. We have raised it, but we have not yet broken through it”.
 

“People act differently if they own assets.  It gives them a real stake in the future.  It enables people to act independently and make their own choices.  Ownership works. It enhances responsibility.   After all nobody ever washed a rental car. For these reasons I believe both employee share ownership and home ownership need to be extended far further driven in part by tax breaks”. 

“The private and voluntary sectors should contribute more in years to come through their expertise, their efficiency and the incentives they bring to compete”.  

“Where one new regulation is proposed two old ones will have to go.  Where one new form is issued two old ones will be replaced.  Where one new standard or target is introduced two old ones will be withdrawn”. 

“ Local police and health services should be made more directly accountable to local people through elections”. 

This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 20th, 2006 at 12:35 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.