It has been given the task of cutting bureaucracy and releasing major resources for frontline services. Thousands of civil servants will lose their jobs. There is much talk of merging back-office functions, transferring responsibilities to the front line, and of sweeping away national agencies.
The worry factor in the public services is also higher because, although government spending will continue to grow in real terms, some areas, most notably the health service, have already been promised a very large slice of what will be available. For the NHS, this means a whopping 7.4% over the period of the review; education will receive 3.2% growth. That leaves just 1.4% for the rest.
Of course, this is not a cut: we're talking about growth on top of inflation here. But it does mean most of these other services will receive a smaller share of national income and in some sectors, costs and extra demands will easily swallow up that so-called growth money. It is worth remembering, too, that while the economy is doing relatively well the nation's finances do not look quite as healthy as they did a few years ago – chancellor Gordon Brown may manage to stick to his "golden rule" and the other self-imposed restrictions that earned him a reputation for prudence, but even to achieve the levels of spending he wants over the next few years it seems certain the tax burden will have to rise again.
There is little sign of embarrassment in hospitals, clinics or schools at their relative good fortune, where those delivering the services feel the pressures on them are as great as, and in some cases greater than, ever. In health, some specialities will benefit more than others, while many working in the community feel hospitals continue to suck in large amounts at the expense of more cost-effective interventions and treatment in primary care.
Brown has popped up with the hopeful tidings that he supports the findings of the Barker review – but this doesn’t seem to add up
It is inevitable that some sectors will do better than others as they fight for their share of the 1.4% growth pot that remains. That means some will get more than 1.4%, others may barely grow at all.
But Brown has popped up with the hopeful tidings that he backs the findings of the Barker review – effectively promising significantly more money for social housing and for an expansion in affordable housing. On the face of it, this just doesn't seem to add up. Brown has significant commitments to extend to childcare, and tackling child and pensioner poverty. There are still huge defence commitments, and transport will make a strong case.
The answer, for housing at least, probably lies largely in timing and tax . The spending review only takes us to 2007/8 and as Kate Barker herself made clear, it will need that time to reach the level of 17,000-23,000 extra homes that she says must be built each year.
A proposed land tax on developers will also bring in revenue and with its Gershon-like face, the Treasury is making it clear that in every area of government efficiency, gains must help deliver the extra frontline benefits.
Source
Housing Today
Postscript
Niall Dickson is chief executive of the King's Fund, a charitable healthcare foundation
No comments yet