A remarkable day

Yesterday, we saw Mark Cavendish secure his 35th Tour victory. Now standing alone above Eddy Merckx in the list of all time Tour de France stage winners. He surfed the wheels and won by a bike length. An extraordinary, emotionally charged victory.

I’ve been watching cycling since Cavendish started winning in the Tour. 2008 was his first win. 16 years. The times of financial crisis, Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, Brexit didn’t exist and we were two years away from Nick Clegg, coalition government and all that good aspirational stuff.

If the polls are to be believed, we are in for another remarkable day today. Regardless of the majority size (I’m less inclined to believe the wilder estimates), we will have a Labour government tomorrow. But what does this mean for public service reform? For government outsourcing? For the long-term improvement in public service productivity and performance?

Unfortunately, the Labour manifesto is little more than a collection of platitudes, with very little concrete proposals or even direction of travel when it comes to how we can improve public services and tackle some of today’s challenges, from the rapid rise in the economically inactive, to the productivity of the health service to the local government funding crisis.

There is very little detail other than the constraints Labour have imposed on themselves (e.g. current spending commitments, no increase in income tax, VAT, corporation tax). Starmer has set out his stall that growth will enable improved public services, tackle debt, and put more money in people’s pockets. There is very little new or radical thinking here. Beyond additional ‘reviews’ and governance, what will Labour do?

What are we to make of this dichotomy between aspiration and detail? There are two interpretations. First, that this is a safety-first campaign and that there is a much more detailed plan in place – a (so far) hidden strategy that will radically transform public services. Or second, that Labour represent an iteration of the as is, a red tinged status-quo. More oratory on the role of public sector works, greater emphasis on voluntary and community sector organisations, more regulation and governance

Can Starmer control the left of the party and maintain a healthy mixed economy of public services? Can he win the battle that more money doesn’t equal better service? That injecting productivity improvements and technology driven innovation matters as much as employment rights and headcount numbers? Can the Cabinet shake off the caution that’s typified the campaign and move towards bolder, often uncomfortable or unpopular decisions on public services?

Over the next 12 months for example, what will Labour do to tackle the economic inactivity gap? Devolve down employment programme provision to Combined Authorities and local government? What capacity/capability do they have to commission programmes at scale?

What about new private sector prisons? Will they support the future Prison Operator Framework due to launch early in 2025? What about functional assessment services currently delivered by large private sector operators? Will the current Prison Education Service tenders be thrown out and replaced with something that looks very similar? These are a tiny fraction of the practical public service reform decisions facing Labour over the coming months. Could we see some sensible machinery of government changes, such as the bringing together of Jobcentre Plus and elements of Department for Education to better integrate employment and vocational skills for young people?

And what about the bigger strategic questions facing public services over the next five years? What of the role of generative AI? Rapidly bolstering effective defence spending? Delivering a material step change in the performance of hospitals and community-based care? Balancing global geopolitical instability and two wars at the same time as the grinding persistence required for Whitehall reform is no easy task even for visionary leaders.

My assessment is that the Labour government presents reasonable stability and pragmatism over an ideological driven reform agenda. But it doesn’t yet demonstrate how we can collectively tackle today’s big problems. There is a real danger that in five years’ time the hope that is embodied in the ‘Change’ slogan is replaced by despondency and a further shift to populism. Is there the boldness, intellect, leadership, grit and resources required over the next five years to make Change a reality? Perhaps the numerous ‘reviews’ will create the roadmap for the rapid change required.

Talking of roads, can Cavendish win his 36th today? Here’s to another remarkable day.

Andy Bowie
Partner