It had been trailed in the press for months and was the subject of much debate within government. Finally, in July and a full six months after its planned publication date, the open public services white paper was released. So where are we now?
Two months on, we have a clear steer on direction: we can expect to see government policies and initiatives geared towards opening up a market for the provision of public services. The white paper was neutral on whether future providers should be from the traditional roster or new entrants into the market, whether they should be profit distributing. Whatever happens, we can expect quality to become the watchword by which services and service providers are judged and common standards to be applied. Regulators, in turn, will be more willing to show their teeth.
We can also expect decision making to move closer to service users. Whether a local referendum to veto excessive council tax increases or individual budgets introduced to pay for social care, there is a trend to transfer power from institutions to individuals. Feelings on the ground suggest this provides significant benefits to service users, but it has to be hoped that such power is exercised responsibly.
But, perhaps inevitably, the white paper leaves some business undone. The breadth of its ambitions meant that it asks a lot of questions and invites responses from all of us.
The government also makes a general commitment to employee-based enterprises wanting to take control of their own services. There is the prospect of new forms of finance, including social investment and payment for results and the Big Society Bank as an enabler. There is the promise of a "full range of support … to those who are considering setting up a mutual". What this range of support will comprise will be of interest to many, whether they have an earnest desire to set up such a structure or are merely observers.
The white paper acknowledged that an employee-based mutual is a big step and that there are barriers to identify and overcome. It is something of a disappointment that the many barriers already identified have not been addressed, but there is, no doubt, a process to go through.
One such barrier is the public procurement regime; the government has acknowledged this in the UK response to the European Commission green paper on the modernisation of EU public procurement policy. This response specifically requests and recommends that the EU policy "make clear that contracts could be awarded directly for a period of, for instance, three years to employee-led organisations/mutuals to help employees gain experience of running public services prior to full and open competition".
Let's hope the old joke, "I'm from the government - I'm here to help you" will not turn out to be a hollow promise.
Ross Griffiths is a partner at Cobbetts LLP
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Join the local government network for more like this direct to your inbox
