Our Local Enterprise Partnership and the NHS (or not the NHS)

Comment turned into post:

“In the light of the concern over the future of the NHS it may be worth reminding ourselves just what Heart of the South West LEP proposed, on our behalf, in their 2015 Devolution Statement of Intent:

We [HOTSW] will:

• Increase productivity by reducing ill-health and reliance on the state

• Reduce overall need for formal health and social care services

• Reduce the cost of health and social care

• Help more people with long-term illnesses or mental ill-health start or return to work

What we need:

• Freedom to pool budgets and direct resources to local need

• Freedom to develop a commissioning framework that supports local decision-making

• Freedom to establish effective, integrated governance and delivery structures

• Freedom to develop local metrics and incentives

(The associated productivity prospectus says something which sounds even more sinister: “A healthier population means lower public sector costs and increased economic activity. To fill 163,000 more jobs [by 2030] we must engage the non-working population in the labour market which will require a significant health and care contribution.”)

Here is what the Public Accounts Committee concluded about LEPs and devolution in its report of 27 June 2016. (Kevin Foster MP, Conservative Torbay, is a Committee member)

“9. It is alarming that LEPs are not meeting basic standards of governance and transparency, such as disclosing conflicts of interest to the public.

LEPs are led by the private sector, and stakeholders have raised concerns that they are dominated by vested interests that do not properly represent their business communities. There is a disconnect between decisions being made by local business leaders and accountability working via local authorities.

It is therefore crucial that LEPs demonstrate a high standard of governance and transparency over decision making, at least equal to the minimum standards set out by government in the assurance framework.

It is of great concern that many LEPs appear not be meeting these minimum standards. The scale of LEP activity and the sums involved necessitate that LEPs and central government be pro-active in assuring the public that decisions are made with complete probity.

The fact that 42% of LEPs do not publish a register of interests is clearly a risk to ensuring that decisions are made free from any actual or perceived conflicts of interest. The varying presentation and detail of financial information across LEPs also makes it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions or make comparisons across LEPs on how they spend public money.”

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmpubacc/296/29605.htm

The National Audit Office in a 2016 report also made the obvious, but crucial, point that LEPs do not yet have an established track record of delivery.

Our future is in their hands!”