Barnet Air

Barnet council in north London has taken inspiration from budget airlines such as Easyjet and Ryanair in developing their new business model. The basic premise is that every local resident will be entitled to a core service but can access more or an improved service by paying extra. For example residents will be able to jump the queue for planning consents if they pay a charge (Easyjet’s Speedy Boarding) and increase the size of waste bins (Ryanair’s ‘carry on’ luggage only). The model, dubbed “easyCouncil”, is part of the council’s “relentless drive for efficiency” and includes cuts to services with live-in wardens for sheltered housing replaced with ‘floating’ wardens, and citizens offered more choice - recipients of adult social care will be offered a choice on how spend their care budget - a respite carer or a holiday to Eastbourne.

Budget airlines let passengers tailor their service to a budget - they can choose online check-in, priority boarding, a meal on board or to have bags in the hold. It is this concept that Barnet Council is interested - how they can stop wasting money providing services that some people do not need and/or want thereby providing more for less. As the Government is forced to cut public spending councils will have to trim their budgets in the coming years and this is going to be a major challenge for them.

Now I’m all for delivering services efficiently (check out our upcoming event titled “Can neighbourhood working deliver more for less?”) but adopting a no frills approach to public services is a rather daunting prospect. I don’t mind taking a flight on a budget airline safe in the knowledge that it’s only for a few hours and is a lot cheaper than the next best alternative but council tax is already expensive and less than a few months ago only 33% of respondents to the Place Survey agreed that the local council provides value for money, e.g. 67% of respondents didn’t think that they did. Does Barnet expect residents to pay the same for less? If I only want to access the clean streets, street lighting, and the waste collection can I pay less? The implications of this approach are huge.

That’s not even mentioning the potential impact on inequality too with the risk that poorer areas of the borough could become further removed from the more affluent ones when they can’t afford to pay for the additionality of other areas. We already know working in the world of neighbourhood management that doing things for free, such as collecting bulky items (fridges, sofas, etc) can save the council money by reducing fly-tipping and anti-social behaviour when they are set alight. Not only that but borough-wide solutions to service delivery produces disproportionately worse results for deprived neighbourhoods with more affluent ones ‘peeling away’. This was recognised in the National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal (2001) which cited evidence that proved “the poorest areas have often received the poorest public services” – it was this that prompted the launch of the neighbourhood management pathfinder programme. Without mechanisms for devolved service delivery Barnet will run the risk of a return to these times.