Alison Rodwell is a councillor at Bollington Town Council, a former Parliamentary Candidate and founder of Impact the Future which equips business leaders to play an active role in transforming the public sector.
Whilst Andy Burnham set out his vision for a state that does more, with the spending pressures that entails, as a Conservative I believe the state should do fewer things, and do them well.
My recently published Onward Corner paper, A State that works for us, explores practical ways to make that happen.
For Conservatives, this is more than an ideological argument. We must use opposition to prepare for government. A manifesto can explain what we want to change. It must be accompanied by a plan for how we will deliver it.
I saw the challenge first-hand when I moved from the private to the public sector. After two decades in finance and founding an award-winning start-up, I entered a world of acronyms, Treasury rulebooks and exchanges that sometimes felt lifted from Yes Minister.
Over five years serving on boards across business, energy and health, I have met dedicated public servants who want to deliver. But commitment cannot compensate for a system that obstructs them. The barriers fall into three areas: culture, ecosystem and accountability.
Start with culture. One well-respected CEO admitted at a board meeting that he had never considered the users of his service as customers. That matters. If an organisation’s starting point is its own processes rather than the people it serves, its priorities will reflect that.
Every public body needs a clear purpose. Is it keeping us safe, treating patients or providing a safety net? Mission creep obscures the answer. An acute hospital should be focused on treating patients promptly and safely. Loading it with competing social and environmental objectives makes management harder and responsibility less clear.
Leaders need the authority to build high-performing teams, recruit talent and tackle poor performance. Clear annual objectives, regular performance conversations and recognition for delivery should be routine. A public service career should mean serving the public, with advancement earned through results.
We should also challenge a culture that tolerates either defeatism or officials pursuing their own political agendas. Ministers set policy; public servants deliver it. Independent non-executive directors with private sector experience can bring challenge and practical expertise.
Then comes the ecosystem: the machinery through which decisions become action. Too often, it feels like wading through treacle.
I have seen investment decisions pass through more than ten levels of approval. Each committee understandably wants to demonstrate its contribution. The cumulative result can be delay, duplication and higher costs. Ten gates do not necessarily provide ten times the assurance.
Some inefficiencies would be comic if taxpayers were not paying. After induction training, I was given paper proof of completion, which had to be cut out, laminated and carried as a card. We cannot credibly promise a modern state while tolerating such processes.
Simplification should precede digitisation. Otherwise, we risk buying expensive technology to automate unnecessary bureaucracy. Standard accounting and payroll processes should move towards shared services, freeing resources for frontline delivery.
Financial rules also need scrutiny. An investment that saves money can still be blocked by capital spending limits. We need an “invest to save” approach, with disciplined appraisal and verified savings. Delaying decisions also has a price: inflation, standing down project teams and remobilising them later all cost money.
Finally, accountability. Politicians can find themselves accountable without sufficient authority, while responsibility disappears into committees and overlapping organisations. When everyone has reviewed a decision, who actually owns it?
Conservatives should review the purpose and powers of arm’s-length bodies before returning to office. Policy belongs with accountable ministers. Delivery bodies should have focused remits, clear leadership and measurable outcomes. New quangos should face sunset clauses requiring a conscious decision about their continuation.
We must also examine statutory obligations that pull delivery bodies away from their core purpose, including the Public Sector Equality Duty. Reform requires serious legislative preparation: announcing a bonfire of bureaucracy will achieve little if the duties generating it remain intact.
Our own years in government should teach us humility. Conservative ministers encountered these obstacles too. We need to learn from that experience and prepare the people, legislation and management changes required to overcome them.
Burnham has set out his ambitions for a more expansive state. Conservatives must offer a credible alternative—and prepare now to deliver it.
Imagine a state that does fewer things but does them well. A culture that empowers rather than obstructs, an ecosystem that enables rather than frustrates, and an accountability structure that rewards delivery rather than delay. The result would be customer-focused services, a slimmer state and a motivated public sector equipped to deliver.
The question is not whether change is possible, but whether we are prepared to do the difficult work to make it happen. For Conservatives, that work must begin in opposition. The prize is a state that works better, costs less and serves us all. A state that works for us.
Alison Rodwell is a councillor at Bollington Town Council, a former Parliamentary Candidate and founder of Impact the Future which equips business leaders to play an active role in transforming the public sector.
Whilst Andy Burnham set out his vision for a state that does more, with the spending pressures that entails, as a Conservative I believe the state should do fewer things, and do them well.
My recently published Onward Corner paper, A State that works for us, explores practical ways to make that happen.
For Conservatives, this is more than an ideological argument. We must use opposition to prepare for government. A manifesto can explain what we want to change. It must be accompanied by a plan for how we will deliver it.
I saw the challenge first-hand when I moved from the private to the public sector. After two decades in finance and founding an award-winning start-up, I entered a world of acronyms, Treasury rulebooks and exchanges that sometimes felt lifted from Yes Minister.
Over five years serving on boards across business, energy and health, I have met dedicated public servants who want to deliver. But commitment cannot compensate for a system that obstructs them. The barriers fall into three areas: culture, ecosystem and accountability.
Start with culture. One well-respected CEO admitted at a board meeting that he had never considered the users of his service as customers. That matters. If an organisation’s starting point is its own processes rather than the people it serves, its priorities will reflect that.
Every public body needs a clear purpose. Is it keeping us safe, treating patients or providing a safety net? Mission creep obscures the answer. An acute hospital should be focused on treating patients promptly and safely. Loading it with competing social and environmental objectives makes management harder and responsibility less clear.
Leaders need the authority to build high-performing teams, recruit talent and tackle poor performance. Clear annual objectives, regular performance conversations and recognition for delivery should be routine. A public service career should mean serving the public, with advancement earned through results.
We should also challenge a culture that tolerates either defeatism or officials pursuing their own political agendas. Ministers set policy; public servants deliver it. Independent non-executive directors with private sector experience can bring challenge and practical expertise.
Then comes the ecosystem: the machinery through which decisions become action. Too often, it feels like wading through treacle.
I have seen investment decisions pass through more than ten levels of approval. Each committee understandably wants to demonstrate its contribution. The cumulative result can be delay, duplication and higher costs. Ten gates do not necessarily provide ten times the assurance.
Some inefficiencies would be comic if taxpayers were not paying. After induction training, I was given paper proof of completion, which had to be cut out, laminated and carried as a card. We cannot credibly promise a modern state while tolerating such processes.
Simplification should precede digitisation. Otherwise, we risk buying expensive technology to automate unnecessary bureaucracy. Standard accounting and payroll processes should move towards shared services, freeing resources for frontline delivery.
Financial rules also need scrutiny. An investment that saves money can still be blocked by capital spending limits. We need an “invest to save” approach, with disciplined appraisal and verified savings. Delaying decisions also has a price: inflation, standing down project teams and remobilising them later all cost money.
Finally, accountability. Politicians can find themselves accountable without sufficient authority, while responsibility disappears into committees and overlapping organisations. When everyone has reviewed a decision, who actually owns it?
Conservatives should review the purpose and powers of arm’s-length bodies before returning to office. Policy belongs with accountable ministers. Delivery bodies should have focused remits, clear leadership and measurable outcomes. New quangos should face sunset clauses requiring a conscious decision about their continuation.
We must also examine statutory obligations that pull delivery bodies away from their core purpose, including the Public Sector Equality Duty. Reform requires serious legislative preparation: announcing a bonfire of bureaucracy will achieve little if the duties generating it remain intact.
Our own years in government should teach us humility. Conservative ministers encountered these obstacles too. We need to learn from that experience and prepare the people, legislation and management changes required to overcome them.
Burnham has set out his ambitions for a more expansive state. Conservatives must offer a credible alternative—and prepare now to deliver it.
Imagine a state that does fewer things but does them well. A culture that empowers rather than obstructs, an ecosystem that enables rather than frustrates, and an accountability structure that rewards delivery rather than delay. The result would be customer-focused services, a slimmer state and a motivated public sector equipped to deliver.
The question is not whether change is possible, but whether we are prepared to do the difficult work to make it happen. For Conservatives, that work must begin in opposition. The prize is a state that works better, costs less and serves us all. A state that works for us.