Second of the speeches I made in the MTFP debate. This one against an amendment laid by Deputy Yerby where I stated savings can be made but reliant on digital transformation.
Sir, when I first read the MTFP, reinforced by re-reading it a number of times, I got a strong sense of déjà vu. Savings targets, ‘affordable and realistic’, unlocking resources to allow investment in the future. It has all the hallmarks of the FTP. Of course there is a need for transformation of our services. Reviews of health and social care, and more recently education and home affairs demonstrate that savings can be made from doing things differently although I acknowledge the limitations that Deputy Yerby set out. However, as I alluded to in the previous debate, what concerns me from reading this paper is that lessons haven’t been learnt and we end up with an emphasis on short term tactical savings to meet immediate targets, rather than longer term strategic change to enable long term cost avoidance.
Through the original FTP, over £30m of recurring savings were apparently found over 5 years as Deputy St Pier mentioned earlier. We are now being expected to find another £26m of savings over 4 years. Whilst we are told this is a MTFP it is not. It is very short termist as Deputy Yerby made clear. And, Just like FTP, savings can be found but not reinvested until 2020 where £3.5m can be used. Under the FTP, the KEVII hospital was closed on the understanding that the savings generated, which were considerable could be reinvested in the community. This never happened of course, despite investment in this area being a key part of the 2020 Vision.
It is my concern that the MTFP as it stands will limit Committees’ ability to think strategically which makes me attracted to this amendment. Of course it could also be seen as a let off for Committees. We know that inefficiencies still exist. But how best to deal with them? Short term tactical savings only go so far before they have a negative impact which only come to light when something serious happens and it becomes headline news locally and nationally.
However, I totally agree with Deputy Kuttelwascher that savings can be made through eGov initiatives. In fact the reality is, as the MTFP does state explicitly, the major savings aren’t within Committees at all, which is where some of the speakers in this and the last debate have got it wrong. They are at an organisational level. There are efficiencies that can be made there. In fact, the one cross-cutting saving of any note in the FTP, The Hub, has been a success and resulted in efficiencies. Savings can be made in procurement. Improved HR processes and the better use of technology can make a significant difference.
So, I can’t support this amendment. But my message to members of this Assembly, and the Scrutiny Management Committee in particular, is to monitor progress closely. The annual update to the P&R Plans should enable this Assembly to determine whether the right approach is being taken and to make changes should that be necessary. Everyone here needs to be actively engaged not just now but throughout the rest of this term.