A lot of luck and a following wind

Bell, good news from British Gas who wrote to say that, despite the fact that Transco's records are wrong, they would now close my account. They urged me, and my new supplier, to press Transco to correct their data! Leaving out the rude words I said to myself "Why should I?" My euphoria was somewhat reduced when, two days later, I received a Final Demand accompanied by threats to cut off my supply. Ho hum. What we have here, it seems, is another example of that widely unlearned lesson that divided responsibility does not work. "Everybody's business is nobody's business" as some sage observed. As far as I am concerned Transco is a creature of British Gas - split off under some duress if I remember rightly but, nonetheless, closely related. Was the divorce so acrimonious that they won't even talk to one another?

Of course I have seen this error in operation more than a few times. For example I once worked with an organisation which had installed a system which contained a computer from one major supplier and a punched card element (I'm going back a bit!) from another. It didn't work and it proved absolutely impossible to pin the responsibility upon either of them. We had to rub it out and start again.

Unfortunately the same mistake continues to be made. When we enjoyed (?) the services of British Rail we, at least, knew who should be held to account if trains collided. Now, clearly, we do not. As somebody once said: "That's a helluva way to run a railroad". I am reminded, although I should prefer not to be, of the trying times I experienced in local government service.

The thing is when I was a management services bloke in the private sector and I came up with a brilliant solution to some problem I just had to go to the MD and sell it to him. OK, he might have the odd discussion with the departmental managers who hated everything about it and there might even be a more or less acrimonious discussion between us but, ultimately, he would decide to accept my recommendations or not and that was an end to it.

In local government however it was a whole different ball of wax. If one's recommendations had any effect on staff - which they usually did - you had first to send them to the Staff Side of the Joint Staff Committee. They normally objected and sent you a deputation to remonstrate with and harangue you. Then you had to send them to the Joint Staff Committee itself, prior to which the councillors thereon would come to you for a briefing. At some stage you had to send a report to the Board of Management, where the departmental directors concerned would, often, do their best to rubbish it. Then, having fought it through this process and a meeting of the Joint Staff Committee the report had to go to each of the spending committees affected. This could often involve two, or more, committees, each involving briefing of the committee chairman, pre-meetings of officers and endless suggestions for modifications to your report - ranging from total evisceration to queries about whether it was proper to say "the Committee is recommended to..." or "the Committee are recommended to...".

Meetings of the committees were spread over a six week cycle and since the report had to go to them in the correct sequence its passage through them all could easily extend over 12 weeks. Having got past the spending committees it had to finish up with the Policy & Resources Committee whenever finance or staffing changes were involved. At this point any director who was seriously aggrieved would seek a meeting with the Council Leader to make a last ditch stand. This was their chance to deliver the ultimate arm-twisting line: "I will not be responsible if, as a result of this change, I fail to meet the Council's statutory obligations".

Finally, with a whole lot of luck and a following wind, your recommendations might be implemented.

I should, perhaps, mention that in summer there was a six-week recess in which no committee meetings took place - which could well mean that a proposal which you initiated in May might well drag on into October. I am here to tell you that this was an exceedingly dispiriting and tiring experience and to ask for your sympathy for those who still labour in that particular vineyard.

Whatever happened to that noble experiment of having Town Managers with executive powers? Oh yes, I remember, some of them turned out to be a trifle crooked, didn't they? This is one of the many problems for which I do not have a ready solution. I suppose it might help if we could take party politics out of the equation - although I have no idea how this might be achieved. I certainly felt that local authorities were managing far too many different things. For example, things like social services, education, policing and housing benefits would be better run on a national basis. The only trouble with that being that they would then be in the hands of Westminster/Whitehall which, no doubt, have similarly tortuous, convoluted and Machiavelian procedures of their own. My own personal solution was that I left - well, actually I was evicted like a rejected transplant. Must have been something I said....