Page 109

CEP template 2012

The committee also conducted semi-structured interviews with commissioners and public service providers to understand how organisations ensure that they meet the high ethical standards expected for the delivery of public services and managing of public resources. From this evidence base the committee identified some emerging themes, examples of current practice and proposals. Findings: Stakeholder views Despite the common view that providers will, in most cases, conform to ethical standards, it was found that commissioners do not necessarily articulate ethical standards to providers explicitly. It was considered that there were limitations in the current mechanisms to establish how ethical standards were embedded in provision. Whilst many thought efficiency and flexibility gains had been achieved through new ways of working, there was some concern that certain providers would ‘cut corners’, ‘deliver below par services’ or risk quality of service in order to achieve value for money or payment demanded by commissioners. Stakeholders felt there was a greater emphasis on transparency around decisionmaking and accountability, although the latter tended to be seen predominantly in financial terms. The conduct of organisations and individuals delivering services was seen as important, and there was an expectation that organisations would comply with legal and regulatory requirements, and staff would conform to an organisational code of conduct. There was also: • A view that ‘personalisation’ of services to the needs of the user – which was not consistently defined – implicitly required high ethical standards • An acknowledgement that complaint data and user satisfaction data could be used more effectively • A concern that some commissioners may not be equipped to deal with the size and complexity of new contracts • A focus on quantitative metrics to measure outcome and impact • Evidence that commissioners wanted training, dissemination and guidance to help and support them to encourage providers to conform to ethical standards From the views expressed during focus groups with members of the public, we can be confident that the public expected that the same ethical standards should be confirmed and upheld by any organisation providing public services irrespective of the nature of the organisation providing the service. ‘How’ the service is delivered was found to be as important as ‘what’ is delivered. The public want personalisation and a user-led definition of quality. The public are, however, realistic and acknowledge the need for proportionality and the implications for cost. They recognise that good outcomes as defined in the contract will not necessarily conform to high ethical standards. So, as the Ipsos MORI research clearly revealed, they also want closer and more effective scrutiny of all providers regardless of sector, to ensure those delivering services are held to account if they do not meet user expectations. However, the committee’s meetings with commissioners and suppliers indicated that ethical standards do not tend to be explicitly incorporated into either the selection or contractual E t h i c a l s t a n d a r d s f o r p r o v i d e r s o f p u b l i c s e r v i c e s arrangements, nor is performance monitored on this basis. The primary focus of commissioners appears to be on cost and outcomes – the ‘what’ and not the ‘how’. Commissioners rely instead on an implicit understanding and application of ethical standards, which, across government, we found to be fragmented, piecemeal and inconsistent. There is an assumption that a relationship of trust between the commissioner and the provider alongside ongoing dialogue would ensure that the desired values are delivered as part of the service. But we heard that this is not without risk of potential inter-dependency, particularly with big suppliers, and there is potential for conflicts of interest, especially in relation to the interchange of office holders The Seven Principles of Public Life Commonwealth Governance Handbook 2014/15 107 The Seven Principles of Public Life are accepted as the basis of the ethical standards expected of public office holders. While these principles have not changed over time, the scope of public office holders has. More and more public services are provided by third-party organisations outside the conventional public sector. The key message, as shown by our research, is that the public want all providers of public services to adhere to and operate by common ethical standards, regardless of whether they are in the private, public or voluntary sectors… Ethics matter. The public are right to expect high ethical standards and the government must ensure that this is achieved regardless of who is providing public services. Lord Paul Bew Chair, Committee on Standards in Public Life Selflessness. Holders of public office should act solely in terms of the public interest. Integrity. Holders of public office must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence them in their work. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family or their friends. They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships. Objectivity. Holders of public office must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias. Accountability. Holders of public office are accountable to the public for their decisions and actions, and must submit themselves to the scrutiny necessary to ensure this. Openness. Holders of public office should act and take decisions in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing. Honesty. Holders of public office should be truthful. Leadership. Holders of public office should exhibit these principles in their own behaviour. They should actively promote and robustly support the principles and be willing to challenge poor behaviour wherever it occurs.


CEP template 2012
To see the actual publication please follow the link above