Whatever happened to pride, responsibility and common sense ?

To say 2024 was a turbulent year is probably an understatement. All manner of things seemed to culminate in very poor, even disastrous outcomes. To name a few: The Post Office scandal, Grenfell, HIV contaminated blood, Valdo Calocane.

Wherever one looks something is going wrong and it seems to have been this way for some time. Surely human beings can organise themselves to make better decisions and to behave with integrity and take responsibility. I posed this question to myself and began to consider how things may have changed over time and what were the drivers for change.

In years gone by things were simpler: one example that has stuck with me is the Wheel Tapper. In the days of steam locomotives the wheel tapper would hit the wheels with a special hammer and by listening to the sound he could determine whether or not the wheel was cracked. If a wheel was cracked it would be replaced and the train would be kept safe. There was a direct link between the wheel tapper’s competence and the safety of the train. He took responsibility for his job and took pride in the fact the he maintained safety for the passengers. (I don’t think there were any female wheel tappers). Wheel tappers still exist in eastern European countries.

In my field, Highway Maintenance, there used to be a length man. As the name suggests, he was assigned to a length of highway and he knew it like the back of his hand. He would clear the ditches, cut the grass, sweep up debris, fill potholes and so on, all under the protection of a flag which he would poke into the verge near where he was working. Again, a direct connection between his role and the condition of that section of highway. He would also have been known to the locals as the guy who looks after the road.

I moved into Highway Maintenance in 1987 and things were still run in a common sense way; the County was split into areas each with a depot and people covered different disciplines in their areas. The link between role and function remained and a term I favour, “pride of patch”.

There was never any suspicion that the people carrying out the work were in some way gaining from a “cushy” existence; quite the opposite in fact. One of the guys in the depot had his own sign making business and he would work through the night if something was needed and charge less than if the signs had been bought in from a tendered supplier.

I think change started in the late 80’s when compulsory competitive tendering (CCT), brought in under Margaret Thatcher, was taking effect. All that had been done with common sense, no complication and no profit was thrown into turmoil; everything had to have a price and it was decreed that private companies could do things more efficiently and cheaply. Initially local authorities got round this by separating the client and contracting side of the operations. This complied with government diktat in that the contracting element was called the Direct Labour Organisation and made profit; the profit was however paid back to the local authority. The Council still felt like the Council and the people worked in partnership for the good of the residents.

Over the next few years full externalisation was insisted upon and private operators got in on the act. Although many of the people were the same they were eventually forced to become more contractual. When drawing up contracts it is never possible to cover every eventuality and to describe what will need to be done over the contract period (5-20 years). Anything not covered in the contract doesn’t get done because there is no item or cost specified; previously someone would have just done it. The over-arching priority is to make profit for share-holders. Inevitably staff numbers increased (efficiency decreased) as teams were required to run “the contract”. Another aspect of this is the need to avoid risk and to price in any possible risk that could lead to the contractor losing money. Again, things that had been done hundreds of times before were suddenly such a serious risk that the contactor needed thousands of pounds to go near the site.

In my last position as Head of Highways I tried to get young engineers to think for themselves, to challenge norms and not be restricted by convention. It is becoming unceasingly difficult to step outside the box these days for fear of condemnation from on high. We have lost the courage to stand up for our own, well thought through and principled ideas and actions.

All this has been compounded over the years as local authorities have lost their own staff and have employed consultants. In my experience consultants take no risk, they over-design, over price and often don’t even go to the site they are designing, preferring instead to “google” streetview. I knew of cases where consultants had seriously fallen short but they never contributed anything towards the remedial works.

In combination this has led to extreme difficulty in making decisions and getting things done, after all - who will make decisions, who will prioritise, who will prepare and confidently announce accurate costs for projects.

Over my time in Local Government the decision making process became unrecognisable: from a local engineer deciding to do a scheme to a series of risk meetings, meetings between various parties to the project and stakeholders, and usually over many months involving tens of people, none of whom was in charge.

I came to the view that this was a deliberate act so that, when things went wrong, no-one could be blamed, it was just too complicated to unravel who did what and who was to blame.

Lo and behold, we now live in a society where people are afraid to make decisions or the ones they do make are influenced by money or power and basic human decency has all but been lost.

And, when all has gone wrong the efforts to put things right are pathetic and take years and public inquires and still justice isn't forthcoming.

I for one am thoroughly fed up with this state of affairs and long for a return to common sense arrangements where people are willing to take responsibility, make decisions and have pride in themselves, their colleagues and their communities.

To conclude: someone is responsible for all the scandals I mentioned at the outset. The Horizon system did not prosecute sub postmasters, the chief executive did; someone made the decision to put flammable cladding on Grenfell and when individuals are sent to prison for these horrendous failings then maybe things will change.