Who wants more power

 

Who wants more power

 One of those occasional questions that crops up for every DPH  - “what powers would you like please”

 Thoughts

 

1            I would like the SAME powers as national govt  ….

Or something akin to the powers available to us cities. For example in NYC if National Govt isn’t going to do anything local Govt can take power in responsibility for addressing a risk to health. In U.K. the opposite is in place. Maybe THIS is the key power we need to ask for devo wise.

 

2            Caveats and cautions in “power”
I don’t think “more power” is right (well only at any rate) way to solve the problem of health inequality.

 


Local power doesn’t / shouldn’t replace national. For example local powers on air quality shouldn’t be seen as a reason for no progress on tax and fiscal on fuel, diesel scrappage, DfT investment in the right kind of infrastructure, govt subsidy to fossil fuels.

 

The exercise of powers

Worth exploring and unpacking “powers”.

Powers permit L Govt to do things

Lawyers have insight into what can be / can’t be achieved.

Councillors allow powers to be executed,

Public views matter - how do we best shape public views who will be interested in potholes in road and dig fouling. We will all chose the here and now, ask specific questions.

 

More power vs resources to execute power.

It is important to be careful on the narrative on “more powers”. Many suggest it is a cynical way of offloading responsibilities, powers must come with resource to execute. “more powers” may sound good, but not executable, or need too much to resource.

 

3            Competing priorities an issue

Powers with sticks and carrots

As well as having useful sanctions and the resources to enforce them, effective incentives are needed too.

Policies should also have built in mechanisms or “balancing feedback loops” where developments are allowed up to a point after which another rule “kicks in” to slow them down and limit negative health impacts. I am not sure these exist, but think in terms of limiting loss of open/green space in an area.

Are policies clear about what we need more of in terms of infrastructure etc. to improve health. Do we need to think beyond cycle paths and walkways?

When we use our powers say around junk food advertising, we loose income. The actual evidence is emerging to the contrary, but needs some careful thought and handling.

 

If you are interested in leverage points to intervene in a complex system the above point relate to rules, balancing feedback loops and buffers.

 

 

4            There are plenty of powers already in play. We don’t make optimal value

·       2000 Duty to promote well being

·       *The power of competence*

·       Local Govt Act

·       The Social Value Act 2012

·       The Equality Act 2010

 

First two of the above give LA pretty much licence to do anything other than declare war

Might be worth wrapping it all up in the context of duty for well being  - see government DCLG ( now MHCLG) research into the old wellbeing power’s use and barriers - Practical use of the Well-Being Power

Plus - general power of competence (…..the local authority can do anything to promote the social, economic and environmental wellbeing of the area, apart from raising taxes and anything that isnt reasonable……).

Power of well being (duty of competence or whatever we call it) is pretty all encompassing. So maybe we DO have what powers we need

Many of the powers are present already through existing regulations and legislation, which apply to infectious disease from decades ago, but framed in such a way that can be applied to non communicable diseases. In UK the LA has huge body of regulatory and legal weight behind it, incredible powers that often we forget about.

 

5            give me some specifics

I’ll avoid a long bucket list of specific powers. But have a running list, as does every DPH in the country

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Note on reducing gambling harm and a public health approach to this

Note on reducing gambling harm and a public health approach to this Gambling harm is going up lots of radars now. The UK Govt has been reviewing the existing Gambling Act and the result of that is expected to be published shortly. This has been a rather turbulent beast to tame. It is out there to be 1) used by any who want to use it to frame evidence or arguments. I would be interested in your views.    1.        Framing gambling It isn’t a “harmless leisure pursuit”. The question of how gambling is framed matters to the response. Many frame it as “a public health issue”. What that means requires careful definition. Will come back to) For more than 20 years, UK Government policy has portrayed gambling as, firstly, enjoyable; secondly, an expression of adult freedom; and, lastly, harmful only to a minority. The UK Government and policy makers have employed discourses that align more closely with those of the gambling industry than with those of the individuals, families, and communities
Read more

Health disparities white paper

Image
  Health disparities white paper Doing a fair few talks at a fair few meetings on “what are we doing, or going to do about health inequalities” or similar.  Note here. Steal / use as you want to NB – I don’t know what is IN the forthcoming White Paper. Here are some of my thoughts and hopes.   1             introductory stuff Language and framing What to call it Lots of discussion and questions from field at the recent LGA / ADPH conference on what we “call it”. Everyone in the field calls it “health inequalities”. There is something on use of language to appeal to different audiences – the recipient of a message may be more willing to hear some framing and language than others. Don’t just think of “health”. Disparities in health, inequalities or any title is an economic issue. Poor productivity and impact on health and vice versa     Models of evidence We also need to move on from individualised model of evidence – Lynch  and  Marmot  make the point about avoid
Read more

Personal responsibility and public health

Personal responsibility and public health   1             industry loves this narrative. You have got to wonder why Of note the harmful product industries are strongly in favour of personal responsibility. You can draw your own conclusions why this might be. Read 1) the history of tobacco control esp the write up of California and New York from Stanton Glantz in Tobacco Wars   2             It is a policy framing problem for public health that crosses political divides   This has been one of the deep running rifts in what different camps think about what would be most effective in public policy for many generations It is fair to say that the response to Wanless and Marmot 2010 (for eg Govt response to Wanless in 2004 (John Reid), The NHS Long Term Plan and Five year view, and many others) continued to focus on lifestyle, and within that individual lifestyle choice.   3             two examples – infection and obesity In infectious disease contexts , the pandemic has
Read more