“Places for Growth”

 Late last year, without any fanfare, the Cabinet Office published an evaluation report on “Places for Growth” (PfG). PfG is the Tory initiated program, started in 2020, to relocate 22,000 roles outside of London by 2027 and to have 50% of UK-based Senior Civil Servants (SCS) based outside of the capital by 2030.

The real purpose of the plan, however, was to move civil service jobs into constituencies that the Tories wanted to win in the general election; of course, that plan failed miserably.

For us, the key conclusion in the report is (emphasis ours):

Conclusion: At risk: The ministerially agreed principle to reduce the number of civil servants based in London to 75,000 by 2030, a key aspect of the Plan for London program, is currently at risk based on current headcount data. It is noted, however, that the increase in Civil Service headcount in London should be viewed in the context of the increased demands preparing for EU Exit, and then management of the pandemic response during this period.

Year	London (Headcount)	Outside London
2017	78,070	334,150
2018	83,530	339,110
2019	89,100	348,460
2020	91,660	356,100
2021	101,930 (FTE 98,000)	375,470
2022	104,830 (FTE 100,955)	398,250
2023	103,735 (FTE 99,790)	409,820

Up until now, PfG has been relatively painless as the civil service was expanding at the same time as roles were supposedly being relocated out of London. Following recent announcements, however, we know that overall civil service headcount is set to reduce and, on the face of it, 25,000 jobs will have to be cut in London to meet the 75,000 target for London headcount.

We in the Independent Left take this seriously. Labour is desperate for savings and in many ways, they are more ruthless, callous, and rigid than the Tories.

This is amply demonstrated by today’s announcement that the Cabinet Office, mostly London-based, expects 2,100 out of its 6,500 jobs will be cut or moved to other parts of government over the next two years. Pat McFaden, the Minister in charge of the Cabinet Office, has been explicit that moving jobs out of London is “where the state can get better value for money.” Where the Cabinet Office goes, others will follow.

Also highlighted in the report is the target:

“London estate reduced to 20 buildings by 2026 and consolidation of regional estates into hubs”.

The report says of this target:

Evidence: The current count of buildings in the London estate is 63. This is expected to fall to 40 buildings by 2026 based on disposals planned, compared to a target of 20.

Such a sharp reduction in the number of buildings threatens our members working in facility management jobs. It stands to reason that you need fewer security guards, catering staff, cleaners, etc. if you have 20 buildings rather than 63 buildings.

What is to be done?

The Independent Left propose the following:

• We ask the Labour Government to drop the 75K target, insource all FM work, and give a guarantee of employment for all FM workers. If they don’t, then we campaign in London, targeting Labour MPs in particular to support us;
• We educate and agitate around this issue with London staff with an explicit goal to recruit civil servants and FM workers and to build an expanding cadre of civil service/FM activists;
• Under the auspices of the London and SE Regional (LSE) committee, regular meetings are held with impacted London branches. FM worker reps must be part of these meetings. The LSE to be given a campaign budget so that local campaigning can be undertaken;
• All relevant Groups, National branches, London branches, and the national union meet together regularly to plan bargaining and campaigning;
• All the above is undertaken with the aim to build and win strikes in London.

If Left Unity wins a majority on the NEC, will any of the above happen? We are doubtful.

In DWP, where the LU has had complete control for decades, their standard operating procedure when faced with mass office closures/staffing cuts is to place the burden on individual branches to fight the closures/cuts on their own and to exclude local branches from any talks with management about local offices.

They will do the same with London

With a Coalition for Change NEC, our proposals stand a chance of being adopted. So, if you work in London, vote Cfc in the NEC elections.