Separation of powers in the UK social care system: A 50‐year perspective

Abstract

AbstractUK social care policy has “traditionally” sought to minimise organisational and sector boundaries through cooperation and partnership. This discussion paper argues that there is a case for a social care system based openly on separation of powers to address the conflicts of interest that inevitably exist between the actors—notably local authorities and service providers. Such systems, with “guardrails” to separate the actors, and “checks and balances” to keep them stable, have been developed over centuries in other spheres. Furthermore, if disabled people are to be considered as participants with rights, rather than mere recipients, they should be recognised as the third main actor in the system, also with powers that are protected and constrained. This paper takes a 50‐year retrospective view of these issues in terms of policy affecting people with learning disabilities, focusing on three policy episodes in the UK. First, the 1970s, with a system unbalanced by powerful medical professions, and an absence of self‐advocacy. Second, care management in the 1990s, which ducked the spirit of Sir Roy Griffiths' vision of a lively provider market. Third, the adoption and degradation of Personal Budgets. The learning from UK and international individualised funding programmes is too complex to be certain which ingredients are the keys to success. However, there are strong arguments, and substantial evidence, to suggest that Personal Budgets will not truly succeed until they are built on a structure that determines not only what councils and providers can and should do but also where they must not interfere.