Q&A: the proposed Tory co-operatives

Who would run the co-operatives?

Managers in the public sector would be encouraged to form social enterprises, wholly owned by their staff, to deliver existing services more efficiently

Why would they bother?

The Tories say that morale would be improved if workers could “become their own boss”. More pertinently, the co-ops would be allowed to keep a share of any efficiency savings they made, with the cash shared out among the workers

Is this privatisation?

Not exactly. Although the co-ops would be able to keep some “surplus”, they would not be allowed to make profits for shareholders. Nor would they be given ownership of government assets such as buildings. However, the co-ops could form joint ventures with private companies that would be paid a share of revenue

Why would co-ops be more efficient?

The Tories believe that co-ops are more productive “because both business and employee interests are closely aligned”. They point to the success of John Lewis, which announced record Christmas sales.

Would this mean more targets?

Yes. Government would specify the outcomes that co-ops have to achieve. Contracts would be written so that they were paid according to these benchmarks. If they failed, contracts would not be renewed

If it’s such a good idea, why isn’t it happening already?

It is. The NHS has a scheme called Right to Request, which allows staff to take over ownership of services, which they provide by contract to primary care trusts. There are also numerous examples of social enterprises taking over services from councils

How are the Tory plans different?

They are far broader. There are so far only 20 organisations in the NHS scheme, but the Conservatives aim to allow almost all public services to become co-ops, except forareas such as the police, the Armed Forces and the courts

Don’t I remember the Tories announcing something like this for schools?

Yes, but with important differences. The Tories plan to let parents start their own schools within the state sector. For other public services, it would be workers, not the community, who owned the co-ops

What are the practical problems?

Persuading managers to take the initiative may not be as easy as the party hopes. Unions are also firmly opposed, claiming that the plans are a front for cuts. Transferring staff contracts to the co-ops could also be a sticking point, particularly where pensions are concerned

Whose idea is it?

Labour protests that “it is ours”. But mutualism has been a fashionable idea for think-tanks on both Left and Right. Last October, the “Red Tory” thinker Phillip Blond set out his idea for the “ownership state”, arguing that public services should be delivered by social enterprises that would harness the knowledge and commitment of frontline workers

What are the political advantages?

The Tories hope mutualism will help them to make big efficiency savings without having to cut services. They also hope that by using the language of co-operatives, traditionally associated with the Left, they will attract disaffected public sector workers and centrist voters, while also appealing to those on the Right who demand radical reform of public services Chris Smyth