Now that we are over halfway through the financial year, more and more councils are revisiting plans they have made to generate efficiency savings to see if they will stack up and achieve their desired outcome for this year and beyond.

At APSE, we have noticed an upsurge in enquiries about how you make remaining services more commercially viable by either reducing costs or generating additional revenue to offset budget cuts. This suggests that councils are concerned they may fail to meet existing targets and are attempting a ‘take two’.

With outsourcing too lengthy a process to deal with the immediacy of the financial pressures, many are looking at internal resources to see how they can make what they have go further or how they can generate a return from existing services.

The Audit Commission study ‘Positively Charged’, back in 2008, identified that local authorities in England and Wales generated over £11b in charges per annum. I must stress that nobody is suggesting we should try to soak the public for further revenue in the current economy. However, senior officers are recognising that some of the services they currently provide and assets used could raise revenue from the wider public sector and beyond.

Some of the thinking behind this is driven by the Open Public Services approach and there are those who add two and two together and come up with putting services at arm’s length to ‘free’ them to compete in wider markets. But decision-makers should remember that much of the perceived opportunities of this approach can be achieved with existing in-house services. And you certainly don’t need to mould services into a new type of model to pursue alternative work streams.

Local government already has many existing powers that allow it to provide services for other organisations. When you add the powers to charge for cost recovery and to trade for profit contained within the 2003 Local Government Act, you have quite a range of options available.

Some may decide to go for it and trade for profit on a larger scale, although I suspect the vast majority will test their competitiveness by expanding their charged-for services and perhaps trading commercially on a small scale at the outset.

As budgets continue to fall and corporate directors scan the horizon for opportunities to balance the books, I suspect many more will turn to developing income generation strategies for their authorities.

Took part in Guardian online debate today on managing parks and green spaces despite the budget cuts and with over 100 posts in two hours it was a lively debate.

I pushed the APSE line about whilst we disagree with the cuts we recognise that they are happening and therefore we need to find ways to stop services from imploding. The only response is to seek efficiency, generate additional income and innovate.

In terms of efficiency APSE's Performance Networks benchmarking data tells us that 56% of parks and grounds maintenance costs are staff, 16.5% are premises, 12.5% are vehicles, with the rest made up of equipment and materials, sub contractors, administration and central establishment charges.

Some of the answers therefore need to be found in staffing costs and that is why many local authorities have or are moving to more integrated streeetscene models where services merge together to reduce management costs. They are also looking at job redesign from the ground upwards to streamline processes and cut out waste and bureaucracy. This will increase productivity further and by utilising seasonal staff and volunteers, reduce the numbers of full time staff. This is not something I am happy about but service budgets will now only go so far.

Other areas to focus on to improve efficiency are better vehicle utilisation and better absence management.

In terms of income generation whilst many parks and open spaces people have raised revenue through events over the years the data I have seen suggest that this is not consistent across the board. There is a need for an even more commercial mindset in these tough times, that doesn't mean charging people who can't afford the cost but being more entrepreneurial in attracting new revenue streams.

This can come from providing catering for the many millions who visit parks or sponsorship from private companies of bins and shrub beds. Some provide specialist services to other public and private sector bodies. One authority in Scotland generated tens of thousands of pounds by getting its arboricultural squad to undertake tree inspections for private companies and some pruning activity. Others sell off surplus nursery plants. One English authority has received significant funding from the local health authority for organising outdoor health walks and putting some outdoor gyms in its parks and open spaces.

In terms of innovation a number of opportunities exist around renewable energy. The feed in tariffs for solar PV mean that revenue can be generated by fixing panels to south facing roofs of facilities. This can make these facilities self sustaining in terms of energy and helps with carbon reduction commitments. Similarly biomass boilers can heat premises and the fuel for these can be grown on rough land surrounding facilities, the new renewable heat incentive will also provide funding for this.

Other authorities already recycle water they use in ponds through drainage systems and reuse leaf fall and other parks waste as fuel.

The issue of trusts was raised as a potential answer to the parks funding crisis, however I think you need to start by asking what advantages can be achieved by this route and ask what you may lose.

It would be difficult to establish a trust without going through some form of procurement process and these normally take a number of years to achieve - my view is the cuts are more immediate than this.

Unlike Leisure there is only a very limited NNDR or VAT advantage with a trust for parks, therefore there is no significant financial savings.

In terms of trusts ability to attract new investment I have not seen examples that cannot equally be achieved by local authorities directly. On this point of funding I am aware of a number of examples where local authorities have used their specialist resources to make successful heritage and lottery fund bids and I wonder if this would be diminished by externalising services.

Overall a useful debate was had but if parks and open spaces are to survive the age of austerity then it will be done by sweating out efficiency, generating new income streams to offset budget drops and by seeking new forms of innovation.

Spoke today at APSE's Northern symposium on 'Avoiding the road to nowhere' at Formby Hall.

This was the latest event in our roadshow on discussing with our membership the financial challenges they face and debating some of the solutions around efficiency, income generation and innovation.

Also speaking was Paul Sanderson from St Helen's Council, who identified measures that they are taking around energy efficiency and renewables to save money and improve their performance in relation to reducing carbon emmissions. 

Caroline Finnett from Walker Morris presented on what social and environmental actions you can include in procurement. She also used the opportunity to promote the research APSE has completed and our publication on a Sustainable Development Toolkit. Walker Morris provide the legal advice on this.

Busy couple of days in London, where I attended a couple of conferences and had several meetings.

The first event was 'The Public Sector Efficiency Expo', where I almost seen Francis Maude outline the coalition Government's policy on Public Services.

I say almost because despite turning up early at the Business Design Centre in Islington the organisers hadn't anticipated how many people would want to get into the main hall and it was overflowing with people. I ended up watching the session, chaired by Ben Page, from a balcony trying to make out what was going on through a dodgy sound system. Don't think I will be going back next year.

Had a really useful meeting in the afternoon at the Department for Transport, where we discussed the development of the Highways Maintenance Efficiency Programme. The meeting was quite stimulating as the civil servants engaged in an open diaologue as to how we could communicate the programmes aims effectively, including the use of social networking.

I then went off to discuss a research project on Insourcing services that we are undertaking for a client.

My second day allowed me to attend the Sustainable Development UK conference at the QE11 centre in Westminster, whilst their were a number of interesting speakers, Phillip Monaghan was the one who I enjoyed listening to the most as he spoke about his book 'sustainability in austerity'. In the afternoon I met up with another research client to discuss a project we are undertaking on the employment opportunities created in the green agenda. 

Spoke at APSE's latest roadshow event on 'Avoiding the Road to Nowhere' in Landudno in North Wales.

Reg Kilpatrick the Deputy Director of Local Government Policy at the Welsh Assembly gave a useful insight into the efficiency context in Wales. Compared to England, Scotland and Northern Ireland the cuts appear to be on a smaller scale to existing budgets and therefore perhaps give a greater opportunity to come up with responses that can be implemented over time. 

Mad dash around London today for a series of meetings aimed at developing a couple of research projects that APSE is keen to undertake on green jobs and service delivery.

Later on had a catch up with Jack Dromey, who is now a Shadow CLG Minister. Jack has spoken at numerous APSE conferences over the years in his previous role with the T&G and he has also worked with us on a range of housing issues in the past.

Finished the day with a meeting with Lucy Makinson, Director of Efficiencies at the CLG where we shared our views on how efficiency can best be achieved in local government.

The blows just keep on coming, it seems. A recent report claiming council managers are unproductive is the latest in the drip, drip, drip attack on public servants already facing slashed budgets, frozen pay and pension cuts.

I was pleased to be able to set the record straight on Radio 4 (listen on the attached clip) after the report by management consultants Knox D’Arcy had been sensationalised in the press. While they had surveyed just 176 local government managers and claimed they were 12% less productive than private sector counterparts, I was able to draw upon APSE’s comprehensive performance networks database, which contains eleven years worth of information from more than 200 local authorities across the UK showing productivity gains.

It would be all too easy to critique the methodology used by Knox D’Arcy, but the most worrying thing here is the way in which negative stereotypes were all too readily seized upon to malign local government. One newspaper actually illustrated their story with an image from a photo-library of someone sitting with their feet up on the desk, when the true picture of high performance among millions of staff working to serve the public on a daily basis is repeatedly overlooked.

APSE’s detailed evidence shows, for example, the amount of refuse collected has doubled in the past three years, as has the number of school meals served. Sickness absence has dropped dramatically in services such as cleaning. Our latest series of briefings on efficiencies is also packed with cases of councils delivering millions of pounds of savings.

It was suggested that 500,000 staff could be cut on the basis of the Knox D’Arcy report. But undermining public services upon which millions of citizens, not to mention our national economy, rely is not the solution.

So what is? I have argued previously that councils need to keep cool heads and robustly examine how they can continue to improve from within – rather than make rash decisions they will regret. I also believe more can be done to increase the bang councils get for their procurement buck and ensure their spending benefits local economies. We at APSE are helping councils across the country implement ‘lean systems thinking’ processes to minimise waste and maximise productivity.

No-one is at all complacent. Council have risen to the previous challenges of CCT, Best Value and Gershon Review but now face greater pressure than ever with budget cuts of at least 25%.

As a first step, we need to use the reams of evidence available to fight back against unhelpful stereotypes and speak up for local government. We need ministers to be seen to be working with the sector, not against it.

I am not suggesting there are simple answers and there is certainly further pain to come. What is certain is that rolling over and playing dead is not an option.

Progressive austerity appears to be the message on public finances for the foreseeable future. In local government this translates to reducing costs or cutting services in order to pay for the sins of the bankers.

For those who have been in local government over the last few decades this is not exactly a new phenomenon. From the mid-1970s onwards every few years another government financial crisis appears, often originating from another source; from the International Monetary Fund intervention to CCT and from Black Wednesday to Gershon.

And as much as we can blame others for all of this, the reality is that the public sector has rapidly become the media whipping boy once again.

There is much talk of incremental improvement being exhausted with innovation and step change being the only solution. But is this really true? Or is it a convenient truth for those who stand to prosper from alternative forms of service delivery?

My view is that creating an environment in which efficiency and continuous improvement flourish will allow a culture of innovation to develop. It will also place local authorities in pole position to lead other public sector agencies in the total place agenda. So what might this environment look like?

Firstly, there needs to be a focus on good local performance management data. Not centrally driven targets, but meaningful useful information that identifies a baseline of performance which can be scrutinised for competitiveness and challenged by both elected members and local people.

Phase two is about process benchmarking with others to identify who has outstanding performance at present then examining how to get to that standard or level of efficiency.

This can be done in a variety of ways, but the management tools and techniques associated with systems thinking approaches could prove a useful start rather than simply attempting to replicate others.

Involving staff from all levels of the organisation from the outset in this process will help spread the message and build ownership of the solutions.

Having untangled staff from the organisational straitjacket of the past, you are now into level three where innovation can flourish. Transformational service redesign can take place by eradicating waste and bureaucracy and enabling such innovations as the co-production in service delivery we have seen in recycling and waste minimisation over the past few years.

This has encouraged residents to take more responsibility for their actions while having greater input into service design and allowed more to be done for less.Of course it may prove easier to achieve the benefits created by such an environment if you have retained control of your own destiny.

For councils locked into long-term contracts, it is likely to be someone else who reaps the rewards.

I was quite surprised in more ways than one at the weekend to read the Chief Executive of the Audit Commission, Steve Bundred's comments suggesting a pay freeze for public sector workers as an answer to the current gap in public sector finances.

Firstly it seems a bit strange that in a week where we have the Leader of the Opposition, David Cameron, praising local government for its record breaking efficiency savings we have the Chief Executive of the Audit Commission suggesting that as a reward for this the staff should receive a real terms cut in their pay.

My second observation is that as an independent watchdog the Audit Commission is getting into debates that are beyond its brief. I think the Commission has a key role to play in ensuring transparency and accountability in public services, it's politicisation would be a real shame.

Attend MJ awards dinner this evening at the Hilton Park Lane and it's a real pleasure to see some of the hardest working staff in local government get the recognition their achievements deserve.

The room is packed with around 1,000 people present. I am fortunate to be seated front centre at Deputy Editor of the MJ, Heather Jameson's table. To my right is Efficiency Guru and Chief Executive of Lewisham, Barry Quirk and to my left is Chief Executive of the LGIU, Andy Sawford.

New Communities Minister John Denham gives some opening comments, which are well received by the audience. Huw Edwards of the BBC presents the awards.

Needless to say a good time is had by all, but most importantly is the celebrations that hopefully take place at authorities all over the UK when news filters back of the success of all those recognised at the awards.