Introduction

Across much of Europe local government is facing a dramatic decrease in resources alongside a sharp increase in citizen demand. In England, the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review proposed a 27% cut in local government budgets, alongside major reductions in other funding streams that impact local communities. The cuts are being experienced in the context of the wider costs of recession, notably declining incomes and rising prices for food and fuel, which are leading to rising demand for many local authority services. At the same time, demographic changes are increasing further the pressure on local services, most significantly in relation to the needs of an ageing population.

This chapter asks how English local authorities are weathering what amounts to a ‘perfect storm’. Are they merely trimming their sails to accommodate the buffeting as best they can, or have they decisively changed course? Gerry Stoker (2012) proposes two scenarios for local government in 2020. The ‘life after the cuts’ scenario sees budget cuts as driving innovation in public service delivery, while the ‘sustained recession’ scenario sees a long term depression characterised by ad hoc rather than strategic responses to the cuts. The scenarios approach, while providing a useful heuristic, runs the risk of overdrawing the choice between action and inaction. The aim of this chapter is to analyse the balance between ‘trimming’ and ‘transformation’ on the ground, and to examine those practices which fall between these extremes.

Reflecting the unprecedented scale of the cuts at hand and the early point in their implementation, we start with open questions rather than specific research hypotheses. We employ a case study methodology, using interviews and observations. We contextualise our data with reference to national surveys on the early impact of the cuts, and in relation to research on previous periods of austerity, notably in the 1980s. The chapter draws upon, and contributes to, the literature on institutional change and austerity, in general and in respect to local government. The first section looks at the nature and scale of the cuts; the second section specifies our research questions and explains our methodology; while the third and fourth sections present research findings and analysis respectively.