You can read the whole report for yourself as Barriers to Choice can be downloaded from the Cabinet Office website.
The report was the subject of a favourable editorial in this morning's Guardian:
The first thing to say about the Barriers to Choice study is that it doesn't feel like a government review at all. As an independent author, David Boyle is evidently not all steamed up about bringing in more private-sector players. He is also refreshingly level-headed about the benefits of providing patients and parents with ever more information: none of those Google-your-way-to-a-heart-transplant enthusiasms indulged in by Mr Cameron and Steve Hilton at their most tiggerish. But this very lack of Conservatism is what makes Mr Boyle's survey so interesting, because here may be the makings of a Lib Dem view of public-service reform.Mark Pack is less enthusiastic:
The ideas in The Barriers To Choice Review are good. They are also – for want of a better wording – boring. Worthy but not the sort of stuff out of which you can fashion many leaflet headlines or news conference soundbites.
In other words, it’s a great report for ideas about how to govern successfully. It’s far less useful at providing a guide to what the Liberal Democrats could say at future elections is its approach to improving public services. Electorally successful messages need to be found elsewhere.This seems an odd reaction to me for two reasons.
First, though the Guardian says Barriers to Choice does not feel like a government review and surely means that as a compliment, it is a government report and it seems unreasonable to expect that a publication emerging from the Cabinet Office will read like an ALDC campaign guide.
Second, if even Dr Pack believes any document not written in text speak, Focus speak or platitudes about being fair to hard-working families is "boring", the fogeyish comments this blog sometimes ventures about the initialisation of society are more justified than I realised.