Is the Brown Government going soft on reform of public services? This charge has been rumbling for some time, but surfaced yesterday as Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, announced the scrapping of six independent sector schemes to provide treatment for the NHS. That is, naturally, not how the decision was presented, and advisers deny strongly any dilution of reform.

The debate over reform is linked with the question of whether there has been a retreat from Blairism. But it is pointless to treat this as a benchmark. The right question is whether the reform programme, as it is now, is being so changed as to undermine the chances of improving services. Nothing is quite what it seems. All proclaim themselves reformers, none more so than Gordon Brown. But what type of reform? There is ample evidence that competition from alternative providers improves the performance of the existing public sector.

Ministers’ case for scrapping six schemes is that they are no longer needed and will not provide value for money because the NHS has succeeded in increasing capacity. To counter the critics, Mr Johnson gave the go-ahead for three new independent sector schemes for diagnostic scans and kidney dialysis.

But the national programme of private sector centres is being abandoned in favour of local commissioning, with a switch towards more private involvement in primary and community care. Ministers talk of creating a level playing field between NHS and non-NHS providers and extending patient choice from next April to any hospital meeting NHS standards and prices. The diversity programme was intended both to produce an increase in total capacity (in both NHS and independent hospitals) so as to reduce waiting lists and“ times, and to provide competitive pressures to improve existing services. The former has happened, but the latter is now in doubt. Critics, such as the Reform think-tank, now wonder whether scaling back independent sector delivery to a third of what was originally planned will prevent the creation of sufficiently large alternatives to maintain competitive pressures.

In other areas, the impetus for reform is being maintained. The Tories claim that the academies programme is being weakened. They point to the closer involvement of local authorities, and to the requirement for the national curriculum to be followed in English, maths and science. But, in practice, successful academies have worked with local councils and most follow the national curriculum in these subjects. The latest story has been about a review by the Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit, but this is one of several reviews by the unit of significant policies. Both Mr Brown and Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, have become keen supporters of academies, and there is no slackening of the drive to create 400.

There are now legitimate questions about the pace of public services reform. However, claims that both all is well and that everything has been abandoned need to be treated sceptically. The danger is that the cutting edge is being blunted in some areas as the Brown Government seeks reform without controversy.

But placating public sector unions and Labour interest groups is less important than showing disillusioned voters that public services are improving. That will decide the next election.

Times Recommends

• Navigating the new global archipelago
• Comment: McCain isn't Bush and voters know it
• Religion's history of self-inflicted pain