THE so-called English question is beginning to exercise the minds of politicians and the public alike and deserves an answer. One solution could be devolving genuine powers to local government.
But if we are to truly devolve power to local authorities in England then we must first establish precisely what it is we aim to achieve.
Are we merely seeking to ensure less legislative constraints on councils, making it easier for them to deliver the services upon which people depend? Would that be enough to provide an adequate answer?
Or are we contemplating something much more fundamental? Should we consider an entirely fresh approach to the funding of local government and the way in which they choose to operate and run their services?
We should start by looking at where we are and how we got here.
Unquestionably, the creation of the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies provided models that tested years of debate on whether or not such arrangements could work successfully.
But it is just as doubtless that their arrival created a conspicuous anomaly in terms of the English establishment.
It is an anomaly which has sometimes simmered and sometimes bubbled over.
For example, the public may not be that interested in the differences in house buying north or south of the border, so long as it doesn’t impact on them directly.
But try calming the storm over differences such as tuition fees or prescription charges depending on which side of the border you live and you’ll face another challenge altogether.
It is not a new puzzle.
WEST LOTHIAN QUESTION
Tam Dalyell first posed the so-called West Lothian question in 1977, when highlighting that he could vote on matters in Blackburn, Lancashire, but not Blackburn, West Lothian, in his own constituency, because of the local government arrangements.
It is something the commission chaired by Sir William McKay was charged with investigating in January.
More recently, Graham Doig’s A Union of Equals, has taken a much closer look at the issues and proposed solutions more closely focused on the arrangement of government at national level.
What I would propose is that the anomalies can be ironed out by instead looking again at the organised, though not necessarily best-structured, family of local authorities in England.
It is a structure governments have looked at time and again with a view to finding better ways of working and smarter solutions.
I would certainly argue that, irrespective of how successful previous restructures have or have not been, we should not be deterred from looking again at local government as a potential solution.
It offers an almost unique contact with local communities, and it is that power to reach into which we should tap.
Devolving power to local government is something which has been touted in various incarnations for many years.
Perhaps the most concerted effort in recent memory was the proposed regional assemblies, but whether their failing was down to the principle or the way in which they were introduced is a moot point.
Certainly, the North East, where the regional assembly model was thought most likely to gain favour, proved not to be as receptive as anticipated. Was it the modelling, the timing or another factor?
LOCALISM
Now the Localism Act is the latest piece of legislation to bring the debate to the table.
But while the very term ‘localism’ suggests giving power to communities, the reality has so far appeared very different. In fact, more than 120 powers previously held locally have been centralised through this legislation.
Which rather begs the question: what needs to be done differently now to how it has been done before if devolution of power to local authorities is truly to flourish?
There is perhaps a psychological hurdle to overcome – and that is challenging our understanding of what local authorities are there for.
Call them what you like, but councils have been around in a shape either broadly or closely representing what we know today since the municipal reforms of the 19th century.
They have, of course, been transformed and reformed time and again during that time.
So we should not be afraid to think differently about them. One of the earliest radical thinkers was Joe Chamberlain, Mayor of Birmingham from 1873.
His vision enabled the creation of municipal gas and water services, resulting in dramatic improvements to his city and the lifestyle of its inhabitants.
Almost 140 years on, we perhaps have another opportunity to make a big impact on people’s lives for the better.
For let us make no mistake – things will need to be done differently. The funding reductions we have seen in the last two years far outstrip anything that has gone before.
They have left a hole in council budgets that mean something radical, drastic even, needs to happen to ensure there are still services and they are still delivered locally.
And that point is at the heart of this debate – doing things locally. If we are to truly give power to councils up and down the land then we need to believe that they can deliver and we must give them the authority to do just that.
NEIGHBOURHOOD AGENDA
While I was Leader of Derby City Council, we launched our Neighbourhood Agenda. The administration I led passionately believed that, with the support of local councillors and other public services, the people in the communities were best placed to recognise their needs and prioritise accordingly.
The premise was simple – formally give communities the appropriate powers we could, provide them with the funding and governance to deliver, and let the rest take care of itself.
And take care of itself it did. Neighbourhood working in the city is among the best developed of those I have seen anywhere because it remains built on the solid foundations.
I am not pretending for a moment that the delivery of the required monumental savings in local government by restructuring and devolving is going to be that straightforward, but I do profess that the principles remain the same.
It is about Government believing that local authorities truly do have the ability to make the right judgements, rather than talking about devolution but then leaving the ultimate decisions to the centre.
BEYOND CORE CITIES
We have already seen a move towards giving more powers towards so-called core cities. That would be a step in the right direction, provided it is properly supported with the finance and legislation to make it meaningful rather than notional.
But we should not fall at the first hurdle and think that a move in the right direction is necessarily good enough.
If Birmingham can do it why can’t Bolton? If Manchester then why not Middlesbrough? If Liverpool then why not Lincoln? The principle remains precisely the same.
A sceptical view would be that for this to be achieved then we must first put some consistency across the local authorities that would be affected.
There is certainly inconsistency at the moment, be it that some have Elected Mayors while others have Leaders and Cabinets, or that some have elections in thirds while others have all-outs.
But I feel this view is just that – sceptical. Enforcing any such changes rather undermines what it is we are trying to achieve: what works best for that area, for the people who live there and in the interests of delivering the right services in a way that best suits.
Although if we are to consider truly radical change then one area which surely deserves re-examination at the very least is the unitaries versus two-tier debate.
SPENDING CUTS
While the enormous cuts in public spending were being announced by the Government, the private sector was being touted as a knight in shining armour that would ride to the rescue of those made jobless by the public sector cuts.
Of course, just as many predicted, this has not come to fruition.
The cuts to public spending have come thick and fast but, unsurprisingly, that has had a significant impact on private sector business too and so there simply haven’t been the economic triggers to create those employment opportunities.
This is where councils can make a real difference if only they had the powers to do so.
Lack of employment is a growing problem in the context of the cuts agenda. National programmes to remedy this are often toothless because the jobs are simply not there.
But what if councils were able to make meaningful arrangements with local employers to provide opportunities?
Just as the planning authority can insist upon Section 106 arrangements from incoming developers, what if councils also made mandatory arrangements for internships or work experience opportunities with local employers, new or existing?
Not only would it give those out of work much-needed purpose and encouragement, but it would also give the local workforce in the best possible opportunity to take advantage should jobs then become available.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
And allow me to propose another example as to how local decision-making can make a genuine difference, again referring to an example from my own city; Derby.
The city has proportionately more jobs in high-technology sectors than any other area outside of London, and workers in Derby on average attract the second highest salaries in England, again behind only the capital.
It is these sorts of economies which the UK needs to nourish and protect if our economy is to recover – and who is better placed to enable that than the people of Derby?
True controls of economic development, with a proper devolution of powers, would make that a reality.
Here there will be inevitable contemplation of Sir Michael Lyons’ local government finance review in 2007, and in particular the potential for improving incentives to promote economic prosperity.
The Shadow Secretary of State has already spelt out details of a new deal for English local councils, resulting in powers on transport, housing, skills and economic development being truly devolved.
And that is clearly the direction in which we must seek to travel.
But we must also learn our lessons from the past if the new deal on offer to those councils has the very best chance of success.
For example, any review of local government structures, and in particular the obvious savings on paper that can be achieved by the introduction of unitary authorities in two tier areas, must be properly thought out and debated.
END WHITEHALL DICTATS
Moreover, in the true spirit of devolution those debates need to take place not in Westminster but in the areas that would be potentially affected. Once again, it is about local decision making.
We need to see a promise of localism supported by actions.
It is no good telling a local authority it knows what is best for its area while simultaneously issuing a dictat on what colour bins it should collect and how often.
It is equally unhelpful to promise local authorities will provide for local people while stripping away their funding so they are hamstrung and totally unable to deliver.
Of course, while entrusting local authorities to make the decisions that matter for their residents we must also put in place the necessary safeguards to ensure those services will meet the required standard.
What we could not possibly contemplate would be a postcode lottery of sorts, where people in some areas are continually let down by poor performance from their council.
So in return for their extra powers, councils would be expected to sign up to a contract with their residents, committing to providing certain standards as a minimum - and pledging to go beyond that where possible.
Maybe then we will have a model that not only replaces what we know now, but is far superior it in terms of performance, delivery of services and, crucially, genuine local democracy.
For it is the latter which we must surely return too: local democracy. That is what Tam Dalyell was talking about, and that is what the very principle of the West Lothian question debate seeks to remedy.
Once we have real local democracy then we have real devolution. Likewise, until we have real local democracy then devolution will ultimately be undermined.
That is why I believe now is the hour for something radical, for the new deal the Shadow Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government talked about and for a system that finally removes the anomaly in England that breeds, at best, frustration and, at worst, anger and envy.
We may be close to finally answering the West Lothian question. The biggest challenge may yet be persuading those in power to have the courage to deliver on it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment