Local collaboration will be even more necessary in the tough times ahead

May 21, 2010 by
Filed under: Credit crunch, Politics 

What does the Coalition programme mean for local government? Some of the most specific of the 28 points in the ‘communities and local government’ section focus on planning where the thrust is double devolution. Councils see the return of local planning powers, a measure which will presumably be used to block new housing developments where there is local opposition. But there will also be steps to give neighbourhoods an enhanced role in very local place shaping.

Beyond this there are three sets of issues. The first is a commitment to ‘a radical devolution of power’. Beyond planning, the main specific measures are a general power of competence, cutting local government inspection, scrapping ring fenced grants and the abolition of the Comprehensive Area Assessment. However, as local government has a minimal place in the NHS, crime, schools and ‘social action’ sections, and as there is no mention of Local Strategic Partnerships or any other co-ordinating body, it doesn’t appear this devolution of power will include a wider strategic function across local public services.

Indeed the opening up of schools to new providers, the strengthening of the right of local communities ‘to save local facilities and services threatened with closure’, the direct election of local police chiefs, the freeze on council tax for one (and possibly two) years and the enhancement of rights for residents to veto ‘excessive’ council tax increases, could all be seen as measures that will make it harder for councils to get their way. In this sense the agreement confirms the impression of all the party manifestos which is the absence of a coherent framework for local governance.

It is difficult to know what will be the outcome of the second theme; the reform of local governance. Councillors will no doubt be pleased to see the back of the Standards Board, have some fun with the right to vote on remuneration packages for chief officers but possibly be less enthusiastic about publishing every item of spending over £500. But how many will vote to return to the committee system, and will the 12 big cities take up the opportunity to have mayors, or fight for a ‘no’ in the ‘confirmatory’ referendum?

The third theme isn’t in the local government or public services sections but in paragraph three of the introduction by the two leaders: ‘We are…agreed that the most urgent task facing this coalition is to tackle our record debts’ and in the pledge to ‘significantly accelerate the reduction of the structural deficit….with the main burden…borne by reduced spending’. It is this issue which is certain to be the most important for councils.

In all the talk of the £6 billion savings package, which George Osborne will unveil next week, it is easy to forget this is just the tip of the iceberg. We will have to wait for the budget and the autumn spending review to see the full scale of mainstream budget reductions. But the likely pressure on local government budgets looks even greater in the context of  other Coalition spending pledges, including major areas like the NHS, schools and overseas aid which are to be safeguarded from any reduction. With councils apparently having less scope to raise money locally and with communities having more power to slow down or block unpopular cuts, to say councils are between a rock and a hard place is an understatement.

Unless I have missed something, there is little to suggest the Coalition is interested in supporting – let alone incentivising - initiatives like Total Place (perhaps this is just too humdrum for these heady days). But local collaboration and budget pooling is surely vital to minimise the impact of the coming cuts on the most important aspects of local life and the most vulnerable local people. Maybe, in fact, the most important message of the Coalition programme for local public service leaders is actually page seven where we see the photogenic Dave and Nick sitting together committed to overcoming old rivalries for the good of the nation.

Share

No related posts.

Tags: , ,

Comments

8 Comments on Local collaboration will be even more necessary in the tough times ahead

  1. Julian Dobson on Fri, 21st May 2010 5:23 pm

    2. Good points here. This all links strongly with the Big Society theme: a lot of enthusiasm for local empowerment but some big gaps when it comes to the role of local government and relationships with community organisations.

    The grouse of community organisations – as I reported last year – is that local authorities hang on to money and power when they should share and let go. But their case isn’t that local government should have less money and less power. The issue is one of creating relationships of trust.

    I think there are some conflicts to be resolved in this brave new world. A centrally-imposed freeze on council tax is hardly the stuff of localism – shouldn’t those decisions be made by local electors? And while I’m all for a post-bureaucratic society, do we really achieve that by dismantling the forums people use to create dialogue and partnerships?

  2. Richard on Fri, 21st May 2010 8:46 pm

    3. It is certainly pretty strange that Total Place is getting overlooked by both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats despite the fact that it would seem to fit quite well with their localism agenda – I see Sir Michael Bichard was pretty much telling councils this week that they should go ahead with it no matter what central government does.

    But this isn’t to say Total Place is perfect, even though it is one of the most interesting schemes I know of being tried in any of the corners of the British state.

    As I wrote in this post, the problem with Total Place is that it is still too inward looking and doesn’t much involve the public in ways that would address some of the other issues of participation and responsibility that you often explore here.

    The Conservative manifesto included some pledges on participatory budgeting which could address these weaknesses if they were sensibly linked up to the Total Place reforms.

  3. David Wilcox on Sun, 23rd May 2010 8:07 am

    4. I agree with Matthew, “local collaboration and budget pooling is surely vital to minimise the impact of the coming cuts on the most important aspects of local life and the most vulnerable local people” and with Julian “the issue is one of creating relationships of trust”.
    The various partnerships structures and forums of the past may not be there to do that in future. Maybe they have been over bureaucratic, costly and ineffective in engaging with local people in some cases.
    Now we have to move into the Big Society of new innovative collaborations. Where’s the middle ground between a further round of centrally- imposed structures (which few people want), and the spontaneous emergence of new forms of social action (which will be slow)? How do we re-design civil society … and what are the new roles in supporting that?

  4. Anthony Zacharzewski on Sun, 23rd May 2010 9:05 am

    5. I think the big unanswered question is whether councils have the right sort of thinking in the right places (member and officer) to make such a major shift work. Partnership working has been a success in some places and some areas, but in the majority of cases it’s still a student house-share rather than a marriage.

  5. Alex Cameron on Tue, 25th May 2010 6:29 am

    6. Collaboration at local levels isn’t an option now. when resources are so tight and multiple initiatives unacceptable. Total Place is as good a local focus for collaboration as anything – it is rather untested at present anyway. Collaboration needs a focus and Total Place gives it. Most thinking local authorities will recognise in time that the realities of the situation demand new thinking and new relationships.

    The bigger question is whither they can do it in practice. Collaboration is about sharing control and this is easy to understand intellectually but a little harder in practice!

  6. David Wilcox on Tue, 25th May 2010 8:29 am

    7. Alex - good post over here on Total Place and participatory budgeting reinforcing your view. Can’t see who the author is though. Is that where the practicalities of Big Society could be worked through?

  7. Richard Parsons on Tue, 25th May 2010 12:50 pm

    8. David – Thanks for your mention of the post I wrote on total place and participatory budgeting – you can always get in touch via richard@edemocracyblog.com if you’d like to!

  8. David Wilcox on Wed, 26th May 2010 9:32 am

    9. Thanks Richard – will do. Meanwhile, you might be interested in the ideas from Professor Tony Bovaird at yesterday’s Big Society round table …
    What not take the Total Place idea of pooling budgets in an area another step, and make an officer in every city directly accountable to Parliament for total local spending. And how about taking one per cent of public sector budgets and making it more directly available to the community.
    Let’s also dispose of the idea of grand top-down strategies, beloved of bureaucrats, and focus on how to support a mass of action by individuals.

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!