David Simmonds is MP for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner.
In the last hours of parliamentary time before summer recess began, ministers announced a wave of decisions on local government reorganisation.
Controversial at best, reorganising council services is a major decision for a government to make, which often results in a deterioration in service quality and a rise in cost, and countless needs to be carefully thought through. Councils typically deliver over 800 different services to their residents, from the familiar such as recycling and roads, to those less well known such as public health, early years support, special educational needs, and social care which now consumes around 70 per cent of the budget but touches less than one in five of our population.
Instead of careful thought, however, we have a reorganization based on shifting rural and greenbelt areas within urban boundaries in order to facilitate more planning permissions being granted. There is no vision for what local government is ‘for’ in modern Britain, nor how the persistent failure of the housing market is to be addressed, given that the there are more new homes with planning permission already than the government target for the whole of this parliamentary term.
Our shadow team has been resolute in its opposition to the decisions the government are making, from the cancellation of elections to the blatant shifting of resources away from Conservative-voting areas to favour already relatively well-resourced Labour areas. Although local government is rarely the stuff of stirring manifesto pledges, liveable neighbourhoods, suitable homes, a decent quality of life and standards of living are hugely improved when we get local government right, and feedback across the party is that our decision in government to reduce councils’ funding without trimming back their legal obligations undermined our credibility as a party of government.
We need to use our time in opposition to go beyond a critique of the government’s poor decision making, and to shape our own thinking on what part our councils and local politicians play in a reenergized country, as Kemi has been setting out in a host of policy areas.
As a Shadow Minister, I have been engaging with some of the leading thinkers and researchers in this sector to begin shaping some answers.
That critical first question – “what is local government for” – has many answers. In Russia it is increasingly local management controlled by the central government. In Germany, it has constitutionally-enshrined independence and autonomy and is a major economic force. With Labour’s proposals abolishing 90 per cent of elected representation in England, it is a decisive shift toward that Kremlin model, by contrast with our Conservative tradition of valuing flourishing local democracy.
“Take back control” was a phrase that resonated with people, so revitalising local democracy with elected local politicians who can meaningfully reflect the wishes of voters has to be a key starting point. But we also need to consider what we don’t want councils to do, including what we might stop doing entirely.
“Form follows function” is the next principle. Decisions about what the role and functions of local government are will guide the most efficient form that councils take. We know from experience that councils are much more efficient than other parts of government, and this evidence should inform what responsibility sits with councils rather than government departments. For example, there has been some debate about a ‘National Care Service’ for social care, but experience of joining up through the Better Care Fund showed that councils were significantly more efficient than the NHS, which is used to being bailed out when it fails to live within its means.
Financial stability becomes the next consideration. Many of Labour’s new councils are being set up to fail, with a resource base totally inadequate for the scale of their responsibilities from the outset. In part, this is about a more stable relationship between councils, the Treasury, and the numerous government departments that influence their budgets. However, we need to move beyond that and consider whether the complex patchwork of regulations on council finance are fit for purpose given their responsibilities.
Having considered these points, we have an opportunity to set out a plan for the part our councils, mayors and other local authorities will play in the country we are setting out to renew. Critically, what measures might form part of a ‘Great Repeal Bill’ undoing the damage caused by years of legislation dumping often unfunded duties on councils, with little ongoing follow up of whether, and how they are working in practice. This frustrates voters as well as politicians.
Kemi has been setting out how our country can be different and better for all our people. Getting local government right supports that sense of patriotism that we all feel – our home and neighbourhood are the place we live and hugely influence how we feel about our country.
As we move towards party conferences, and see the direction of travel under another new Prime Minister, we will be doing the patient work with our councillors, businesses, thinkers and strategists to put together the package of reforms to local government that will support our people in “taking back control” in their communities to get the decisions made that will deliver a higher standard of living for everybody.
David Simmonds is MP for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner.
In the last hours of parliamentary time before summer recess began, ministers announced a wave of decisions on local government reorganisation.
Controversial at best, reorganising council services is a major decision for a government to make, which often results in a deterioration in service quality and a rise in cost, and countless needs to be carefully thought through. Councils typically deliver over 800 different services to their residents, from the familiar such as recycling and roads, to those less well known such as public health, early years support, special educational needs, and social care which now consumes around 70 per cent of the budget but touches less than one in five of our population.
Instead of careful thought, however, we have a reorganization based on shifting rural and greenbelt areas within urban boundaries in order to facilitate more planning permissions being granted. There is no vision for what local government is ‘for’ in modern Britain, nor how the persistent failure of the housing market is to be addressed, given that the there are more new homes with planning permission already than the government target for the whole of this parliamentary term.
Our shadow team has been resolute in its opposition to the decisions the government are making, from the cancellation of elections to the blatant shifting of resources away from Conservative-voting areas to favour already relatively well-resourced Labour areas. Although local government is rarely the stuff of stirring manifesto pledges, liveable neighbourhoods, suitable homes, a decent quality of life and standards of living are hugely improved when we get local government right, and feedback across the party is that our decision in government to reduce councils’ funding without trimming back their legal obligations undermined our credibility as a party of government.
We need to use our time in opposition to go beyond a critique of the government’s poor decision making, and to shape our own thinking on what part our councils and local politicians play in a reenergized country, as Kemi has been setting out in a host of policy areas.
As a Shadow Minister, I have been engaging with some of the leading thinkers and researchers in this sector to begin shaping some answers.
That critical first question – “what is local government for” – has many answers. In Russia it is increasingly local management controlled by the central government. In Germany, it has constitutionally-enshrined independence and autonomy and is a major economic force. With Labour’s proposals abolishing 90 per cent of elected representation in England, it is a decisive shift toward that Kremlin model, by contrast with our Conservative tradition of valuing flourishing local democracy.
“Take back control” was a phrase that resonated with people, so revitalising local democracy with elected local politicians who can meaningfully reflect the wishes of voters has to be a key starting point. But we also need to consider what we don’t want councils to do, including what we might stop doing entirely.
“Form follows function” is the next principle. Decisions about what the role and functions of local government are will guide the most efficient form that councils take. We know from experience that councils are much more efficient than other parts of government, and this evidence should inform what responsibility sits with councils rather than government departments. For example, there has been some debate about a ‘National Care Service’ for social care, but experience of joining up through the Better Care Fund showed that councils were significantly more efficient than the NHS, which is used to being bailed out when it fails to live within its means.
Financial stability becomes the next consideration. Many of Labour’s new councils are being set up to fail, with a resource base totally inadequate for the scale of their responsibilities from the outset. In part, this is about a more stable relationship between councils, the Treasury, and the numerous government departments that influence their budgets. However, we need to move beyond that and consider whether the complex patchwork of regulations on council finance are fit for purpose given their responsibilities.
Having considered these points, we have an opportunity to set out a plan for the part our councils, mayors and other local authorities will play in the country we are setting out to renew. Critically, what measures might form part of a ‘Great Repeal Bill’ undoing the damage caused by years of legislation dumping often unfunded duties on councils, with little ongoing follow up of whether, and how they are working in practice. This frustrates voters as well as politicians.
Kemi has been setting out how our country can be different and better for all our people. Getting local government right supports that sense of patriotism that we all feel – our home and neighbourhood are the place we live and hugely influence how we feel about our country.
As we move towards party conferences, and see the direction of travel under another new Prime Minister, we will be doing the patient work with our councillors, businesses, thinkers and strategists to put together the package of reforms to local government that will support our people in “taking back control” in their communities to get the decisions made that will deliver a higher standard of living for everybody.