Examination of Witnesses (Questions 340
- 352)
TUESDAY 14 SEPTEMBER 2004
COUNCILLOR ARTHUR
BRANSBY THOMAS,
COUNCILLOR BOB
GIBSON, MR
PAUL BRIGGS,
MR STEVE
MACHIN AND
MR PAUL
BEVAN
Q340 Christine Russell: Can I ask
you what you are planning to do to interest women in regional
government. 14 witnesses this morning, and every one is a man.
I would like to know with your regional assemblies how many women
have got actively involved? What plans have you got to involve
more in the future? Perhaps you could then go on to talk about
stakeholders' involvement and when you envisage that happening?
Mr Briggs: I have been particularly
involved with that as Chairman of the Economic and Social Partners.
We have a number of women making a contribution on our Economic
and Social Policies Group.
Q341 Christine Russell: Just making
tea?
Mr Briggs: No, they are very much
involved with drawing up the policies we have actually done. One
member is particularly concentrating on the very issue you have
raised. We have included that in terms of the equality and diversity
issues we have mentioned earlier on. I think the involvement of
stakeholders is an extraordinarily important factor, and it is
why we have spent quite a lot of time actually drawing up a statement
of principles, so that it is enshrined statutorily and also involved
in the structure and operation of an assembly if the yes vote
comes through. We have to make sure we review that. I would like
to see that scrutiny role actually brought more forcefully forward
in any Bill that comes forward to ensure that those particular
obligations are carried through. That is very important. I think
there is another element of scrutiny, which I think you began
to address earlier on in the previous session. It seems to me
we ought to have an extended power of scrutiny over the implementers
of the strategy, and perhaps even for those who are actually investing
money from other quangos in the area, so that they do align with
the strategy for the region. If there is no more money in the
region then we must make it effective and make sure it is aligned
with that. I would hope that the stakeholder involvement, if it
can be made more solid in the Bill, would actually empower stakeholders
and make them more involved.
Mr Machin: Some very quick statistics
from the North West. I think out of 46 local authorities there
are five women chief executives. It is a problem which is one
of governance in general, rather than for regional governance.
The North West Regional Assembly has engaged the Manchester Business
School to do research to identify the presence of women in particular
and the imbalance in gender across governance in the North West.
Certainly the outcome of that work shows that the prospects for
more representative gender balance in devolved institutions as
in Wales do offer a number of opportunities in regional governance
if we get the structures right. Moving on to stakeholder involvement:
we have proposed that the added value we have gained from involved
economic and social partners be extended with their representatives
sitting at the board table with the elected regional assembly,
should one arrive in the North West, and be involved fully in
decision-taking but not in decision-making. That is something
which is best done through the representative role of the ballot
box. There is real value-added to be gained from regional bodies
through the involvement of business and social partners: obviously
a "yes" to the idea of a regional civic forum; and full
stakeholder involvement in as many ways as we can achieve. In
the North West the Chamber of Commerce has 17,000 members.
Chairman: If I could just cut you off
there.
Q342 Mr Betts: Relations with the
regional Government Office, would you say how you think that might
change under an elected regional assembly? Would it be more radical
if the proposal was to abolish the regional Government Office
and give the regional assembly responsibility for those functions?
Mr Machin: We think that the current
arrangements in the North West with the Government Office work
very well up to a point. The problem is not with the Government
Office and the regions, it is the point at which their schizophrenic
role being a support of the region but also the Government's watchdog
comes into play. We know with the European Structural Funds that
had there been more flexibility with Whitehall we could have built
on the 95% success of the bid we achieved in the 2006 round. I
think there are good relationships that work very closely with
Government Office and the RDA. Certainly the role of Government
Office of London is one where further clarity is needed. If you
have a regional assembly it seems to me that the officials that
work to it and work to Government need to be very clear about
the extent to which they are responsible and to whom their duty
lies.
Mr Bevan: I think one would expect
the Government Office to reduce in size and scope.
Q343 Mr Betts: Substantially?
Mr Bevan: Yes.
Cllr Gibson: The relationships
with the North East, the Regional Government, the Office of the
Regions and the RDAs are excellent. The interface in future is
now being looked at, as is the interface with local government
etc.
Q344 Mr Betts: A lot is going to
change somehow. We have got the RDA and you have mentioned a good
working relationship, fine: but under the new regional assembly
presumably there is no responsibility for the day-to-day working
of the RDA but to carry on as before. There will be a regional
strategy done by the RDA in line with Government guidelines and
then the assembly is going to get it and be able to alter the
full stops and commas. It does not seem they have got much more
to do than that. Is that a hard view?
Mr Machin: I do not think it is
unduly hard. I think what needs to be worked through is: firstly,
which institution is responsible for policy development—I
would argue that that would be the elected assembly; secondly,
which for delivery—I would argue that would be the agencies,
Environment Agency, Development Agency and so forth; and, thirdly,
who is responsible for evaluating whether the bodies are being
effective or not.
Q345 Mr Betts: The policy of strategy
is still with the RDA. Eventually it comes to the assembly. We
all know the bodies to initiate generally have the real power.
Why is the power not with the regional assembly?
Mr Machin: I think in your deliberation
that is one thing that needs to be made clear. The power should
sit with the elected body; and the Development Agency, Environment
Agency and their like become delivery bodies which are tasked
to deliver against specific targets for the region.
Q346 Mr Clelland: The estimated cost
of an elected regional assembly for a Band D council taxpayer
is around 5p a week. Do you think that is a realistic figure in
your view, or do you think the Government has provided sufficient
tax-raising powers for elected regional assemblies?
Cllr Gibson: It is difficult one
to work through. I would like to see a paper on this. I do not
know where the 5p comes from. I do not know where the £25
million comes from. I do not know where the 300 jobs come from.
I do not know where the £400 million building comes from.
So it is a difficult one. For me if we can achieve what we set
out to achieve in terms of workless-ness, connectivity, a better
regional development strategy then 5p in the pound on local tax
seems fairly cheap.
Q347 Mr Clelland: It could be difficult
for regional assemblies to have real clout and real authority
when they can only influence things rather than actually have
a financial power to do things.
Cllr Gibson: The Bill is what
it is. It is what we derive and drag out of Government from then
on. It is a process than begins on November 6th; it is not an
event that ends on November 4th.
Cllr Thomas: The other aspect
of finance which is rather strange is that this Bill is tighter
on the block grant that is coming through, proposed through Government,
than was proposed in the original White Paper when there was much
greater flexibility for the assembly to be using it.
Q348 Chairman: Would you like that
greater flexibility back in?
Cllr Thomas: Yes, we would.
Q349 Mr Sanders: We heard earlier
in the North East that of 300 staff in the Government Office 100
of them are transferring to the assembly and will be employed
by the elected assembly. Is that not a very clever way of central
government shifting the costs of 100 staff, at the moment paid
for directly by the taxpayer, on to the council tax payer in the
region? Are we not actually being had by this entire Bill, which
is simply a way of transferring costs from the centre on to the
region in the mistaken belief that you have some say over what
happens in the region? Discuss.
Cllr Thomas: I do not think the
5p is something which will cover the cost of what you are envisaging
there. I could make the general point that with the present assemblies
the financing has certainly not kept pace with the responsibilities
given to the assemblies. Whatever happens with the finance, there
has to be the finance to allow the assembly to do the job it is
being created to do.
Q350 Mr Clelland: What flexibility
will regional assemblies have under the terms of the general grant
they will get?
Mr Bevan: I think the functional
body approach is a real limitation. It is bad enough within a
government or local government organisation to take money from
one department and put it into another to reflect your priorities;
but if you have got functional bodies with relatively autonomous
boards that makes it even more difficult.
Q351 Mr Clelland: Cllr Gibson mentioned
his ambition in the North East for additional powers certainly
in terms of transport. Why is that so important?
Cllr Gibson: I think we do not
have powers in the North East. The powers in transport are here
in Westminster and Whitehall. The strategies for the region tend
to be around congestion in the South and South East and not the
economic development needs of the North East. We need now to be
looking in the North East at our links with Scotland, and our
connectivity with Scotland, through to Ireland and Europe; and
our connections with Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds. We cannot
deal with issues—we are not allowed to deal with issues—unless
the priorities are set down here in Westminster and Whitehall.
We have argued for years about dualling the A1 into Scotland and
it gets laughed at because people say, "Why do you need to
dual carriageway the Lake District?" It is not about that.
It is a serious problem of getting the North East connected to
Scotland and connected to Manchester and the South etc so they
will begin to develop.
Q352 Chairman: Would you like to
see transport powers added?
Cllr Gibson: We want to amend
the Bill in Parliament and have powers but we would like the finance
around those powers as well, so that we can have regional strategies
on transport etc, developing the region, paid for by the region
and everybody in the region has a handle on them. We do not have
that at the minute.
Chairman: I am afraid at that point I
will have to cut you off. Thank you very much for your evidence.
| 
