Examination of Witnesses (Questions 440
- 459)
WEDNESDAY 15 SEPTEMBER 2004
RT HON
NICK RAYNSFORD
MP AND MR
IAN SCOTTER
Q440 Mr O'Brien: The Northern Way
does not look at regional assemblies; it looks at regional cities.
There is a difference.
Mr Raynsford: No, it is an economic
and planning development framework.
Q441 Mr O'Brien: So we are not looking
at regional cities then but at regional assemblies?
Mr Raynsford: The Government has
two separate policies. One is the policy that will allow each
English region an opportunity, if it so wishes, to have a referendum
to establish an elected regional assembly. Secondly, there is
a policy to encourage economic development within the northern
part of the country, building on some of the natural growth potential
of the region and identifying certain planning objectives that
will hep to facilitate that. That is work being done in the Office
of the Deputy Prime Minister. Obviously we are engaging with stakeholders
in the northern regions in developing that, but that work will
continue, irrespective of the outcome of the referendums.
Q442 Mr O'Brien: Are there going
to be elections to the regional cities?
Mr Raynsford: The cities will
continue to have elections for their local authorities as at present.
There is no proposal to change that.
Q443 Mr Clelland: In terms of the
Northern Way, the three regions involved in the referenda are
obviously all involved in the Northern Way. In your opinion, if
one of those regions had to have an elected assembly, would that
strengthen or weaken its position within the Northern Way?
Mr Raynsford: I have said on a
number of occasions that I suspect that all of the northern regions
will be looking to some extent over their shoulders at how others
vote because there will be a suspicion that the region or regions
that are first in the field with assemblies may get a competitive
advantage. They may well have a very powerful voice in advocating
key priorities for their region, a voice that is possibly going
to be more influential in Westminster, in Brussels and in other
areas where decisions are made that will impact on the economy
and the life of those regions and that this, as I say, will give
a competitive edge to a region with an elected regional assembly.
I cannot judge whether that will be the case or not. I just say
that I think there are quite a lot of people who feel that may
be the case.
Q444 Mr Clelland: The possibility
is that if, for instance, the tragic event happens and the North
East were to vote no and then Yorkshire and Humberside were to
vote yes, that would put the North East at a disadvantage?
Mr Raynsford: I think a lot of
people in the North East would be worried that that would leave
Yorkshire and the Humber with a significant competitive advantage
against the North East.
Q445 Chairman: One or two government
departments, like Culture, Media and Sport and perhaps Transport,
do not seem quite to have embraced the enthusiasm of the Deputy
Prime Minister for regional government. Are you going to be able
to get them brought into this in the future using clauses 45 and
46?
Mr Raynsford: I am pleased to
say we have had very lengthy and productive discussions with a
number of colleagues in other government departments, included
both DCMS and Transport. The discussions are ongoing, particularly
in respect of Transport. On the cultural side, we have a series
of proposals that I think will help to ensure a really effective
partnership between the national institutions, such as Sport England,
the Arts Council and the elected regional assemblies, in order
to achieve an improvement in the facilities available and their
use, both in respect of sports, arts and other cultural activities
in the regions. Very obviously for major projects that will have
a big impact on the arts or sports in the region, and indeed on
the economy and the quality of life in the region, there will
be a continuing need for inputs from the centre, from the Arts
Council and from Sport England. The framework that we put in place
is one that will help to ensure a very close working between the
two to achieve the maximum benefit for the region and for arts
and sports.
Q446 Mr Betts: On the sports issue,
as I understand the White Paper, it seemed initially that regional
sports responsibilities were almost going to be transferred to
the assembly. Now we are talking about keeping the regional sports
body but the assembly has a right, as I understand it, to nominate
five members, including the Chair. The Chair then has a right
to an automatic place on the national sports body. Where does
responsibility actually lie? Is there room for discussion with
Sport England about outside responsibilities? If an elected regional
assembly has a right to make this appointment and the Chair goes
to the national sports body, does that mean that that does not
happen where there is no elected regional assembly, so a regional
with an electorate simply has an advantage in that respect?
Mr Raynsford: You are absolutely
right that those regions that have an elected regional assembly,
because there is that new democratic body responsible for the
region, will be able to nominate both the Chair and the members
of the respective body: the sports regional body and the arts
regional body. The Chair of those will serve on the national body.
That is exactly the kind of process I was describing of trying
to ensure an effective partnership between the national body and
the regional body. The difficulty, and let me be quite frank about
this, is that if you try to define the funds available into national
as against regional posts, you will end up inevitably with some
arbitrary and probably unsatisfactory divisions and some very
lumpy patterns of expenditure. If you try to build a partnership
in which the region is exercising a real influence on the national
body, and the national body is tied into a relationship with the
region where it knows that its input is going to be crucial to
successful development of sport and arts facilities in the regions,
I think you are much more likely to get a successful long-term
relationship with investment planned in a way that maximises the
benefits for the region. That is the objective that we are trying
to achieve.
Q447 Chris Mole: We were told at
our last session by a representative from ACPO that the Home Office's
and the ODPM's and their perception seem to be talking a different
language. What really is the Home Office's commitment to regional
development? You talked about all the other departments but you
did not mention that one.
Mr Raynsford: I have not talked
about all the other departments. I was asked specifically about
Transport and DCMS and I did respond in relation to those two,
but obviously we have had discussions with many other departments
such as the DTI, for obvious reasons in relation to economic development
and others. We do not propose that the elected regional assemblies
should be responsible for policing. That is one of the differences
between the English regions and the London model, and so there
has not been the same degree of Home Office involvement as there
as in the formulation of the proposals for the Greater London
Authority. Nevertheless, colleagues in the Home Office are well
aware that an elected regional assembly will have a significant
impact on many of the programmes that they regard as very important
indeed. In terms of social cohesion and measures designed to improve
relations between different communities, an elected regional assembly,
I believe, has a crucial role to play in overseeing the activity
within the region.
Q448 Chris Mole: What about the health
agenda? The strategic health body seems to sit there lurking about
the primary care trusts which have that local membership and accountability.
Should the strategic health authorities not be drawn into the
accountability loop?
Mr Raynsford: They will be drawn
in because the regional director of public health will relate
directly to the elected regional assembly, and in that way I believe
the assembly will be able to exercise an important influence on
the development of policies to improve public health in the region.
That is our objective. We are not saying that the assembly should
run the National Health Service; that would not be appropriate.
We are saying that it must have a significant influence, as indeed
I think in London it has. I think the Mayor and Assembly have
made very significant contribution to the debate about public
health in London with very similar arrangements to those now proposed
for the English regions.
Q449 Christine Russell: I would like
to move on to the housing function devolved to the regional assemblies.
The Housing Corporation appears to be expressing some concern
over the fact that whereas resources will be determined by the
assembly, they will not have a role in regulation. Do you see
that is going to be a difficulty, that it could lead to a fragmentation
and people in the housing field not perhaps communicating with
each other?
Mr Raynsford: No, I do not. I
think there is an entirely logical pattern here. The Housing Corporation
will continue to be responsible for the regulation of registered
social landlords. That is one of its important functions and it
would be wrong for that to be taken away in individual regions
because you do need a consistent pattern and many RSLs, including
many of the big northern ones, operate across a number of different
regions. A national framework for regulation is right, and that
will remain with the Housing Corporation. The financing, the arrangements
for the funding of both registered social landlords and social
housing work by local authorities, will be brought together and
decisions will be made ultimately by the elected regional assembly.
That is ensuring democratic control over spending decisions and
a much more coherent framework than in the past where spending
decisions for registered social landlords were taken by the Housing
Corporation and decisions affecting local authorities were taken
by the Government Offices. We are trying to pull that together
under the new framework with regional housing boards but those
are not democratically accountable directly as the elected regional
assembly would be. I think the new framework is an important step
in the right direction to ensure sensible decision-making about
the balance between investment in the particular sectors and an
overall framework for housing investment. This is one of the areas
actually where elected regional assemblies in the English regions
go beyond what applies in London. It is an area where the Mayor
of London, not surprisingly, has jumped on the bandwagon and has
said he wants those powers to himself. This is an illustration
of where some people say elected regional assemblies do not have
as much power as the Mayor. There are some, and I talked about
the policing function, where they are not involved in that but
here in housing they will have greater powers.
Q450 Christine Russell: So the monitoring
role will clearly remain with the Housing Corporation?
Mr Raynsford: The inspection of
registered social landlords and indeed local authorities will
remain with the Audit Commission, which is the inspectorate. The
regulatory function, that is the registration and disciplinary
action where there is a failure to meet regulatory standards,
will remain with the Housing Corporation.
Q451 Mr Clelland: Whatever the Government's
policy is, we would expect that all government departments would
be fully and enthusiastically behind that policy. It is not entirely
clear in terms of regional government whether that is actually
the case. To return to transport for a moment, while the regional
assemblies will be expected to draw up transport strategies, they
do not seem to have much power to ensure that those strategies
and priorities are implemented. The proposed powers in the Bill
do not seem to reflect the proposals in the recent White Paper
Future of Transport: A Network for 2030 with its new role
for passenger transport executives. Was the Department of Transport
involved in drawing up the draft Bill?
Mr Raynsford: We have had fairly
lengthy discussions with the Department of Transport about the
appropriate model to ensure that there is real power and influence
in the regions, but within a framework that recognises that many
of the transport networks are national and have to be coherent
nationally. You cannot have individual regions responsible for
sections of the rail network. Clearly you have got to link, if
you take the North East region, beyond Berwick into Scotland and
south of Darlington into Yorkshire and other regions. That is
the balance we are trying to achieve. As I indicated earlier,
there have been discussions which have not been entirely completed
yet. This is one area where we may well have further thoughts
about the potential role of elected regional assemblies.
Q452 Mr Clelland: That is good because
while the White Paper does in fact make very encouraging noises
about regional transport policies, it does not actually talk about
the role of regional government within those policies. It talks
about passenger transport executives from county councils, et
cetera. Will the DFT, for instance, be giving the Highways Agency
instructions to ensure that the investment decisions of the regional
assemblies are taken fully into account by the Highways Agency?
Mr Raynsford: We certainly would
expect the Highways Agency to pay very close heed to the views
of elected regional assemblies. I know of one particular issue
which is very dear to the heart of people in the North East, the
dualling of the A1 north to the Scottish border. I confidently
expect that if there is a yes vote and an elected regional assembly
in the North East, the assembly will be hammering on the door
of the Highways Agency. We certainly want a framework where the
Highways Agency will be paying very close attention to the view
of the elected regional assembly.
Q453 Chairman: Are you really telling
us that if there is a dramatic yes vote, your negotiations with
the Department of Transport might be strengthened?
Mr Raynsford: I could not possibly
be saying that. What I am saying is that there have been very
useful discussions with the Department of Transport. I think there
is a common aim to achieve a framework that meets the objectives
I set out for genuine devolution and decision-making to the regions
but within a framework that ensures a coherent national pattern
of transport provision.
Q454 Christine Russell: While we
are on transport, do you have any concerns that there may not
be sufficient capacity in perhaps some of the smaller unitaries
that could be created as a result of the local government reorganisation
that will take place actually to deliver a full range of transport
services? At the moment they tend to be run in two-tier authorities
by the counties, do they not? Do you have any concerns if the
electors opt for a proliferation of smaller unitaries?
Mr Raynsford: I do not think they
would opt for a proliferation of smaller unitaries because the
models in respect of the North East involve either a single unitary,
Northumberland, or two unitary authorities, one representing the
rural area and one representing the more urban area on the east
coast.
Q455 Christine Russell: I did ask
about some of the smaller unitaries in the North West.
Mr Raynsford: I understand that.
I was thinking about the North East immediately, because that
is where the first referendum will be held, as I was saying, in
either case in Northumberland there will be a significantly sized
unitary authority and in the case of County Durham either a single
unitary Durham or three unitaries in place of the seven district
councils at the moment. The Boundary Committee has given very
careful thought to those options and it has set out its proposals.
I accept when you come to the North West that there are more complex
issues, and that obviously will be a factor when people come to
cast their vote in those two-tier areas about the preferred model
of unitary local government. I have no doubt that those people
who prefer a model of very large unitary authorities will put
that case forcibly. I have no doubt equally that those who would
prefer smaller unitaries will argue their point of view for a
different approach. The debate will take place. One of the important
innovations I am very pleased we have done is to make it possible
for people to express a view. Previously when boundary decisions
were taken and local government was reorganised, the public had
no say whatsoever other than the consultation. The Boundary Committee
came up with its proposals; the Government either accepted them
or did not; and then they were put into practice. People did not
have a chance to express a view as they will in the second referendum
on their preferred model for unitary local government for their
area.
Q456 Mr Betts: This is a devolution
measure, as you keep saying, Minister, but one of the concerns
that has been expressed to us by the Local Authority Associations
and others is the fact that they are inherently suspicious that
in the end government will transfer powers up from them to the
regions. Indeed, despite the fine words in the policy statement,
they quote planning and housing in the Bill as examples where
this is happening, and particularly the fire service, which is
perhaps the service in terms of actually doing things where the
regional assembly will have the most amount of responsibility
and resources. Is the fire service proposal in particular really
not consistent with the intentions in the policy statement?
Mr Raynsford: No, it is absolutely
consistent, and I will explain why in a moment. Let me briefly
touch on those other two. In the case of planning, as you know,
the Government has proposed a streamlining of the planning system
which previously involved rather complex tiers of decision-making.
As part of that, we were in any case in all regions, not just
where there are elected regional assemblies, proposing that the
regional tier of decision-making should be more focused than was
the case in the past, but that still does not take away the important
role that remains with local authorities to develop their unitary
development plans, and indeed to take decisions on development
proposals. That remains with local government. That is not affected
in any way by the arrival of the elected regional assembly. The
elected regional assembly will perform the regional planning function,
the development of a spatial development strategy, but local authorities
will continue to take decisions on individual development proposals.
On housing, there is no intention for regional assemblies to take
over the functions of local housing authorities. Local housing
authorities will continue with exactly the same functions. They
are not affected. The one power that the assembly will have is
the overarching decision-making about housing investment to ensure
there is a more coherent approach than in the past where local
authority funds have come via one stream and housing association
funds have come via another stream. Most people feel it is sensible
to have a coherent approach towards investment and that that is
democratically accountable, which is what the elected assembly
makes possible. I entirely repudiate the argument that local authority
powers have been taken away in those area. In the case of fire,
during the preparation of the Fire White Paper, which we published
a year and a bit ago, we talked at length with local authorities
about the right arrangements. It was clear that a number of functions
had to be discharged at a larger level than individual fire and
rescue authorities, such as coping with major terrorist incidents,
procurement of equipment and training and other needs where it
was simply not cost-effective to operate on the basis of the 47
separate fire authorities. There had to be a better degree of
regional co-ordination. We discussed this at length with the Local
Government Association at the time. We said that there was an
argument for the whole fire service being regionalised, but we
listened to their concerns and we agreed with them that the right
way forward was one in which the functions that had to be discharged
at a regional level would be discharged in all areas of the country
through regional management boards but where an elected regional
assembly was established, it would be sensible for that body,
as a democratically accountable and elected body, to take over
responsibility, as in London. The Greater London Authority has
oversight of the fire and emergency planning authority in London
and so it would be applying exactly the same model as applies
in London but only in the regions that have elected regional assemblies.
We agreed that with the Local Government Association 18 months
ago and we are acting entirely within the spirit of that agreement,
which was reflected in the Fire White Paper we published in the
summer of last year.
Q457 Mr Betts: Why would it be necessary,
though, just say the North West voted for a regional assembly,
for the Greater Manchester Fire Service to be transferred to the
regional level when it is already bigger than the fire service
would be in certain regions if there were elected assemblies in
those regions, and yet you would be quite content for relatively
small county fire authorities to carry on and remain where regions
do not have regional assemblies elected?
Mr Raynsford: As I have said,
there is now a framework of regional management boards in all
the English regions, including the North West, and they are responsible
for developing proposals on those issues that must be handled
at a regional level. That model is already in place. Where there
is an elected regional assembly, you have, for the first time,
a directly democratically elected and accountable body which can
exercise the kind of oversight that is possible in London where
you have a democratically elected body and where you have a regional
fire and emergency planning authority far larger than any other
one in the country. That is the reason why when we looked, for
example, at the cost-effectiveness of the control operations,
we found that there was a huge variation, with London being by
far and away the most efficient and the average cost per call
at about £18 and a range going through £30, £40,
£50 per call elsewhere in most of the other authorities including
the large ones, culminating in the smallest, the Isle of Wight,
with a cost of approximately £170 per call. That huge variation
in cost is simply unsustainable. That is why one of the functions
which regional management boards are responsible for is developing
regional control rooms in each of the English regions. That is
happening and that will happen in the North West as well. Even
where there is quite a large fire authority, there is still a
need, as in the case of Greater Manchester, for regional co-operations
to deal with major incidents, and there is a need for pulling
together resources in the region to ensure the most cost-effective
and the most resilient fire control centre.
Q458 Mr Betts: Just looking to the
future, and the suspicion still lurks about the pulling up of
powers to the region, would it be possible to put a clause in
the legislation which safeguarded local authority functions from
being transferred up in the future or demanded further primary
legislation before they were?
Mr Raynsford: I have already said
that we intend to introduce additional clauses specifically to
define local authority functions which would be off-limits for
elected regional assemblies, in response to Chris Mole's earlier
question. Yes, we are sympathetic to that. The LGA asked for a
blanket provision that said that no function ever discharged by
a local authority could ever be transferred. Frankly, I cannot
accede to that because, as I pointed out to them, this legislation
will be on the statute book hopefully for many years, and at some
future date when it is decided by a future government to change
a relatively minor function in a way that would make it more logical
for it to be discharged at a regional rather than a local level,
some such change might be both sensible, necessary and entirely
supported by all the parties, yet a clause of that nature would
prevent it ever happening. I think one has to be measured about
this. We have given assurances that it is not our intention to
take powers away from local government. I have explained how the
legislation, as it is presently constituted, meets that commitment
and how it is our intention to continue to honour that commitment.
I certainly will ensure that, but I could not accept a proposal
for a complete blanket block on any transfer ever in the future
of any power from a local authority body to a regional body. I
think that would be over-prescriptive.
Q459 Mr Sanders: Why deal with only
one blue light service? Why not also have police and ambulance,
and indeed in some regions coastguard services, being co-ordinated
at a regional level alongside fire?
Mr Raynsford: I suppose my real
answer to that is that I think we have a big enough agenda to
cover what we are doing at the moment and I believe that the measures
in the draft Bill do provide a coherent set of powers for elected
regional assemblies. The reorganisation implicit in your proposal
would be a further very major step on which I do not see the basis
for agreement—there certainly is not any national agreement
on that possibility—and I think it could be terribly disruptive
to the work of elected regional assemblies if they were having
to oversee major reorganisations of that nature.
| 
