Select Committee on Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions First Report


4  POLICY AREAS

Economic Performance

64. The draft Bill anticipated the major role of elected regional assemblies as promoting sustainable economic development. This was clear from the choice of policy areas in which elected regional assemblies would have control led resources and would have been expected to wield strategic influence. This expectation was reinforced in a recent rewording of the joint-ODPM, HM Treasury and DTI PSA target on regional economic performance which now expresses the specific expectation that elected regional assemblies would assist the Government in realising its commitment to improving economic performance in all English regions and help, in the long term, to reduce regional disparities in economic growth.

65. Evidence to the inquiry broadly supported the idea that the core activities of an Elected Regional Assembly should be in the fields of economic development, strategic planning, business development, training and skills, transport, housing and culture. At the same time, though, the evidence questioned whether the particular package of resources and influencing mechanisms set out in the draft Bill would provide elected regional assemblies with sufficient 'clout' to make a substantial difference to regional economic performance. This scepticism was stated most starkly by the North East Chamber of Commerce which argued that "no evidence has been provided as to how an elected regional assembly will actually deliver stronger economic performance."[77]

66. A wide variety of organisations expressed disappointment with specific aspects of the powers and resources earmarked for elected regional assemblies within the draft Bill and wished to see greater devolution, particularly in terms of funding, from Government Departments and the NDPBs they sponsor. Only three submissions expressed the view that the transfer of powers and funding from Whitehall and NDPBs had gone far enough or too far. [78]

67. Elected regional assemblies could be effective in improving regional economic performance. It is important that should the Government propose elected regional assemblies in the future, sufficient resources and clout are devolved to them to make a difference in terms of funding from Government departments.

Transport

68. There was strong support that the transport portfolio proposed for elected regional assemblies should be strengthened, and that it lacked ambition. Mr Corry of the New Local Government Network made this point forcefully:

69. Three reasons were put forward for increasing the transport powers of elected regional assemblies:

    a)  Public transport and transport infrastructure have a direct impact on everyday experience. A more substantial transport policy role for elected regional assemblies would help them connect with the general public in a very direct way: "People might begin to understand that there is something for them to do which will actually affect them."[80]

    b)  Transport policy tended currently not to reflect different regional requirements, applying solutions which were strongly relevant in the south east, like congestion, but which were less relevant elsewhere. We heard strong evidence from the north east about the importance of transport links for economic development objectives.[81] The improvement of road links into Scotland appeared not to be high priorities for the Highways Agency, which works to Whitehall-set parameters. Similar arguments were put about railway infrastructure and franchising issues, which again worked to England/Britain-wide parameters set in Whitehall and placed too little weight on regional needs. Roy Wicks, the Director General, South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive said:

      There is often a view that at the sub-regional and regional level it is very difficult to influence national priorities [on rail spending]'; 'We think that bodies such as Network Rail and the Regulator should have a statutory requirement to consult and have regard to regional transport strategies'.[82]

    c)  We heard a number of recommendations that regional transport strategies should not just set out policy goals, but also have the 'carrot and stick' of funding devolved from Whitehall to ensure the goals are carried out. Mr Stewart Francis, Chairman of the Rail Passengers Council and a Commissioner on the Commission for Integrated Transport said:

      We believe that regional assemblies should be given funding powers because if not they do not have teeth. They should not have the powers to deliver; it should be others who carry out that duty. That is the only way that RAs will have teeth to ensure that local authorities work to deliver a regional transport strategy.[83]

70. The weight of evidence in this case was unambiguous. We note that the Department of Transport has shown a fuller openness to the regionalisation of some of its functions than some other Government departments. However, there is a strong case for pushing regionalisation further.

71. We recommend that elected regional assemblies - as is broadly the case in London - act as regional transport authorities with responsibility for deciding on the distribution of funding currently allocated by Whitehall for local transport plans. We also recommend that agencies quite rightly focused on nationwide priorities such as the Highways Agency and national railways authorities are required more explicitly to take account of Assemblies' regional priorities and consult on the regional dimensions of their policy programmes.

Skills agenda

72. Witnesses emphasised the importance of developing a skills policy and development programme that reflected regional needs and was accountable to an Elected Regional Assembly. Many argued that the proposals in the draft Bill would not give an Elected Regional Assembly sufficient powers to develop such a policy and programme. Mr Donnelly from Yes 4 the North East told us that:

Sir Jeremy Beecham of the Local Government Association suggested that:

    [T]he skills and training agenda needs a distinct regional perspective. Although there is some movement in the draft Bill, I think it needs to go further. This is an area currently entirely unaccountable.[85]

In similar vein, Mr Clarke from One North East informed us that he had:

    some experience through the Spending Review in trying to get greater regional flexibility over DfES funding on adult skills budgets. It is quite difficult to do that. I think the balance at the moment between national, regional and local within that part of DfES is too much at the national. I think there could be greater regional flexibility for the benefit of the region.[86]

73. The proposals in the draft Bill in the field of training and skills development would have placed too much expectation on elected regional assemblies being able to influence Learning and Skills Councils programmes, both nationally and as they are delivered in their regions. The proposals underestimate the importance of assemblies being able to use resources to implement a regional training and skills strategy. The Learning and Skills Council in its written evidence said that it is "keen to work with any body or organisation that shares the same agenda as the Learning and Skills Council."[87] This suggests a rather limited preparedness to work with regional agencies.

74. The effectiveness of any future elected regional assemblies in developing regional training and skills development policies and programmes would need to be kept under review with a view to further devolution within what is currently a national budget. This process could usefully be attempted in two stages, with adult training budgets being devolved to elected regional assemblies as a test case in the first instance with a second, more thoroughgoing devolution of resources to follow if the first stage proved successful when measured against mutually agreed criteria. As with the Regional Development Agencies, regional assemblies should appoint the Chair and members of the LSC, issue policy guidance and ratify development plans.

Housing

75. There has already been a degree of decentralisation of powers and resources to Regional Housing Boards which are charged with developing Regional Housing Strategies and providing a more 'joined up' approach to the allocation of resources for social housing by Government Offices, local authorities and the Housing Corporation. The draft Bill went further in suggesting that an Elected Regional Assembly would take over the responsibilities of Regional Housing Boards and have direct responsibility for social housing budgets including Housing Corporation funding for housing associations and managing local authority single housing pot.

76. The Housing Corporation highlighted a potential confusion for associations working across regions with and without an Elected Regional Assembly. The Corporation and the Audit Commission would continue to have responsibility for the registration, regulation and inspection of housing associations across all regions but would only be expected to fund associations in regions without an Elected Regional Assembly. This division of responsibilities held out the prospect of certain RSLs, particularly where they are active in more than one region, pursuing two sources of income and serving two masters - the Elected Regional Assembly and the Corporation.

77. The Minister insisted that the regulatory function would continue to be discharged by the Corporation and argued that the regime set out in the Bill, whilst it would require active co-ordination across regional boundaries, was preferable to one in which "in the past… spending decisions for RSLs were taken by the Housing Corporation and decisions affecting local authorities were taken by the Government Offices."[88] We support the Minister's view that the risks of the new regime are less important than the benefits of a more co-ordinated regional approach to the funding of social housing and its integration with regional land-use strategies. The potential dual funding of housing associations by the elected regional assemblies and the Housing Corporation as proposed in the draft Bill would have been unsatisfactory. Regional assemblies should appoint the Chair and members of the Regional Housing Boards, issue policy guidance and ratify development plans.

Culture and Sport

78. The role of elected regional assemblies in culture and sport is one area where there would have been a backward step, in terms of the proposed devolution. The degree of commitment on the part of DCMS to devolve responsibilities to elected regional assemblies was left vague in the White Paper because a number of reviews were ongoing which affected the NDPBs that the Department oversees. In the interim period, however, the Department and its NDPBs had not become converted to the Elected Regional Assembly cause. The draft Bill proposed that the small and currently independent regional cultural consortiums become functional bodies of the Elected Regional Assembly and draw up a regional cultural strategic plan for publication by the Elected Regional Assembly. However those strategies were not binding upon any of the organisations that fund or deliver services in the arts or sporting fields.

Emergency Services and Civil Contingencies

79. There was a subtle shift in policy between the White Paper on the English regions and the draft Regional Assemblies Bill. In the White Paper it was felt "appropriate for elected assemblies to take on the main coordination role in regional contingency planning, working closely with the Government Offices".[89] In the draft Bill that role in contingencies planning is not mentioned, and appears to have been superseded by the network of Regional Resilience Forums coordinated by the Government Offices. The draft Bill did though envisage a fire and rescue role for elected regional assemblies, with new regional fire and rescue authorities acting as functional bodies of elected assemblies, similar to the arrangements with the Greater London Authority.

80. A capacity to coordinate emergency services at a higher level than individual service authorities is desirable. However, the Committee is not convinced that government policy has addressed these issues coherently. The role envisaged for assemblies in contingencies planning has been downgraded. We view this function as one inherently suited to the kind of strategic, coordination role envisaged for elected assemblies. There is clearly a case for a strategic view across all the blue-light services, and indeed other functions such as health service planning for major incidents, in contingencies planning. It seems that the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister could not persuade other Government departments involved in contingencies planning to relinquish responsibilities. We do not regard such apparent Whitehall turf defence strategies - as suggested in the following exchange with Chief Constable Strachan - as a sound basis for policy-making:

    Mr Betts: Mr Strachan, you have commented on the fact that you have some doubts about the ability of the Home Office and the ODPM to work together. Is this Bill a reflection of that, that it is ODPM's Bill, so they have managed to find something in their remit, namely fire, to give the regional assemblies to do, but the Home Office have not really wanted to play ball with this at all and, therefore, police are not affected by the legislation?

    Mr Strachan: That is, with respect, sir, a leading question, but yes, I would agree!'[90]

81. Responsibility for fire and rescue services which was to be devolved to the elected regional assemblies lies with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. ODPM proposed that regionwide fire authorities should be created which would be accountable to the Elected Regional Assembly. The evidence we heard on the transfer of this general role to the regional level was rather mixed. Mr Richard Bull, Chief Fire Officer for Tyne and Wear, was for example sympathetic to a regionalised service in the North East, though insisted that this was because of particular geographical circumstances in the North East which did not necessarily apply elsewhere: 'in this country one size does not fit all'[91] One particular concern was that fire services have a strong community focus and logic, which would be endangered if local/county fire services were rationalised into region-wide bodies. Councillor Les Byrom from the Merseyside Fire Authority said: 'The county badge of the local fire authority, of the local police authority is very powerful and it is closer to the people'.[92]

82. We also heard that fire services are already cooperating voluntarily and effectively on region-wide scales to ensure a capacity to respond to major incidents and to enjoy other benefits of economies of scale.[93] In some cases, such as in the north east, this voluntary cooperation maps neatly onto official regional boundaries. In other cases it does not.

83. Because of concerns that they could lose their community focus and scales for operation we remain unconvinced of the rationale for establishing regional fire and rescue services as functional bodies of elected regional assemblies. There is a need however to develop the wider role foreseen in the White Paper in which elected regional assemblies would lead the planning process for civil contingencies, involving all the blue light services, but across a narrower part of their fields of responsibility.


77   Ev 148 Back

78   The following organisations called for more powers to be passed from central Government and NDPBs to the ERAs included: the Regional Assemblies for the North West, North East and South East, the West Midlands Constitutional Convention, business organisations (CBI, Manufacturer's Association for the North of England), trades unions (Unison Northern), think tanks (New Policy Institute, Institute for Public Policy Research, Policy Exchange), local government bodies (Local Government Association, Local Government Information Unit, Local Choice Local Voice, Burnley Borough Council), transport organisations (Passenger Transport Executives' Group), campaign groups (Yes 4 the NE, Yes 4 the NW, English Regions Network), political groups (Northern Region Liberal Democrats) and academics (Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies, University of Newcastle). Only three organisations that wrote to the Committee - Sport England, the (national) Learning and Skills Council and the Council of Mortgage Lenders Back

79   Q82 (Mr Corry) Back

80   Q82 (Mr Betts) Back

81   Q327 (Councillor Gibson) Back

82   Q388/399 (Mr Wicks) Back

83   Q388 (Mr Francis) Back

84   Q515 Back

85   Q133 Back

86   Q363 Back

87   Ev 155 Back

88   Q449 Back

89   White Paper p.43 Back

90   Q207 Back

91   Q214 (Mr Bull) Back

92   Q205 (Councillor Byrom) Back

93   Q211 (Mr Bull) Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 5 January 2005