Memorandum by the Association of Greater
Manchester Authorities (AGMA) (RG 26)
1. The Association of Greater Manchester
Authorities (AGMA) considered the issue of the ODPM's new inquiry
on this issue at the most recent of our monthly Executive meetings,
held on 16 December 2005. The AGMA Executive, which consists of
the 10 Leaders of the local authorities of Greater Manchester,
agreed that we should submit evidence to the Inquiry.
2. Our agreement to submit evidence is based
on submissions that AGMA has previously made which are attached
for your information. We are not sure how these relate to the
caveat in your press release that
"evidence should be original work, not previously
published or circulated elsewhere".
However on the basis that the Committee may—understandably—not
be aware of them they are submitted to you as evidence which the
Committee may wish to consider; together with the comments made
in this letter.
AGMA SUBMISSION ON
DEVOLVED DECISION
MAKING
3. The first submission (Appendix A) is
that made to the Department for Transport (DfT) in March 2005
in response to a Government consultation on devolving decision-making.
This primarily relates to the questions of regional governance
which the ODPM Committee has raised. Within the North West we
are now seeing the start of a more simplified structure, advocated
in our submission. We now have a North West Regional Assembly
(NWRA) Executive Board composed of representatives who attend
on the basis of sub regional location and nomination rather than
political party, plus there is Economic and Social Partner representation.
That change has had some notable early successes, including the
agreement across the North West in early January 2006 of a priority
list of transport schemes within the region to submit to the Government
as part of regional advice on the 2007 Comprehensive Spending
Review.
4. However the issue of local government
organisation remains an issue for effective regional governance.
Within AGMA we have no view as to the respective merits of maintaining
County Councils as opposed to Districts; but we support the general
argument behind the necessity of moving to one tier. As an illustration
the new NWRA Executive Board consists of 21 members (three per
sub region and six for other partners). One reason why this board
could not be smaller is the fact that in some parts of the North
West there are three different types of authority within a county
area (counties, districts and unitaries). AGMA recognises that
the size of Regional Assembly Boards is unlikely to be a significant
factor in the Government deciding whether or not to reform current
arrangements. However it can unnecessarily complicate and add
to the bureaucratic arrangements required for inclusive regional
decision-making.
5. This submission by AGMA to DfT also referred
to the importance of sub regions and sub regional arrangements.
This is an area where the Committee will not be surprised to learn
that AGMA has strong views. We recognise the reality of Government
administrative arrangements and have over a long period of time
advocated the devolution of appropriate policy areas to be overseen
at a regional level. However the regional dimension can create
challenges in a region as large and diverse as North West England.
The reality is that regions do not function as an economic whole;
and that sub regions or city regions are a far more effective
and realistic embodiment of the way in which economies work spatially.
6. The concerns AGMA has on this issue can
be illustrated by a number of recent examples where "regional"
issues have hampered delivery at sub regional level or appropriate
account being taken of sub regional differences:
— In the Regional Economic Strategy
submitted by the North West Development Agency (NWDA) to Government
no account is taken of the fact that business sectors that are
a key priority in G Manchester may not be the same as those that
are a priority in (for example) West Cumbria. Regional strategy
documents—and their preparation by Government Agencies—can
be too crude a tool to successfully underpin strategies to deliver
economic growth.
— RDAs appear to be moving away from
a system of sub regional delivery of business support services.
This appears to be because of concerns that these are not functioning
properly in some locations. But rather than identifying those
sub regions where intervention by Government Agencies are necessary
because of poor performance, the instinctive reaction appears
to be blanket reform at a regional level, increasing distance
from the customer and ignoring successful sub regional delivery
where this occurs.
— The role given to regional assemblies
as planning bodies means that, in producing draft Regional Spatial
Strategies (RSS), they have to confront a dilemma between openly
acknowledging that certain spatial areas need to be priorities
in terms of economic growth (because of either their potential
for growth or levels of deprivation) and needing to get a consensus
document agreed across a diverse region. In this respect AGMA
has particular concerns with the draft RSS being produced by NWRA.
Part of this problem will we hope, in time, be addressed by the
recent changes we have supported in reorganising NWRA. But it
does also indicate that the regional structures we currently have
do not always appropriately reflect economic and spatial realities
on the ground.
7. The problem inherent in at least two
of the cases illustrated above is that, in AGMA's, view the Government
does not provide clear enough guidance to regional bodies and
agencies on how it views the significance of initiatives such
as the Northern Way and the importance of city regions, when these
agencies are faced with the task of preparing regional strategies.
Consequently this lack of a clear steer means that strategies
are produced which:
— tend towards a "lowest common
denominator" compromise with a view to achieving regional
consensus; and/or
— ignore significant differences in
sub regional strengths and priorities in order to achieve an overall
high-level regional picture.
The result of this is that, particularly in
a region as diverse as the North West, the position of city regions
and their priorities can be considerably underplayed.
8. Consequently AGMA would advocate that
far more attention needs to be paid to the priorities, performance
and governance of city regions in particular and the resources
they will need. They will be the key areas where economic wealth
is generated and they are where the key centres of population
are. This is reflected in the second submission generated recently
from within Greater Manchester, which we also attach for the Committee's
consideration.
A GOVERNANCE MAP
FOR GREATER
MANCHESTER
9. The second document attached (Appendix
B) originally resulted from discussions within AGMA Authorities,
in part reflecting some of the concerns expressed in the previous
paragraphs of this letter. It also reflects the growing debate
across decision makers and recent research (much of it commissioned
by parts of Government) into the importance and role of city regions
for the UK economy.
10. In AGMA's view, advocating a particular
position in terms of the importance of city regions remains consistent
with our views on regional governance. Our proposals for how we
consider the governance of Greater Manchester could be enhanced
would remain within the overall context of a high level regional
group, consisting of a few representatives from each sub region
(and other partners) convened to reach decisions on regional priorities.
11. The document, after endorsement by AGMA
Leaders, was also discussed and approved at the Greater Manchester
Forum, the body set up by partners in Greater Manchester to function
as the sub regional partnership (SRP) for the conurbation. In
particular, the document deals with the opinions AGMA currently
holds on the following aspects of the Committee's proposed direction
of inquiry:
— the effectiveness of current arrangements
for managing services at the various levels, and their inter-relationships;
and
— the potential for new arrangements,
particularly the establishment of city regions.
12. The document was also submitted to the
Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (The Rt
Hon David Miliband MP) when he visited Manchester on 3 October
as part of a round of "City Summits" arranged by ODPM
in the Autumn of 2005. In summary it makes the following points:
— city regions are increasingly acknowledged
nationally as the driving force of economic achievement, and the
key to the delivery of national competitiveness and inclusion
strategies;
— advocating particular solutions within
city regions can be done within the context of a regional dimension
to policy and decision making;
— achieving growth and change across
city regions requires co-ordination of policies across the public
sector and agreement and buy in from the private sector. The need
within city regions to understand the combined impact of services
on competitiveness and sustainability of communities suggests
that there is a strong case for Whitehall to have a different,
or at least a more sophisticated, relationship with public services
in city regions;
— there are a number of problems with
existing governance arrangements for the full range of public
functions on a sub-regional basis. Expressed simply there is no
single or integrated focus for co-ordination and action which
brings together the key interests within the city region which
possesses the resources and power to make a difference; and
— the preferred model for Greater Manchester
is to develop a federated approach. However, this needs to be
the subject of independent analysis to illustrate how it can be
successful and can be an effective alternative to the elected
mayoral model.
13. Following discussion with the Secretary
of State at the City Summit work is continuing on some of the
aspects contained within the paper, in advance of a further meeting
with Ministers. In particular the document recognises the need
to demonstrate how AGMA's preferred federated model could work
in practice. AGMA has now commissioned the Institute of Political
Governance (IPEG) at the University of Manchester to carry out
this work.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
14. AGMA welcomes the decision taken by
the Committee to review this area of governance. Given the increased
recognition of the importance of city regions, the change in attitudes
towards "regionalism" that the NE referendum needs to
engender and the likelihood of a Local Government White Paper
in 2006 it is an opportune time for these issues to be considered
by MPs.
15. Consequently, AGMA would welcome the
opportunity to share its views in discussion with the Committee.
In view of our previous and current thinking and work on this
issue, as evidenced by the documents submitted, we believe that
it would be helpful for the Committee to hear evidence from a
city region such as Greater Manchester where we have been aware
of these issues for some time and are seeking ways in which to
respond to them.
| 
