Examination of Witnesses (Questions 150-159)
MS TRISH
HAINES, MR
KEN FOOTE
AND MR
LAIRD RYAN
20 MARCH 2006
Q150 Mr Betts: I have quite a few comments
on the evidence we received about the accountability or lack of
accountability at regional government level. Do you think there
is a crisis in the lack of accountability that exists?
Mr Foote: I certainly would not
use the word "crisis". There are concerns around democratic
deficit, duplication; issues around accountability; but I would
not say it was a crisis. What we are doing in the Humber—and
it is what you discussed earlier in the afternoon—is looking
at how we make the best use of opportunities around city regions
and sub-regional agendas, and how we use those as the driving
forces to lift the economic regeneration of an area of the country
that badly needs it.
Ms Haines: The comment that I
would add is that in the South East the region is not a very homogenous
one; there is very little sense of regional identity. That is
reflected in the way in which the regional assembly works. There
is very little sense that I get of a clear way forward for the
South East as a whole. As a consequence, the assembly has some
difficulty in agreeing a coherent strategic overview.
Mr Ryan: I very much echo what
my colleagues have said. The West Midlands, again, is not a homogenous
region. The fact that the two West Midlands regional development
agencies have come together to create a Midlands Way as almost
a riposte to the Northern Way, reflects the quality of decision-making
that flows from those bodies, albeit accountable—they are
perhaps not delivering the goods fairly and demonstrably throughout
the regions.
Q151 Mr Betts: It is also a problem
in terms of public perception of the numerous different bodies
at regional level. One might use the words "public engagement"
but I think that is too strong—and public understanding
probably does not exist. Do you feel that is an issue?
Ms Haines: I think they are very
remote from the public. They are not directly elected; they are
indirectly elected. There is very little knowledge of them, and
even those who know of their existence have very little understanding
of what they do.
Q152 Chair: Do you think that applies
to all regional bodies? Is there any regional body that is a bit
more accountable than the others?
Ms Haines: I do not know. I can
only speak for the ones that I work with, I am sorry.
Mr Foote: I totally agree with
what Trish has just said. What the public are interested in are
outcomes. They are interested in how the quality of their lives
will change, whether economically or in relation to education
and skills. The public I do not think would be interested in the
process, in a sense, but would very much be interested in the
outcome. We have a real window of opportunity in Hull and Humber
to change the quality of life of local people but they will be
holding us to account primarily through the councils.
Q153 Mr Betts: Let us come back to
that. They will hold you to account—and that comes up under
the next point. Assuming that we are not now going to have elected
regional assemblies and assuming that none of the regional bodies
currently are accountable through a democratic process, do you
see the possibility, or would you be arguing for, many of the
powers that are currently exercised by the various regional bodies
actually being decentralised back to local government? If so,
which?
Mr Ryan: I very much agree with
that particular perspective. There are those functions that are
most identifiable with results on the ground—things like
strategic transportation, the skills agenda, and environmental
management. At a regional level the issues are too broad and too
diverse to be anything more than depicted at the lowest common
denominator, if you like.
Q154 Dr Pugh: Councillor Thornber
in the previous session sketched this attractive model of democratically
accountable bodies, with local councils merging, joining into
partnerships, breaking out of partnerships when it suits them
and not really being bound by regional boundaries or, for that
matter, sub-regional boundaries. It struck me for a while that
this might be a reasonably workable model of how things should
be done. However, I have a residual concern that somebody needs
to have a view of the regional picture because obviously all these
various exciting relationships that are formed and unformed may
not necessarily deliver the wider objectives. Would you be comfortable
with a regional body that simply set strategy and direction and
left the decision-making and expenditure commitments to local
authorities primarily? Is that the kind of model you would like
to see?
Ms Haines: I think there is a
problem with that. I come from Reading. It is a very small urban
area and is at the core of a much wider urban area, a lot of which
falls outside the administrative boundaries of the council. The
issue that I am most concerned about in terms of regional assemblies
is that I do not see them providing the leadership for the way
forward for either the region as a whole or the various parts
of the sub-region. Thames Valley is one of the most successful
sub-regions of the UK, economically successful; and Reading has
the highest gross-value-added growth in the UK over and above
London. Those issues are not being dealt with by a regional assembly
effectively. My concern is that there are lots and lots of powers
that exist at regional government level that could effectively
come down to local government; however, that works really well
where there are shared interests across neighbouring councils—and
I am sure all of us sitting at this table could give you lots
of examples where neighbouring councils have been able to come
together to work on cross-boundary issues, where there are shared
interests and common concerns. It is a problem however when there
are issues where there are conflicting interests, and that is
primarily around things like transport infrastructure, economic
growth and housing numbers.
Q155 Dr Pugh: That slightly missed
the point I wanted to make—and maybe I am not explaining
my position clearly. You could imagine Reading paddling their
own canoe and doing everything Reading wants to do, forming the
liaisons it wants, the partnerships it wants, and getting things
done as Reading wishes it to be done in collaboration with other
partners with similar intentions. But even where that happens,
and happens to the total satisfaction of Reading, might there
still not be something more required for the wider area that somebody
needs to do, and it is probably not going to be Reading?
Ms Haines: Yes, I think there
is. Sorry, that is the point that I was rather long-windedly trying
to get round to! There are some areas, and it is one of the reasons
why I am so interested in the city region ideas—there are
some issues that affect bigger areas than administrative council
boundaries. Where there are common interests it is possible to
deal with those through voluntary arrangements. Where there are
not common interests, then we are not making the kind of progress
that needs to be made. It is that kind of issue; it is not everything
that regional government does at the moment, but it is some of
the core things that regional government should be doing at the
moment and is not doing very effectively.
Q156 Chair: Can we put the city region
idea on the side for the moment? Briefly, do either of the two
of you want to add anything different to that particular question
before I go to Anne?
Mr Foote: In terms of local authorities
and local councils, clearly they have a leadership role, but that
is very much in partnership with other stakeholders, and certainly
within our city region or sub-region the role of the private sector
and the role of the voluntary community sector are absolutely
key, and they should play a full part.
Mr Ryan: As local authorities,
we have to manage the interface between top-down and bottom-up
agendas, and there are some issues that regions are well placed
to deliver, and that is in setting overall standards, setting
the gold standard across the West Midlands. That needs to be tempered
by what local authorities do as championing other interests in
that area.
Q157 Anne Main: Ms Haines mentioned
conflict and lack of vision and common purpose within the regional
structure. We have heard other people say to us that, for example,
in relation to housing it is not democratic; that some things
have been plonked or put somewhere else. Do you have this concern
at all about this lack of vision and conflict? Which are the issues
that you feel could give rise to the conflict and lack of vision?
You mentioned houses and roads and think that those things should
be kept locally. Do you think they are a source of conflict and
are undemocratically decided at the moment?
Ms Haines: I am sorry, I did not
say—I am not sure I heard you right. At the moment housing
and transport is largely dealt with within council boundaries.
I think that that is an insufficient and ineffective way to do
it.
Q158 Anne Main: How do you think
it should be done—so that I get the right feeling for it?
Ms Haines: There are a number
of ways that you could look at it, which range in spectrum from
local government reorganisation at one end to doing it co-operatively
on a voluntary basis. You can do it co-operatively on a required
basis. For example, Reading together with two of our neighbouring
authorities until very recently ran a Reading Urban Area Package
for Transport, which was a deal done with the regional officers,
which was backed by funding in return for co-operation between
the three authorities, that allowed us to look at strategic planning
issues. That worked very well. It was voluntary but there was
a stick and a carrot to help it along. Sadly, that joint package
arrangement has been withdrawn now and is not available to us
any more, and the arrangements have fallen apart. But I think
there is spectrum of ways in which you could begin to deal with
the areas where it is difficult to get the planning co-operation
on strategic issues.
Q159 Mr Olner: Both the witnesses
before and yourselves, it seems to me, want to pick and choose
what you want on a regional basis. Are you fairly happy about
some of the creep of regionalisation that is happening with the
police authorities, the ambulance services and the fire and rescue
services? Surely this is a form of regionalisation that is going
to affect your areas! Are you happy with it happening like that,
or do we need it on a more formal basis?
Mr Foote: Our view is that on
process we felt the consultation process both for the police reorganisation
and the ambulance service was just too quick and too pushed. We
did not feel that we had sufficient time to give evidence back.
There are real concerns about the size of footprints of both those
organisations. We are still yet to be convinced.
| 
