Memorandum from Somerset County Council (BOP 07)

 

I am responding to the invitation to local authorities to submit evidence to inform the above Inquiry.

 

1. Since 1997, when the Labour administration signed up to the European Charter of Local Self-Government, local government has responded positively to the opportunities offered by a series of enabling legislative changes. In particular local authorities have risen to the challenge of putting their well-being powers into practice to bring about changes which local people want to see. The following practical examples give you a flavour of how we are using our well-being powers in Somerset:

 

§ Active Living Centres

We have created an Active Living Service as part of mainstreaming our successful POPP project and have 61 Active Living Centres serving local communities throughout Somerset. They are run by local community groups, with most being sustained entirely by local volunteers. Core funding for the centres is provided by a joint fund established by the County Council and Somerset PCT. Age Concern Somerset continues to play a key role by ensuring that local clubs and groups are linked into the wider active living network within their area. The service is overseen by a multi-agency steering group.

 

 

§ Rural Re-generation

The County Council has used its land assets as a driver of re-generation in economically vulnerable communities and acted as facilitator to broker agreement between a wide range of agencies. This example relates to an exciting development situated in the coastal market town of Minehead. The key site development includes 13,000 square feet of high quality business workspace, public realm improvements to a prominent town centre site, additional tourism facilities including the landmark re-installation of the railway turntable and, potentially, a young peoples' centre. This is a £6.5m scheme, with significant leverage of RDA and European funding plus active community engagement with its concept and design.

 

§ Connecting Somerset

The County Council led the initiative to drive up the adoption and application of broadband and e-commerce. Somerset has been transformed from a position of competitive disadvantage to the most e-connected shire county in England. We have achieved value added by brokering and co-ordinating the activities of various public and private sector bodies in this sphere.

 

§ Somerset Fuel Poverty Partnership

An example of the PCT, DWP, the Centre for Sustainable Energy and Somerset local authorities working together to reach the maximum number of vulnerable people and make it easier for them to access support and advice.

 

2. So what simple changes could be made in allowing us greater freedom to deliver our vision and ambition for Somerset? I would reflect that although many of the legislative changes over the last 10 years set out to be enabling, arguably the much closer inspection regimes and fundamental dependence of local government on central government funding with its attached controls means that local authorities are less able to do things on a local basis which fully reflect local needs and aspirations for fear of losing funding, breaching central grant conditions or slipping in the assessment tables.

 

3. A practical example of central funding controls relates to the recurrent capital grant for community safety. Most community needs are revenue rather than capital and the flexibility to spend the grant at a local level on either revenue or capital would enable local authorities to respond more effectively to local circumstances whilst delivering improved outcomes.

 

4. With regard to the central performance regime we welcome the move from Corporate Performance Assessment to the Comprehensive Area Assessment. The new framework is broadly sensible and we support a more integrated approach to inspection and a reduction in key indicators. However, if the new performance framework is to succeed then it is important that successful authorities are trusted to get on with delivery and not subjected to micro management with time and capacity distracted and diluted by a lack of joined up processes between central and regional agencies. Already we are seeing a plethora of self assessment requirements emanating from the Audit Commission, Government Office and Regional Efficiency and Improvement Partnership.

 

5. In the past the allocation of functions has felt somewhat piecemeal and we would welcome a more coherent programme for the future. For example, why are the local decision making processes on whether someone gets planning permission or a liquor licence (sometimes for the same premises) fundamentally different? It seems that every statutory function has a different statutory scheme under which it is operated and the methodology changes between functions and over time in a way which isn't helpful or often practical, locally.

 

6. It would be helpful for any future devolution or transfer of functions to be achieved through a consistent framework. The developing of an integrated tool-kit of best practice business design processes which can be used to devolve any further decision making to a local level would be a step forward.

 

7. In addition, many initiatives emerge from central government direct to local government with each council taking a view whether to respond and in what way without the opportunity to consider a sector led approach. A good example of this is the Local Employment Partnership (LEP) scheme which supports disadvantaged people into work. This County Council was amongst the first to respond and others have since followed. However, early brokerage between the central government, relevant central departments, key agencies and local government would have helped to give this initiative real traction in the sector, avoiding a more piecemeal approach. The LGA is well positioned to make a significant contribution here.

 

In summary, it would be helpful for the Committee's review to consider the extent to which the change agenda envisaged by the European Charter has been delivered - this could inform the scope of future devolution.

 

September 2008