Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
The hon. Gentleman will be aware of the lack of ring-fencing and the flexibility that local authorities have in relation to the money given to them by central Government. More than £3 billion of funding paid through the completely unring-fenced area-based grant enables local authorities, working with partners, to decide where best to invest their resources in the most effective and efficient routes to deliver local priorities.
Sir Peter Soulsby: My hon. Friend rightly draws attention to the greater certainty that has been given on local government finance and the other measures that have been taken, which I think have been broadly welcomed in local government, but does he not accept that an unhealthily high proportion of local government funding still comes from central Government, and the inevitable feeling is that the person who pays the piper seeks to call the tune?
Mr. Khan: My hon. Friend would have a fair point if the money given to local authorities were ring-fenced and controlled from central Government, who decided how the money was spent. He will be aware of the number of representations that we in central Government receive from citizens complaining about their local authority, which is often of a different political persuasion, not spending money where we would like it spent. Instead, they build up their coffers for a swingeing council tax cut before an election. They do not use it as the Government would prefer. We recognise that we must let go, and let local people choose their local council and local councillors decide how the money is spent.
We are committed to maximising the flexibility given to local areas through unring-fenced funding with no performance or reporting conditions attached. So Government have already given councils more financial freedom to meet local needs and local priorities, but it is right that we continue to protect council tax payers from excessive increases. The hon. Member for Shipley had huge sympathy for those authorities that complain that they are unable to increase council tax by a disproportionately high figure for fear of being capped. We have no plans to change the current structure of council tax or to introduce a local income tax. To do so would create significant costs and place new burdens on businesses in these tough economic times.
The hon. Members for St. Ives and for Shipley alluded to the local performance framework. The Government have taken important steps to show a clear commitment to, and recognition of, the important roles that local government and its partners play in delivering services to citizens, through the development and implementation of the new local performance framework. In 2008, we introduced major changes in the way national Government, local authorities and local service providers work in partnership to deliver better services to improve the quality of life for local people. Those changes are all about finding out what local people need most, prioritising those needs and taking action to deliver results. It is about empowering residents and making sure that their needs are the driving force behind change.
The hon. Member for St. Ives sits on the Select Committee. He referred to the local area agreements, which cover all 152 upper-tier local authorities in England.
They recognise that one size does not fit all and that locally delivered services must reflect what it is that local people need most. He will accept that no two agreements are exactly the same, because every area has different needs. I am sure he would welcome the fact that the new comprehensive area assessment, launched in April 2009, will be fair, rigorous and independent. It will help to ensure that local authorities and other service providers deliver the quality of services that local residents need. There will be less bureaucracy for service providers themselves to deal with, which will leave them free to concentrate on delivering results and driving up standards. Up to £185 million has been made available to regional improvement and efficiency partnershipsRIEPs. The hon. Member for Shipley referred to his love for RDAs, but he forgot to refer to his love for RIEPs. They work with local authorities and strategic partners in each region to support improvement and efficiency in the delivery of services. The hon. Member for St. Ives will recognise that in this recession RIEPs and RDAs have played a huge role in helping to rebuild those parts of our country that were not helped in previous recessions. In those days, such was the control from Whitehall that there was not as much connection as there now is with local communities. RIEPs and RDAs have also brought inward investment from Europe and have created other revenue streams that do not come from Whitehall.
Andrew George: I certainly look forward to a day when there is a performance framework set by local government for central Government, so that local government can see whether government is devolved.
In terms of delivering the devolved settlement and giving powers to local authorities, would the Government be prepared to look at establishing in legislation the European charter of local self-government? Putting that on a statutory basis would demonstrate a real commitment to supporting local government. Also, might it be possible to work with other Departments such as the Department of Health to make sure that the fracture between the NHS, the local community and social care is overcome by locally elected people? I am sure the Government have it in their power to deliver those things.
Mr. Khan: The problems articulated by the hon. Gentleman are referred to in detail in the Select Committee report. I will not succumb to the temptation to give the Departments response to it, except to say that the report was clear about some of the things we can do to make government more joined up and to ensure that there can be a basis for filling in the gaps to which he has referred. I am sure our formal response will take on board some of the points he has made in the debate, as well as those referred to in the report.
RIEPs are made up of local authoritieslocally elected councillorsworking with partners, and they are committed to working together to raise performance collectively. They will work closely with the sector to co-ordinate an analysis of regional improvement and efficiency-capacity building needs.
I want to talk briefly about regional powers. Multi-area agreements are one of the key tools to enable local authorities, working beyond their traditional boundaries, to deliver key economic outcomes better and faster. Ten
partnerships of local authorities have so far signed multi-area agreements, with further negotiations under way.
The future is relevant not only because of the context of todays debate, but because of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill, which is currently going through this House and which began its life in the House of Lords. Despite the progress we have made over the past 12 years, we recognise there is a need for further reform. Therefore, the White Paper I have referred to was published, which passes real power into the hands of local citizens and communities, giving greater control and influence to more people. Key ways in which this White Paper gives greater substance to councillors community leadership role include the following: the new duty to promote democracy; extending the duty to involve people in decisions, policies and services to additional agencies and bodies; a new duty to respond to petitions; and creating a new empowering the frontline taskforce to look at the role of the public service work force in empowering users and residents. A practical example of how we have encouraged the passing of power into the hands of citizens and communities is the considerable growth of participatory budgeting, which now gives people a say over budgets in at least 55 local area agreement areasthat is 36 per cent. of them. Since 2005, local peopleand not just elected councillorshave been given a direct say over how at least £14 million-worth of local public budgets have been spent.
Philip Davies: Could the Minister comment on matters such as local transport? In my constituency, the local residents and the local council want to do something about a congested area, Saltaire roundabout, but they cannot get the funding because it is determined by an unelected regional transport board. Could not these powers be handed down to local authorities, so that local people could have a better say in how money is spent? At the moment, with the regional transport board, they feel that they have no say.
Mr. Khan: That argument contradicts the point that the hon. Gentleman made in his speech, but local authorities could let go of some of their moneys to local communities and let them decide how to spend it. This is not simply about the local councils bidding for money from the RDAs, the RIEPs, the Government or elsewhere, as they should carry on doing; it is also about local authorities being given record sums from central Government over the past 12 years. Local authorities could let go of some of that money, as it is not ring-fenced, and allow local communities to decide how it is spent. The hon. Gentlemans example demonstrates why local authorities cannot always work by themselves to get the solutions; they will need to work with other local authorities, which is why a regional tier of government might sometimes be one of the solutions to the problems that he highlights.
I shall not revisit the order of last year; I have read some of the debates in Hansard and found them interesting. I note the objection of the hon. Member for St. Ives to that order. He will be awarehe referred to this when discussing tomorrows electionsthat Cornwall underwent a major step change when the seven councils were replaced with a single unitary Cornwall council. He
made the serious point that, notwithstanding his objection, he wants to ensure that it is a success, and it is important that that is recognised.
The vision that the hon. Gentleman set out in his essay was for a Cornish regional assembly; he described it as an ambitious plan. The people of Cornwall clearly feel strongly about certain issues: they believe that Cornwall should act as an exemplar for environmental best practicethe hon. Gentleman mentioned that in his speech; they advocate social justice, with locally focused housing and transport plans; and they want multi-area agreements to be developed. All those issues can be explored further in the context of the new unitary authority, and we stand ready to provide continuing support to achieve success in those areas. As he notes, the advent of a unitary Cornwall marks a jumping-off point for further local empowerment. I agree that it is important that we look towards the future and fully utilising the powers available to the new Cornwall council.
I have dealt with the points made about the north-east referendum. The hon. Gentleman also referred to the agents of vision within central Government. I hope that he will accept that over the past 12 years there has been a genuine attempt by this Government to give more power away. He will see that, notwithstanding the imperfections that any Bill has, the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill is another example of devolving power to the citizen and turning what were previously subjects into active citizens who have more control over their communities.
I have a problem with the hon. Member for Shipley, which is that when I was the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Leader of the House I found myself agreeing with him far too often for the liking of any Labour Member. He began his contribution by discussing some of the tensions between central and local government when two different political parties are involved, and I could not help but agree. He also demanded that there be more power for local authorities, which surprised me, bearing in mind the fact that his party voted against giving that Bill, which will give such power to those authorities, a Second Reading. I hope that he will be on the Committee and will support the Bill there. He also referred to development on brownfield sites, and that also caused me concern because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, South reminded me, one cannot have it both ways and be against development on greenfield and brownfield landdevelopment must take place somewhere.
On the point that the hon. Member for Shipley made about Gypsy sites, he was in danger of confusing unauthorised encampments and developments with authorised Traveller and Gypsy sites. The hon. Member for St. Ives, in a very responsible way, talked about the need for more authorised sites, because the more authorised sites there are, there less likely there are to be tensions between the settled communities and those Travellers and Gypsies who live on the unauthorised encampments or developments. He accepted the role that regional tiers could play in easing some of the tensions between local authorities that might not want an authorised Traveller or Gypsy site on their patch.
In conclusion, I would say that a great deal has been done to get the balance right between central and local government. I forgot to mention the question raised by
the hon. Member for St. Ives about the Henry Spink Foundation. There are national standards of care. I was at a meeting today in relation to a social care Green Paper, and the hon. Gentleman referred to the Sustainable Communities Act 2007. May I take this subject away and write to him to deal specifically with the points that he raised? I will refer to Hansard to ensure that I get the point right, and I will get back to him.
The Government have already given a lot to local government, including greater financial freedom and stability and a drastic reduction in the number of indicators, targets and assessments. We have established a clearer, more transparent relationship between central and local government, allowing policy development through co-design. Long may this continue.
We are at a crucial stage of our relationship. The economic times we face will test us all, but local government and its partners need to grasp this chance and the opportunities that we have given them to show usand, most importantly, local residentswhat they can achieve by working closely together.
I hope that through the matters I have outlined in my speech, I have enabled the hon. Member for St. Ives to agree that the Government have done a lot to devolve powers to local areas, including Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing this Adjournment debate and on his interest in this important area.
Index | Home Page |