Memorandum by Trafford Council (BOP 47)
I write in response to your invitation to submit
evidence to the Communities and Local Government Committee's inquiry
on the balance of power between central and local government.
FURTHER DEVOLUTION
There are some specific examples where central
government has given local government increased autonomy, such
as with respect to the reduction of plans that need to be submitted
to government, or government bodies, for formal sign off. However,
the inspection process, albeit more strategic, often has quite
prescriptive elements which are measured and enforced notwithstanding
local priorities or local profile.
The Manchester Multi Area Agreement (MAA) is
another example of how more devolution would lead to a better
outcome. The general principle of agreeing outcomes for our place
in consultation with government is supported. The next step is
to be left to develop effective approaches locally rather than
having central government saying how it should be done.
This is indicative of the challenge for central
government: there is a need to move from a position of local government
having to earn autonomy from central government, to having assumed
autonomy. A position of assumed autonomy will give local government
the freedom and flexibility to fulfil the role of place-shaper
and community leader. This will enable local government to contribute
more holistically to the achievement of strong and prosperous
communities.
FINANCIAL AUTONOMY
In terms of capping, this has a particularly
negative impact on Councils like Trafford who have low levels
of Council tax. Year on year Government finance settlements reduce
in real terms for Councils like Trafford—notwithstanding
the floor mechanism—and yet costs rise as much as they do
anywhere else and indeed often it is harder and more expensive
to recruit because of the local competitive jobs market. Efficiency
savings are harder to make because the council has historically
delivered low cost, high value services and yet the efficiency
target is the same for Trafford as it is for councils who cannot
demonstrate value for money. This is all set against another blunt
instrument, that of capping powers, whereby local discretion to
increase council tax above a certain amount is constrained by
national government imposing a one size fits all criteria.
The move towards raising supplementary business
rates is welcomed but could go much further to create the real
link between local businesses and the local council.
The move from ring fenced grants to area based
grants is welcome. However, there are often very prescriptive
requirements for delivery of particular initiatives and therefore
although technically there is freedom around deployment of spend,
in reality this is constrained by the demands placed upon delivery.
Real financial freedom needs to be linked with the freedom to
deliver what is required by the local communities.
EXISTING POWERS
Local authorities are "creatures of statute"
and, as such must identify specific legal provisions before being
able to act. The power of wellbeing in the 2000 Local Government
Act was intended to provide Local Government with more discretion
but even that is heavily conditioned and cannot be used if other
statutory provisions would be contravened in so doing (eg sale
of land, ability to provide services to the private sector). Local
Government would have greater freedom to be creative and innovative
if it had true discretion and could be freed of the remaining
constraints on its ability to act in the best interests of its
communities
IMPROVING THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
CENTRAL AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Currently relationships are often hampered by
the rapidly changing legislative and regulatory framework, for
example, at Trafford we signed off our three year Local Area Agreement
(LAA) for the period April 2007-10, within a matter of months
we had to prepare a new LAA, against a new framework, for a new
three year period commencing in June 2008.
The impact of this rapidly changing landscape
is that Councils have to invest time, effort and resources into
meeting new requirements of government before even understanding
(or in some instances even implementing) the impact of the previous
wave of requirements.
Central government could plan a much more measured
approach to any new legislative or regulatory controls. This would
enable councils to implement changes in a considered way and plan
resource allocation accordingly.
A further challenge to improving the relationship
between central and local government is to move from the current
approach which tends to be detailed and prescriptive to one that
is much more strategic. A good example of this is the development
of the LAA whereby although our local strategic partnership had
agreed the key areas of focus, the LAA process insisted that we
revisit all 200 indicators again, even though some were patently
not issues that were important to partners or local communities.
An independent commission—which could
have a role in assessing the cost of burdens placed on local government
and the balance between that cost and the funding provided—would
provide a valuable input to policy making and public understanding.
If such a commission were to have a role in advising on the distribution
of central government grant this would be beneficial in increasing
the transparency of redistribution mechanisms. This would in turn
increase local government's trust in the process and it being
based on robust and validated evidence.
September 2008
| 
