Written evidence submitted by RICS (LOCO
105)
The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)
welcomes the opportunity to submit its response to the Communities
and Local Government Committee's call for evidence for its Localism
Inquiry. RICS is currently engaged in a number of initiatives
which seek to support effective policy development and standards-setting
with regard to the emerging localist context.
This includes running a series of local authority
workshops in partnership with the Planning Officers Society and
the Local Government Association, to gauge views of local authority
senior planners, RICS members and portfolio holders for planning
on the best practice ways to maintain the momentum of their local
planning functions and development sectors in the current period.
RICS is also in the process of establishing an independent
cross sector Commission to examine ways to equip communities to
access the planning process and potentially be involved in community
asset acquisition and service delivery—all aspects of emerging
localist policies. This Commission will report back with recommendations
in early 2011.
ABOUT RICS
RICS is the leading organisation of its kind in the
world for professionals in property, construction, land and related
environmental issues. As an independent and chartered organisation,
RICS regulates and maintains the professional standards of over
91,000 qualified members (FRICS, MRICS and AssocRICS) and over
50,000 trainee and student members. It regulates and promotes
the work of these property professionals throughout 146 countries
and is governed by a Royal Charter approved by Parliament which
requires it to act in the public interest.
RICS members are involved in every aspect of the
built environment, including planning and development, managing
public and private sector assets, advising major urban and rural
land owners, planning and delivering infrastructure projects and
strategic land promotion and investment.
OVERALL COMMENTS
¾ The
outsourcing of some local authority services to local delivery
bodies can work effectively and promote cost efficiencies, provided
that the structure, governance, objectives and the relationship
between the provider and the local authority is well defined.
However, any outsourced services would need to attain high standards
given general public satisfaction with local service provision.
¾ There
are specific measures included in existing legislation which could
deliver certain aspects of the Government's localist agenda. RICS
urges policy makers to examine the potential usefulness of measures
in existing legislation before proposing new items in the forthcoming
Decentralisation and Localism Bill.
¾ In the
same vein, beyond local authorities there are existing local governance
structures and community apparatus which need to be involved in
whatever local service delivery models are developed. These range
from town and parish councils to local strategic partnerships,
rural community councils and resident associations. An important
aspect for any bodies delivering local services is the availability
of funding, whether this comes directly from central government
or through wider grant giving bodies. The continued availability
of funds from these diverse sources will have a direct impact
on the services being provided.
¾ Whitehall
has a key role in encouraging and promoting the necessary culture
change among the local government and third sectors, by giving
a narrative of emerging policy and outlining realistic expectations
of what the key local actors might deliver.
¾ RICS,
along with other professional bodies, has an important role in
the "Big Society"—specifically by issuing guidance
and disseminating good practice to ensure that local authorities
and communities are equipped to play their part fully in the decentralisation
of public service provision. An example is the current RICS
Public Sector Asset Management Guidelines,i which
are supported by Government and sector bodies and which are being
refreshed in 2011 to reflect the changing emphasis on localism.
¾ RICS
urges that training and resourcing local authority staff is prioritised
to support the development of efficient, collaborative and innovative
new models of service delivery being discussed.
¾ A number
of best practice examples exist (such as the case study outlined
in this document) which need to be highlighted and promoted to
enable other decentralised and cost effective service delivery
models to emerge.
GENERAL VIEWS
1. Existing measures
A number of the existing measures from the Sustainable
Communities Act 2007 have not been put into full effect. The Act
contained provisions to enable all stakeholders in an area to
provide their spending and resources information which would be
incorporated into a local spending report to be reviewed regularly.
By doing this the reports provided a map of overall local public
service spending in an area, allowing strategic decisions to be
taken for that area.
However, this initiative was perhaps overshadowed
by the Total Place programme of area-based budgeting. It should
be emphasised that the Total Place initiative is still in pilot
phase, and while the results from this appear to be favourable
there seems to be no real reason to neglect to increase the use
of local spending reports.
RICS would urge that measures within the Sustainable
Communities Act 2007 such as this example could be good existing
tools for local authorities. They could be simple to adopt and
use as part of the drive to decentralise services, but would require
recognition from the Government as part of the suite of policies
which sit alongside the forthcoming Decentralisation and Localism
Bill as a crucial tool for neighbourhood planning and delivery.
2. Genuine devolution of local measures and
services
Following the passing of the Sustainable Communities
Act 2007, Communities and Local Government managed the pooled
budget initiative by issuing a call for interest from local areas
to participate. However, a criticism may be that not enough was
known or understood about the detail of this programme at a local
level, which resulted in a low take-up of the project.
In light of this the role of central government departments
should not be to provide detailed criteria for local initiatives.
Local initiatives should instead be delivered and overseen by
local or above local actors—which may include local authorities
and/or other local actors.ii
3. The role of Whitehall
There needs to be wholesale culture change across
the local government and third sectors to encourage local bodies
and groups to proactively focus on delivering local services and
cooperate with their neighbouring partners.iii The
duty to co-operate potentially to be included in the forthcoming
legislation will not be a panacea.
While for a number of initiatives local actors may
be looking to central government for answers to deliver local
services, central government departments should act as enablers
for new delivery models. Whitehall departments have a key role
in providing a clear policy narrative of where responsibility
for local services will increasingly lie, and to outline realistic
expectations of what the local authorities and third sector might
be able to deliver.
Whitehall departments should also be collating and
referring enquirers to best practice case studies where services
have been or are being delivered outside the traditional model.
RICS is also keen to help here, drawing on our members' experience.
4. Resourcing, capacity and skills
Any proposed structural changes require well-trained
local authority staff who have the confidence to make strategic
decisions and build good working relationships with partner bodies.
Additionally there needs to be sufficient well-trained staff employed
to ensure that the quality of public services does not suffer.
RICS is particularly aware of the need to ensure that local planning
authorities are staffed and skilled adequately to support the
momentum of the development and construction sectors, which are
a crucial driver of economic growth (construction spending has
a positive multiplier effect of 2.84). RICS has explored this
issue in a number of research papers in recent years.iv
5. Case study
TORBAY COAST & COUNTRYSIDE TRUST (www.countryside-trust.org.uk)
In December 1999 the Torbay Coast & Countryside
Trust was formed, with Torbay Council passing over the responsibility
to conserve and enhance 1,750 acres of coast and countryside,
including:
¾ Recreational
spaces
¾ Historic
buildings
¾ Woodlands
¾ Farms
¾ Nature
reserves
¾ Footpaths
The aims of the Trust are to safeguard the sites
under their responsibility, to enhance and improve access and
to educate and inform; and to use its charitable status to attract
funding, engage with the communities and provide the resources
to the public free of charge.
Since its creation the Trust has received £1.7
million from Torbay Council against £6.2 million from other
sources through fund raising and legacies.
Governance: As an independent
Trust, the Board of Trustees comprises ten local people, including
a councillor who represents Torbay Council, with the rest of the
Trustees gathered from local businesses, media, education and
social services and professionals. The Chair of Trustees is Tim
Key FRICS, a senior RICS member and retired land agent.
Practical lessons from the case study
(i) Importance of an effective management team
The Trust inherited a proactive and passionate multidisciplinary
team transferred from Torbay Council when it was established,
enabling management and planning to be enhanced by corporate memory
and local expertise from day one.
(ii) The relationship and involvement from the
local authority
The trust was a result of a shared vision held by
council members and officers and local people. Once established,
local authority involvement was given through a councilor representing
Torbay Council on the Board of Trustees.
The partnership working between the local authority
and the Trust was intrinsic to the success of the initiative,
as good working relationships and mutual trust between the two
bodies meant that there was shared understanding and buy-in of
the overall vision, with associated financial underwriting from
the Council. Regardless of the local political environment, the
Trust was left to manage and deliver its public services, in accordance
with an agreed management plan, but without interference.
(iii) Support from across the community
The recognition of the worthiness of the Trust's
work from local community leaders and catalysts substantially
contributed to the Trust's success.
The Trust was established because of a growing recognition
from local people, along with the Council, that Torbay's green
infrastructure and natural surroundings were intrinsic to the
success of the town—as a major attraction for tourists—but
this was not reflected in the local authority budgeting, which
by necessity had to prioritise other essential services such as
health and social services.
Thereafter local ownership and buy-in to recognise,
promote and contribute to the Trust's work has been maintained
through a proactive Board of Trustees representing the local community
including a local head teacher, a representative from a local
media outlet and some business owners.
Delivery is achieved in a variety of ways, but, most
importantly, through Education. A dedicated team within the Trust
operates from four centres across Torbay to provide courses for
people of all ages, but especially children, mainly through schools.
In the past year over 7,000 school children have taken part in
courses held by the Trust.
(iv) Financing
The Torbay Coast & Countryside Trust was set
up with no assets of its own. Instead it relies on the local authority
partner to be a banker of last resort to underwrite its activity,
which brings necessary financial scrutiny for the Council. If
this model had not been followed the Trust would have had to take
ownership of the assets to back its working overdraft and banking
requirements.
Although the Trust did not receive an endowment when
it was set up it is a registered corporate charity and therefore
can access funding streams which were unavailable to the local
authority. Using this business model it was able to deliver its
services with a ratio of £4 raised from other sources (funding
awards, grants and legacies) per £1 grant support from Torbay
Council.
(v) Independence
Independence from the local authority is seen by
the Chair of Trustees as critical to the success of its work,
as it enables the Trust to plan its long-term activity with no
reference to any changing local politics, and strictly according
to a viable business plan. The Trustees must not be afraid to
say no to offers of new projects to be involved in which, while
meeting a local need, may not be financially viable, or compatible
with its objectives.
Beyond the involvement of the council representative
on the Board of Trustees, other senior "champions" functioning
as link people within the local authority are highly valued. In
the case of the Trust it has good day-to-day working relationships
with the Council's Heads of Department which helps in the Trust's
planning and decision making.
(vi) Oversight and scrutiny
In this case, the Trust is predominantly judged according
to its delivery of effective public services. Aside from the general
ongoing scrutiny of its finances from the local authority in its
role as a banker of last resort, the different projects the Trust
runs are scrutinised by grant givers when they make decisions
on granting funding to the Trust.
If the Trust was failing to meet its high service
delivery standards, on the one hand it would not be given new
funding projects from grant givers, and on the other the local
authority at any point could choose not to underwrite the Trust's
overdraft and could take back its assets, ceasing the activities
of the Trust.
REFERENCES
i RICS Public Sector
Asset Management Guidelines: A guide to best practice, is supported
by Communities and Local Government, The Scottish Government,
the Department of Finance and Personnel (NI), the Office of Government
Commerce, ACES, COPROP, CIPFA, AUDE, the National School of Government,
NAMS Group, CLA, the Institute of Asset Management, FPS, VOA.
ii In Spring 2010
RICS carried out an online survey of views on various aspects
of localist policy from built environment and business owners
in England. Of the 149 respondents from members of RICS, Planning
Officers Society, RTPI, Federation of Small Businesses and the
Chartered Institute of Housing, 67% agreed that the increased
involvement of wider community stakeholders in key functions of
local government is to be welcomed.
iii In the RICS online
localism survey (see above) 73% agreed that there needs to be
a wider culture change in the way local authorities cooperate.
iv See: Phil Allmendinger,
Transaction costs, planning and housing supply, RICS, 2010; Katharine
Martindale, Sarah Monk and Christine Whitehead, Improving the
capacity of the planning system in England and Wales: A view from
the regions, RICS, 2009; Yvonne Rydin, Reassessing the role of
planning in delivering sustainable development, RICS, 2006.
October 2010
| 
