WRITTEN EVIDENCE
SUBMITTED BY
MERSEYTRAVEL (LOCO 05)
1. SUBMISSION
FROM MERSEYTRAVEL
1.1 Any approach to partnership-working, policy
making and delivery that allows particular challenges to be addressed
at the most appropriate spatial level is to be welcomed. Merseytravel
supports the localism agenda and the bottom-up approach that is
being advocated.
2. ABOUT MERSEYTRAVEL
2.1 Merseytravel is the combined Passenger Transport
Executive (PTE) and Integrated Transport Authority (ITA) for Merseyside.
It is the public sector body responsible for the coordination
of public transport through partnership initiatives, doing so
with the aim of producing a fully integrated and sustainable transport
network which is accessible to all.
2.2 Merseytravel operates at the level of the
city region, largely reflecting Merseyside's functional economic
area and operating at the optimum strategic level for the provision
of transport. Merseytravel works with private and public sector
bodies (District Councils, transport operating companies, Network
Rail, the business community, community and voluntary organisations)
to deliver the requirements of the city region. Merseytravel is
committed to playing a major role in the continued regeneration
of Merseyside, both economically and socially.
2.3 The ITA/PTE model is a highly successful
example of a bottom-up approach that allows local authorities
to come together with other stakeholders to address shared challenges
around the provision of transport services and infrastructure,
and to support policy objectives around economic development and
regeneration, social inclusion, health and climate change.
2.4 Since the proposed removal of the Regional
Strategies, the key policy framework for transport in the city
regions is provided by the Local Transport Plan (LTP). Merseytravel
now has sole responsibility for preparing and delivering the LTP
for the city region, with the exception of Halton Borough Council
which prepares its own LTP in close co-ordination with Merseytravel.
2.5 Public transport is essential for sustainable
economic growth. As an economic enabler, effective transport infrastructure
connects people to jobs and markets, benefiting businesses and
potential employees and helping to tackle worklessness and unleash
the skills potential of many people on the peripheries of our
towns and cities. Effective transport infrastructure creates greater
opportunities for businesses by opening up new markets and increasing
competition and productivity. In addition, investment in transport
infrastructure can also directly support jobs and boost local
economies.
2.6 Merseytravel is a member of the Passenger
Transport Executive Group (pteg), which represents the
interests of the six PTE's in England. Merseytravel's Director-General
and Chief Executive, Neil Scales, currently chairs pteg but
this consultation sets out the views of Merseytravel only.
3. COMMENTS
3.1 In principle, decentralisation should lead
to more effective models of public service delivery which are
more closely aligned to specific local requirements. However devolution
of responsibility has to be accompanied by meaningful devolution
of funding, powers and appropriate decision-making which invariably
will have significant financial implications. It also requires
sufficient delivery capabilities and capacity at the local level,
and transparent and accountable delivery structures and mechanisms.
3.2 As with the development of policy, the most
effective spatial level for public service delivery varies across
policy areas. As indicated above, for the provision of transport
in the urban areas, this is likely to be at the level of functional
economic areas or the city regions. This should be combined with
close and effective coordination with the composite local authorities
and past them to the level of the communities and neighbourhoods
served.
3.3 Clearly not all public services can be delivered
locally and wider strategic approaches will still be required.
We welcome the commitment to localism but we are concerned that
the speed with which some policies have been implemented, for
instance the abolition of Regional Strategies, may lead a void
in strategic policy with implications for potential investment.
We would also highlight the loss of Government Offices (GOs) and
DCLG's commitments to distance itself from local authorities and
local areas. We would note that there will be an ever more important
role for local and sub-regional advocacy, guidance and support,
and a need to fill the void that will be left as a result of the
abolition of GOs.
3.4 This also raises issues about ensuring that
local bodies work together rather than compete. Without prejudice
to the importance of the localism agenda, there will always remain
a role for clear central government guidance on specific issues.
Good examples here include carbon reduction objectives, strategic
transport and land use planning. There is otherwise a risk that
localism could translate as a "free-for-all", or else
place one local authority against another. There remains a need
for clear national frameworks, with the ability for local authorities
or groups of local authorities to tailor these, where appropriate,
to suit their own distinctive needs.
3.5 Total Place was an interesting exercise and
we look forward to further information about how (or if) the Coalition
intends to take forward some form of place-based budgeting. We
would, however, emphasise the essential role that the business
community, the voluntary sector and public bodies which have responsibilities
across local authority boundaries, such as ITAs, must play in
the budgeting process. These roles must be formalised if place-based
budgeting is taken forward.
3.6 We would add that these issues clearly cannot
be considered in isolation from the upcoming review of local government
finance which we hope will consider opportunities for greater
funding to be raised locally.
3.7 The role of accountable, effective and empowered
local government is essential in a decentralised model of public
service delivery. "Local government" should be taken
to include local authorities, public bodies which have responsibilities
across local authority boundaries and other delivery agents.
3.8 A meaningful commitment to localism across
all Whitehall spending departments is going to be necessary if
the initiative is going to be effective. Central to ensuring this
is for local government to demonstrate that it has the capability
to deliver this agenda.
3.9 Co-ordination between government departments
will be important and it is difficult to see how this coordination
will be ensured in the potential absence of the regional Government
Offices. We look forward to further information from the Government
in this regard.
3.10 We are sure that the Coalition Government
would agree that the localism agenda is an important one in its
own right which, whilst related, has to be considered separate
to the current focus on the public finances. Allowing the localism
agenda to be perceived as a mechanism for delivering "cuts"
will undermine the credibility of the entire agenda.
3.11 The primary focus has to be on providing
for effective and efficient delivery of public services at the
most appropriate local level, albeit designed within the overall
spending envelope that will be set out most immediately in the
October Spending Review. The intention should be to set out the
principles of a robust and credible approach to localism that
will continue to serve the country and the communities within
it long after the country's current fiscal challenges have been
overcome.
3.12 We look forward to further details from
the Coalition Government on arrangements for the oversight of
local government bodies' performance in the context of Ministers'
expressed intentions to "free local government from central
and regional control" and following the announcement about
the proposed abolition of the Audit Commission. If the localism
agenda is successful in devolving responsibility for public service
delivery to the most appropriate level there will be a requirement
for some mechanism of oversight, whether from above or below.
3.13 As the Committee's Inquiry's terms of reference
imply, the requirement for oversight and accountability is particularly
acute for expenditure voted for by Parliament and it is hard to
see how this can be provided from anywhere but from above. Oppositely,
it would be expected that any mechanisms for funding raised locally,
particularly new mechanisms, would have built in mechanisms of
accountability from below as part of the procedures around their
design, authorisation and implementation. We would seek reassurance
that government will put in place adequate controls to prevent
the localism agenda from undermining or replacing strong, accountable,
local democratic structures.
September 2010
| 
