Councillors on the frontline: follow up

Further written evidence from Councillor Rowan J Draper (CC 42a)

Thank you for your letter inviting my reply to the Government’s response to the report that you and other members of the Communities and Local Government select committee, as well as parliamentary staff, received evidence on and prepared the Councillors on the Frontline report for publication.

I enclose the following comments as my response:

 

1.      There is an obvious conflict both in rhetoric and reality in this Government’s consideration of "the core principles of being a councillor are those of community service and volunteering" given the nature of the relationship that Members of Parliament also have with those core principles and a professionalised model of performance. Parliamentarians should also be 'in it' for the community and volunteering their service to the public. 

2. Constituents expect elected representatives to be standing for election because of their care for the community and making a contribution to the local area regardless of the body one is elected to. Constituents expect contact with, from and by their elected representatives and they should receive it in a timely fashion. This however is called into question with the assertion that councillors should be volunteers, who by managing council casework on top of everyday lives, which can be a difficult ask for active citizens working and raising a family. 

3. The Government should be recognised the strength of local government is in a membership that is plural and representative of society. The proposals would ensure retired or wealthy elites domination of local government forcing unrepresentative policy affecting communities that include younger citizens between 18 and 45, minority ethnic communities, women and those with disabilities, and this surely is against the spirit of localism? 

4. It should be noted by the Government that Members of Parliament are supported by caseworkers, office managers and researchers in order to enable them to provide adequate and professional responses on time to satisfy demands from their constituency. Yet the Government's only reference to funding of related activities was to suggest that local authorities should be the decision makers to ensure accountability to local electorate. If these are the values, or intentions, of the government's position then surely the increase of paid staff to support volunteers should also be subject to the accountability of the electorate, and again become a highly contentious issue where working age councillors lose out? 

5. Government ministers receive special responsibility payments due to their added workload and portfolio yet it seems clear from the Government’s response that those who should be champions of their community within executive roles on their Council should be discouraged from contributing effectively, leaving more responsibility to Council officers, and being remunerated for the contribution they make whilst Ministers in Government receive handsome remuneration (or at least, have the appearance to the taxpayer who funds their salary). This seems at odds fundamentally with a government who champion Localism and want to devolve power to local communities. 

6. If Councillors are not the bearers of this responsibility, championing localism, is it the intention of the government to deliver powers directly to electors?

7.   The government asserts that the Town Hall should not be the focus of councillors and that they should focus on the wards and communities they live in. Could the government tell me how many of the Ministers within the Communities and Local Government Ministerial Team have been an elected Councillor, and for how long? Could the government also produce this for the members of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Parties in government? On the face of this statement it looks like many within the Communities and Local Government Ministerial Team are divorced from the realities of many hard-working councillors who do focus on their communities and wards to drive their actions within the Council. It should also be noted that these Ministers are not serving Councillors under this government answering calls and letters from worried constituents whose finances are being regularly attacked by this Government causing worry, panic and emotion toil to constituents who have no power to challenge this government until the next election or to recall their MP for voting for policies that directly inflict heartache and misery on them.

8.   The Government’s desire to support increasing the number of Parish and Town Councils strikes at the heart of a Government who want to reduce the bureaucracy of the state in all other areas of policy like the exchange of labour remuneration for shares, reforming the Planning system and its constant attacks on ‘Health and Safety’. Enabling fewer, more professional and effective Councillors should be the cause of localism not creating more paperwork, more meetings, more redtape and more councillors without sufficient powers locally to affect change within their community.

April 2013