Select Committee on Merits of Statutory Instruments Fifteenth Report

APPENDIX 1: DRAFT BEDFORDSHIRE (STRUCTURAL CHANGES) ORDER 2008: WRITTEN EVIDENCE

---

Memorandum by the Department for Communities and Local Government

INTRODUCTION

1.  The Department for Communities and Local Government ("the Department") laid a draft of the Bedfordshire (Structural Changes) Order 2008 before Parliament on 10 March 2008.

2.  The Merits Committee ("the Committee") has sought comments on three issues from the Department: the process of preparation for transition to the new unitary authorities, the consultation that was undertaken on the Central Bedfordshire proposal between 19 December 2007 and 13 February 2008, and the legal challenge of Bedfordshire County Council which is currently before the High Court.

THE PROCESS OF PREPARATION FOR TRANSITION TO THE NEW UNITARY AUTHORITIES AND WHETHER THE PROCESS ENVISAGED IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE STRONG, STRATEGIC COUNCILS AND EFFECTIVE ARRANGEMENTS FOR EMPOWERING LOCAL COMMUNITIES

3.  As the Committee is aware, the Explanatory Memorandum accompanying the draft Order submitted to the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments sets out the policy framework and objectives which informed the decision to implement a two-unitary Bedfordshire.

4.  In that Memorandum (at paragraph 7.17) the Department sets out the Secretary of State's decision to implement the two-unitary proposal for Bedfordshire and explains that the Secretary of State considered that it was more likely that the long term outcomes around strategic leadership, neighbourhood empowerment and value for money and equity on public services would be delivered to the greater extent by the proposal for a two-unitary Bedfordshire (as opposed to the alternative proposal for a single unitary County Council).

5.  Paragraphs 7.20-7.31 of the Explanatory Memorandum concern the preparation and transition process in Bedfordshire. The Department offers the following additional comments on the preparation and transition process for the Committee's consideration.

6.  There is evidence that both officers and Members from all district councils have been working well together, whereas the Department is aware that relations between the County Council and the district councils have been less effective and constructive. However, since the "minded to" decision of July, good progress has been made with implementation and delivery planning in Bedford, but, due to the uncertainty in relation to the Central Bedfordshire proposal until a final decision was made, transitional planning in Central Bedfordshire is less advanced.

7.  The Government Office for the East of England (GOEast) advises that Bedford has carried out thorough preparations for the transfer of services including the drawing up of an implementation strategy and detailed programme plan. Bedford has been working very closely with the Department for Children, Schools and Families Children's Services Advisor (CSA) on the transfer of Children Services. Discussions have been held around many aspects of children's services including the Building Schools for the Future programme. The initial view of the CSA is that he is content with Bedford's preparations for delivering children's services and that he sees no major risks in the transfer of these county based services across to a new Bedford unitary. The CSA has not yet met with the Central Bedfordshire implementation team but will do so in the next few weeks.

8.  In addition, the Department would like to refer the Committee to paragraphs 9-11 of its submission in relation to the Cheshire (Structural Changes) Order. The arrangements set out in those paragraphs for Government's ongoing engagement with authorities in Cheshire equally apply to authorities in Bedfordshire.

9.  In the Department's view, having regard to the circumstances of Bedfordshire, the arrangements for implementation for which provision is made in the draft Order and the matters described above - whilst implementation will present challenges - the prospect is, if the draft Order is approved and made, that from 1 April 2009 councils will be established in both Bedford and Central Bedfordshire that will prove to be strong and strategic councils, effective at empowering their local communities.

CONSULTATION ON THE PROPOSAL FOR CENTRAL BEDFORDSHIRE

10.  The Committee asks why the consultation on the Central Bedfordshire proposal was limited to 8 weeks. Throughout this process the Government has been clear that it was important to reach final decisions as soon as practicable in order to minimise the period of uncertainty for councils, their staff, their stakeholders and citizens. For this reason, the Government indicated in the original October 2006 invitation its intention, subject to the necessary legislation, of implementing structural change by 1 April 2009. It is only practicable to implement such change at the beginning of a financial year because of the local authority accountancy and budgetary complexities involved; therefore the next opportunity to implement such change would have been 1 April 2010. Having regard to this and to all the circumstances of Bedfordshire, including the fact that there had been an earlier consultation on the proposals from Bedford Borough and Bedfordshire County councils, it was decided that an 8-week consultation period, rather than the customary 12 weeks, would be appropriate. This approach would avoid another year of uncertainty and potential disruption to local government in Bedfordshire, allowing the councils there to have greater focus on service delivery.

11.  The Committee also asks how many consultation responses were received, from which organisations or individuals, and the degree of support, or opposition, expressed for the alternative proposals. The Department intends to publish a summary of the responses received shortly; 95 responses were received in response to this consultation from a range of stakeholders including town and parish councils, Bedfordshire NHS Primary Care Trust, Bedfordshire and Luton Fire and Rescue Service and Cranfield University.

12.  In the consultation the Department sought views on the extent to which the two-unitary option would be likely to deliver the outcomes specified by the five criteria, and on which of the two alternative options (the two-unitary and single unitary options) would be likely to achieve to the greater extent the longer term outcomes on strategic leadership, neighbourhood empowerment, and public services. The Department did not specifically invite consultees to indicate their support or opposition to any proposal. Hence, whilst many consultees have indicated support or opposition, others have simply commented about how the proposals might deliver the outcomes sought. Accordingly, it is not possible simply to categorise the 95 responses between support for and opposition to the unitary proposals being implemented. A summary of the responses received is attached in the annex to this submission.

13.  However, having regard to the results of the consultation, and all other material submitted to her, including the results of the earlier consultation which ended in June, the Secretary of State formed the view that there would be likely to be sufficient support for both the two-unitary and the single unitary options for both to meet the support criterion. Whilst it would be right to say that opinion on the relative merits of the alternative proposals was divided, the Committee's attention is drawn to the fact that the support criterion (as set out in the Invitation of 19 November) is not about whether there is a majority of support from across the bodies referred to, or from within particular sectors. It is a judgement as to whether the range and depth of support for the change, if it were to be implemented, is likely to be sufficient for the new unitary structures to be a successful form of local governance for the area. The Secretary of State concluded that the level of stakeholder support for the two-unitary solution was sufficient for it to be a viable option. The Committee may also wish to note that the decision as to which of the alternative proposals (both meeting the criteria) should be implemented is determined not by reference to the level of support for either proposal, but by reference to the extent to which each proposal is judged likely to achieve the outcomes of each of the longer term criteria.

BEDFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL'S LEGAL CHALLENGE

14.  The Committee asks if the Department accepts that one outcome of the Court action may be that the council's challenge is successful; and, if that were to be the outcome, what does the Department envisage should happen with the draft Order.

15.  The Department accepts the possibility that Bedfordshire County Council may succeed in its challenge. In those circumstances, it would be a matter of discretion for the Court what relief, if any, to grant to Bedfordshire County Council. In the Department's view, it is by no means clear that a decision by the Court in the County Council's favour would necessarily mean that the draft Order should be withdrawn.

16.  The County Council's challenge is to the Secretary of State's decision of 25 July 2007 that she was 'minded to' implement the proposal made by Bedford Borough Council. Since that 'minded to' decision was made, Part 1 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 has come into force, and the Secretary of State has made a new decision under her powers in that Act in relation to the proposals which she received from councils in Bedfordshire. In the Department's view, even if the Court were to conclude that the decision of 25 July 2007 was in some respect flawed, that decision has been superseded by the steps taken since the Act has come into force, and this raises serious doubt as to whether it would be appropriate for the Court to grant any relief to the County Council.

17.  The Secretary of State and the other parties to the Bedfordshire judicial review have recently made written submissions to the Court about the implications for that case of the decision of the Court of Appeal in Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. In written submissions the Department drew the Court's attention to the Court of Appeal's conclusion that decisions or actions made in advance of the orders coming into force under the Act were no more than preparatory steps; the only issue which ultimately mattered was the legal effect of the decisions taken under the 2007 Act.

18.  In the case of Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council the Court indicated that had the challenge been solely to the "minded to" decision of 25 July 2007 it would, on that ground alone, have been inclined to deny a remedy. In this case (i.e. Bedfordshire County Council's challenge) none of the decisions taken under the Act which this Order seeks to implement are subject to challenge.

14 March 2008

Annex

Proposals for Future Unitary Structures in Bedfordshire: Stakeholder Consultation

Summary of Responses

Number of representations received

Local Government	11
Town and Parish Council	11
Political Party	4
Public Sector	26
Business	15
Voluntary and Community Sector	11
Public	17
Total	95
Campaign responses received (approx)	30000

Summary of views expressed by respondents

1.  The consultation asked respondents to consider the extent to which the proposals from Mid and South Bedfordshire District Councils ("Central Bedfordshire") and Bedford Borough Council, if implemented together ("the two unitary option"), were likely to meet the outcomes specified by the five criteria set out in the Invitation. It also requested that respondents consider which of the alternative proposals (the two unitary option or the single unitary proposal made by the County Council ("the single unitary option") would better achieve the long-term outcomes specified by the criteria, namely effective strategic leadership, neighbourhood empowerment, and value for money and equity on public services. The Bedford Borough Council proposal and the Bedfordshire County Council proposal were consulted on in spring last year, and a summary of responses from that consultation was published in November 2007[17].

2.  Corresponding with the previous stakeholder consultation held last spring, we have counted as a single representation where individuals or organisations have written several times to avoid double counting.

3.  Representations were sorted into a broad range of groups as follows:

Local government - councils, councillors and leaders of political groups in councils

Town and parish councils - including associations of local councils

Public sector - public organisations including housing, education sector and public sector unions

Business sector - including chambers of commerce

Voluntary and community sector - including lobby groups and church groups

Public - including all other representation not accounted for above.

4.  We received a number of responses from local authorities. Bedfordshire County Council submitted its 'fourth submission' to the Secretary of State, which contained in particular a critique of the affordability of the two unitary option. There were six responses from Chief Executives of local authorities outside the affected area, the majority of which questioned the viability of small unitary authorities being able to meet the financial criteria, linking their views to the Secretary of State's decision to refer the unitary proposals made on Ipswich, Exeter and Norwich to the Boundary Committee for advice. More locally, neighbouring unitary authority, Luton Borough Council raised concerns about the timing of reorganisation (whichever proposal was implemented), and consequential impacts on the growth agenda, plans for housing and the Local Delivery Vehicle.

5.  The Bedfordshire Association of Town and Parish Councils expressed a commitment to work with whichever new authorities were implemented; it hoped that the new unitary council(s) would effectively engage with the parish sector, for example, through increased devolution of services; facilitation of networks and improved practical support. Individual parish councils requested a speedy solution to end the uncertainty in the area. Some parishes felt that the two unitary option would be better able to meet the neighbourhood empowerment criteria, as it would be 'closer to the people' than a larger single unitary. Others expressed concern as to the financial viability of smaller unitary authorities.

6.  The responses from the public sector demonstrated general support for a unitary solution (in whatever form) for Bedfordshire and a commitment to working with whichever unitary structures were to be implemented. Some key stakeholders highlighted that a single unitary authority would be coterminous with their existing boundaries. Teachers' unions and some schools who submitted a pro-forma response expressed concern about the impact of the two unitary option on Children's Services.

7.  The majority of businesses were concerned about achieving the future economic growth anticipated for the county; in the main, it was felt that this would be achieved most effectively through the single unitary option.

8.  There were mixed views from voluntary and community organisations about whether the Central Bedfordshire proposal met the criteria, and whether the single unitary proposal or two-unitary proposal would better meet the long-term criteria. In terms of which of the two options for Bedfordshire better met the long-term criteria, some felt that the two unitary proposal better met their needs by being closer to the community than a larger single authority. However, some organisations were concerned about the effect of establishing two councils on existing partnerships.

9.  There were 17 responses from members of the public. There was consensus amongst these respondents that there should be a quick resolution to end the current uncertainty for the people of Bedfordshire. The majority of respondents expressed concern about the viability of smaller unitary councils. In addition, the County Council submitted a petition of approximately 30,000 signatures as part of their 'Save Our Services' campaign.

March 2008

Memorandum by Bedfordshire County Council

Introduction

1.  It is Bedfordshire County Council's view that the transitional arrangements proposed in the draft order will be highly unlikely to achieve the objectives of establishing strong, strategic councils, and effective arrangements for empowering local communities, from the proposed date of 1 April 2009. Bedfordshire County Council has provided the following clear and compelling evidence to the Secretary of State in its final unitary submission on 13 February 2008:

The joint proposal for a Central Bedfordshire unitary from Mid and South Bedfordshire District Councils does not meet the required outcomes set out by CLG - in particular, the proposal does not meet the affordability criterion, and will not deliver value for money and equity on public services.

The proposal for a Bedford Borough unitary also does not meet the outcomes specified in the five criteria set out by CLG. Bedfordshire County Council has already presented evidence to the Secretary of State (October 2007) which proves the Bedford proposals to be unaffordable and having no reasonable likelihood of delivering value for money.

The Central Bedfordshire proposal is not complementary to the Bedford proposal. The significant variances cast further doubt on Bedford's proposals.

The Central Bedfordshire proposal does not have the support of a broad cross-section of partners and stakeholders.

Bedfordshire County Council's proposals for a single, countywide unitary has secured overwhelming support from partners, stakeholders and the public. Important public sector stakeholders (including Health, Police and Fire & Rescue) have said that a single unitary would reduce the complexity of partnership working. Businesses also said a single council would simplify structures and be more effective. A petition launched by the County Council gathered over 32,700 signatures in less than five weeks.

Financial risks to two unitaries

2.  Two unitaries will lead to a cumulative deficit of £36 million over the first four years. From day one, both authorities will have to make severe cuts to frontline services leaving communities and individuals vulnerable. In 2009/10 alone, cuts of £15.4 million will be necessary. Council Tax cuts promised by Bedford Borough cannot be delivered - the council will be seen to have misled the public. Two unitaries will not meet the Government's five year payback test.

3.  In contrast, a single Countywide unitary will make a cumulative surplus of £40.6 million over the first four years, and pay back the costs of change in under three years.

Under representation of County Council Members on Implementation Executive and Shadow Executive

4.  The County Council believes that the arrangements, as set out in the draft order, for dealing with the disaggregation of services currently provided by the County Council will have severely adverse outcomes, and this may hinder the implementation of the new structure. The Government's own Impact Assessment on the draft order makes reference to the number of Council's in the affected area reducing from four to two. This oversimplifies the complexity of disaggregation. In Bedford, the existing Borough Council will be added to by approximately half of the County Council and in Central Bedfordshire the two existing districts will merge and be added to by the other half of the County Council. So the 'merger' is not a straightforward rationalisation (of four into two) and furthermore it involves the illogical reality of district councils subsuming an organisation, which is over eight times bigger (in both people and money terms).

5.  In the case of the two proposed unitary councils, the representation of the County Council members does not properly reflect the significance of the services and the budget to be disaggregated. The County Council currently spends £ 506 million per year on its services and the combined expenditure of the three district councils is only £64 million per year. This means the County Council is responsible for 89% of total spend across the county area. In addition to this the council provides more complex services to vulnerable people such as adult social care and children's services, including education.

6.  The Bedford implementation executive comprises the Mayor plus 10 members of the Borough Council and only three members nominated by the County Council. In Central Bedfordshire the shadow executive will comprise of eight district councillors and only four County Councillors. The county council is similarly disproportionately represented on the Shadow Authority for Central Bedfordshire.

7.  The success of the disaggregation of the county services will be critical to the overall success of the implementation plan for both authorities. Yet in both cases the County Council's representation and influence will be through a minority voice. The County Council believes that the representation of county council members should be 50%.

Appointment of members of Central Bedfordshire Shadow Executive

8.  Although the regulations provide that the Shadow Authority shall appoint its Shadow Executive, the order also specifies how many members from each authority will serve on the Shadow Executive. It is for the County and District Councils to nominate members to serve on the Shadow Executive. However, if the Shadow Authority declines to appoint one or more members nominated by the County, then there will be an impasse which will hamper the progress of the new implementation.

Inappropriate use of lead arrangements in Central Bedfordshire

9.  The absence of a continuing authority for the new Central Bedfordshire unitary is a major, limiting weakness in the transition process. This is vital if Government genuinely wants a quick and effective transition of power and seamless service delivery. Already this protracted and cumbersome local government restructuring process has resulted in a timeframe of merely a year to make this change happen. This difficult challenge has been made virtually impossible by not having a continuing authority for Central Bedfordshire. The only authority that can lead this decision-making and indeed effectively lead this entire process of transition as a continuing authority is the County Council. It is the only authority in Bedfordshire with the capacity and range of skills needed to successfully implement unitary government.

Conclusion

10.  The Secretary of State had an affordable, widely supported new flagship countywide unitary on her desk, which had satisfied all of her criteria. It was ready to be implemented by Bedfordshire County Council as the fastest improving council in local government history. Instead she decided to prefer a two unitary solution which has at best significant financial risks and at worse will result in severe cuts to services for the most vulnerable residents. We have no choice but to reluctantly accept this decision, however irrational. Notwithstanding this, unless the question of the County Council's representation is addressed on the Implementation Executive in Bedford and the Shadow Executive in Central Bedfordshire, the establishment of strong strategic councils including the disaggregation of services currently provided by the County Council by 1 April 2009 will be seriously prejudiced.

14 March 2008

Memorandum by Bedford Borough Council

Introduction

1.  Bedford Borough has helpfully been provided with ample opportunities to comment on the wording of the Draft Bedfordshire (Structural Changes) Order 2008 so that it will be a vehicle to achieve the transitional functions including the economic, effective, efficient and timely transfer to Bedford Borough of the County Council's functions, property, rights and liabilities so far as they relate to Bedford.

2.  In advance of the Order even coming into force there have been 2 informal meetings of the Implementation Executive, the second of which included the full allocation of County Council members. County Council officers have not yet started properly to co-operate on the disaggregation of services, but this is expected to commence when the Order comes into force and there is a duty to co-operate. In advance of this the Council has already prepared an "Implementation Strategy; Disaggregating County Council Services" and this will be further refined to ensure the smooth transfer Bedford of relevant staff and assets etc to ensure a smooth service transfer.

3.  This submission provides Bedford Borough's comments on how it will achieve strong, strategic Councils and effective arrangements for empowering local communities.

4.  Additionally we believe the strategy of the government to adopt shorter rather than longer times to create the new authorities is the right one and is undoubtedly the one which will create the best outcomes with the least disruption at the lowest cost.

Strategic Leadership

5.  Elected Mayor: Unitary Bedford Borough will remain a directly elected Mayoral authority (one of only twelve authorities) to ensure a very strong and continuing leadership model for local communities. This will deliver local accountability for citizens in a highly visible way to put community leadership at the Council's heart. Additionally our bid will cut the number of Councillors in the area from 73 to 37. This will allow the Mayoral model to work better and produce real roles for back bench Members.

6.  All out four yearly elections: The new Council will have all out four yearly elections to enable councillors to have a sustained vision to deliver better quality of life outcomes and look at longer term community needs. By this the Council will develop the plans and strategies and take the stronger place shaping decisions needed to deliver community benefits and provide community leadership.

7.  Scrutiny: The Council's existing exemplar Scrutiny arrangements (as recognised by INLOGOV and the Centre for Public Policy) will continue, as will its wide partnership etc. consultation arrangements before it develops its policy and strategic plans.

8.  Focus on Communities of Place and Interest: Ward Councillors will act as local champions and community leaders for local communities of place and interest and will have funds to make Ward improvements. There will be a Cabinet Portfolio Holder for neighbourhood engagement. The Council will retain its Rural Affairs Committee, chaired by the Rural Affairs Portfolio Holder to consider rural interests and allocate funds for rural capital projects. The Council also proposes to develop neighbourhood plans and local charters.

9.  Corporate Capacity and Capability: The Council's latest Comprehensive Performance Assessment rates the Council as "excellent" and highlights:

Exceptional level of Services in top quartile compared with other Councils.

Quality services with high and improving satisfaction levels.

Strong capacity and staff at all levels benefit from a strong but empowering managerial lead with clear community benefits including high quality services.

Equality impact, risk management and business continuity embedded in robust service planning framework.

Financial capacity strong with a clear and sustained focus on delivering value for money.

"Can do" organisation which enables employees, partners and providers to deliver.

The Council is also one of only 7 districts nationally to be awarded the highest value for money rating of 4.

10.  Disaggregation/Implementation: As part of the process of preparing for creating Unitary councils in Bedfordshire Bedford produced a "Unitary Implementation Strategy" setting out how successful transition would be achieved. (See attached document.)

11.  Additionally agreement has been reached with Mid and South Bedfordshire District Councils (new Central Bedfordshire U.A.) that services will not be disaggregated on day 1 where it is felt that this poses a threat to service delivery or unnecessarily increases costs without any advantage to local taxpayers.

12.  Partnership Arrangements: These will operate on strategic, tactical and operational levels and will secure improved outcomes for citizens. At a strategic level the Local Strategic Partnership will develop the new Sustainable Community Strategy and associated Local Area Agreement. At a tactical level the Council will continue and strengthen the partnerships concerning children and young people, adult health and wellbeing and crime & disorder reduction. At an operational level partnerships will ensure the Unitary Council achieves optimum value for money service delivery including the use of specialist contractors and suppliers to deliver one-off contracts.

13.  The Council's current best practice model partnerships such as the Diversity Network and Bed-Safe Partnership will continue and ensure that local people and stakeholders are able to influence issues that affect their quality of life. The current excellent Partnership working arrangements with the Police, Primary Care Trust, Registered Social Landlords, Business Community and Voluntary Community Sector will continue and be enhanced. It is proposed to have a "Strategic Alliance" with the new Central Bedfordshire Unitary Council to enable partnership working and joint appointments particularly during the transitional period.

Neighbourhood Empowerment

14.  Role of Neighbourhood Structures: The Council recognises that neighbourhoods should both challenge and influence strategic planning and the way local services are shaped. It will build on the existing strong mechanisms to capture views and involve communities. Ward Councillors will articulate and champion local views. Strategically community views will be fed into decision making to influence outcomes and widen the democratic process and locally communities will be able to help tailor services around community needs.

15.  Representative Arrangements: The radical reduction in Member numbers will be complemented by their enhanced role to reflect the Council's Mayoral model. Councillors will have local budgets with more officer support to strengthen their Ward role. Unitary Councillors will champion community needs and aspirations by working with the local community and its interest groups to promote communities of place and interest and they will also deliver the democratic process by their respective roles such as a Member of the Cabinet, or a Regulatory Committee, or an Overview and Scrutiny Committee and (for all) the enhanced Ward Member and Community Leadership role.

16.  Local bodies and interest groups will continue to provide a value for money involvement. This includes service user groups (e.g. planning and benefits) plus friends groups such as for parks and the museum. All groups contribute to policy development through consultation with them. In addition the Policy Review and Development Committees will continue to invite local bodies when they review or develop policy.

17.  Other democratically elected representatives (MPs, MEPs and Parish Councillors) will have a key role to support and deliver the Council's objectives. The Council will continue with its Rural Affairs Committee to take decisions on rural issues and permit Parish Councillors to attend and interact with Executive Members.

18.  Viability of Arrangements: The Council's recent "Excellent" Comprehensive Performance Assessment has found that its capacity is strong, that its staff at all levels benefit from its strong but empowering managerial lead and Councillors, officers and staff fully understand what Bedford's communities want and that their staff are enthusiastic about their contribution to delivering priorities. Adequate budgetary provision has been made to ensure sufficient officers' support exists for high quality service provision across all priority areas and therefore these arrangements are viable and will be achieved.

13 March 2008

Memorandum by Mid Bedfordshire and South Bedfordshire District Councils

1.  Much of the content of our December 2007 submission was agreed with Bedfordshire County Council between August and September 2007. We believe that there are no fundamental issues between the councils that have not already been anticipated.

The Process of Preparing for Transition

2.  The timescale for creating Central Bedfordshire is demanding but achievable. We have prepared a draft Implementation Strategy that includes a robust governance structure.

3.  Central Bedfordshire is in a unique position in that none of the authorities which will merge will be a "continuing authority" yet there will not be elections until May 2009. The key reason for this is that Bedford Borough is a "continuing authority" and it will not have elections until May 2009. As the two new unitary council proposals are complementary, it is essential for a seamless transition that the elections are contemporaneous.

4.  A Shadow Executive will be established consisting of 12 councillors (four from each council to be merged) reflecting political proportionality. That Executive will be set up by the Shadow Authority consisting of all the existing Members of Mid and South Beds plus County councillors for that area. The Shadow Authority will be responsible for agreeing the budget for the new council.

Strong, Strategic Council

5.  At its creation, Central Bedfordshire, with a population of 250,000, will be the tenth largest unitary council in England. Out of the 25 existing unitary councils between 150,000 and 250,000 population, 75% are 3 or 4 star performers.

6.  Central Bedfordshire will provide effective leadership in the following ways:

the council and leader will be elected initially for two years and subsequently for a four year term;

our December 2007 proposals set out clear electoral arrangements and plans for elected Member development;

there will be an enhanced role for councillors on the frontline who will contribute to community engagement, service planning, scrutiny functions and democratic processes;

we have proposed clear roles and responsibilities for political and managerial leadership;

there will be a single Local Strategic Partnership for Central Bedfordshire with its own Local Area Agreement;

the rationalisation of the current two-tier structure will assist in the response to growth through Joint Planning and Transport Committees and a Local Delivery Vehicle working across the Central Bedfordshire and Luton area.

Arrangements for Empowering Local Communities

7.  We will achieve empowered communities by:

creating a dynamic agenda with our towns, parishes and neighbourhoods through more devolved powers, local choices, stronger roles for community networks and better links with the authority;

building on what works already at neighbourhood, parish and town level;

recognising that communities are multi-dimensional;

developing the role of councillors on the frontline as both community advocates and community leaders to galvanise engagement at a "grass roots" level and initiate action;

addressing local concerns through councillors' scrutiny role.

The Disaggregation of County Council Services

8.  The well-managed disaggregation of County services is a key reason why our proposal is complementary to Bedford Borough Council's proposal:

there has been joint working by the two districts and the Borough Council since December 2006 especially on finance, disaggregation and procurement / joint service delivery;

close joint working between the districts, Bedford Borough and the County Council will ensure orderly disaggregation of staff, assets and resources. Joint officer teams will be established across the two unitary councils focussed on staff, assets and resources. Where there is scope to manage assets jointly, protocols will be established to clarify operational and service impacts;

discussions are underway between the districts and Borough Council (and we look forward to County Council engagement shortly) on services which could be delivered jointly including:

i) children's services: local safeguarding children's board; youth offending service; pupil referral unit; disability respite service;

ii) highways services: the existing Amey contract to continue with one of the new councils acting as agent for the other;

iii) pension fund management;

iv) planning future waste management arrangements.

9.  As an example of our shared thinking, our approach to service design takes into account the Transforming Social Care agenda. Our model would be implemented with the PCT, Bedford Borough Council, third sector organisations and other parties. This approach minimises the risk of any adverse impact relating to the disaggregation of county services. By 2011, as a result of shared strategic leadership and joint implementation, our new model of unitary local government will be well placed to meet the health, housing and social care needs of Central Bedfordshire and Bedford Borough residents.

10.  As part of the successful creation of value for money, efficient and fit for purpose new councils, the strategy for procuring and delivering services to our citizens will be paramount. In the lead up to and early days of the two new unitary councils the primary objective will be to secure seamless service delivery with a priority for children's services and adult social care. We will look to ensure that the most vulnerable people in our communities have access to the care and support they need to maintain their quality of life.

March 2008

Letter from the Bedfordshire and Luton Fire and Rescue Service

Context

1.  Bedfordshire and Luton Fire and Rescue Service provides emergency response, civil resilience, community fire safety and fire safety enforcement services to the diverse populations of the existing Bedfordshire County Council area and that of the unitary Authority in the Borough of Luton. This presents a wide variety of different risk management challenges ranging from the market towns and villages of North Bedfordshire to the relatively high deprivation and urban characteristics of Luton, which represent an indigenous population of some 600,000. This population is swollen not only by the various visitor attractions but also by a transient population using our busy road network, rail links, and international airport.

2.  Funding is raised by a combination of Revenue Support Grant (RSG) of 5.9%, Business Rate (NNDR) Income of 35.1%, and Council Tax Precept of 59.0%, which is collected on our behalf by the District and Borough Councils.

3.  Governance of the Fire and Rescue Service is provided by the Bedfordshire and Luton Combined Fire Authority, which is constituted by Statutory Instrument 1996 No2918 - The Bedfordshire Fire Services (Combination Scheme) Order 1996.

Key Relationships

4.  The Fire and Rescue Service works in partnership with a wide range of individuals and organisations representing blue light services, health, education, social services, highways infrastructure development, private sector, voluntary sector as well as national, regional and local government.

5.  Key relationships are developed through local strategic partnerships, local area agreements, and the local resilience forum, as well as a wide range of partnerships to deliver specific outcomes such as arson reduction, social cohesion, youth inclusion and community well being.

6.  Clearly, like all public services it is important that our limited resources are used as effectively as possible to ensure that services are provided when and where they are needed in partnerships that are efficient and best placed to deliver.

7.  The Fire and Rescue Service already has close working relationships with the political members and officers of Mid Bedfordshire and South Bedfordshire District Councils and Bedford Borough Council.

8.  The Fire and Rescue Service can see opportunities to make relationships stronger and more effective by supporting them in the transition process for the new authorities

Implications for the Fire and Rescue Service

9.  The Bedfordshire Fire Services (Combination Scheme) 1996 will require amendment to take account of the formation of the two new unitary authorities and the abolishment of Bedfordshire County Council.

10.  The possibility of major changes to the current membership of the Combined Fire Authority which is dependent on appointment by the relevant constituent Authority

11.  The Fire and Rescue Service will have to make alternative arrangements for some services currently being supplied to them by Bedfordshire County Council including the administration of the Local Government and Firefighters pension schemes.

12.  The need to establish proper working relationships with the new unitary authorities and refresh current working practices and protocols to meet new departmental structures that may be implemented by them.

Conclusions

13.  Throughout the review of Local Government in Bedfordshire, the Fire and Rescue Service has engaged in dialogue with all relevant Local Authorities regarding potential transitional arrangements for any potential unitary authority structure.

14.  It is satisfied that the proposed Local Government structures are likely to achieve the objectives of establishing strong, strategic councils, and effective arrangements for empowering local communities and the Bedfordshire and Luton Fire and Rescue Service will play a full and active part in the process of delivering those objectives.

---

17   http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/localgovernment/unitarystructureresponses Back