Democracy at most local level

Peter Halfpenny makes a number of fair points regarding town councils and unitary authorities ahead of the government’s White Paper on local government reform [Letters, Gazette, August 27].

As local government has evolved over the years a number of different structures have appeared across the country. Some may be better than others, but it’s hardly likely to help with engagement in the decisionmaking process when someone could have a parish council, district council and county council while someone living on the next street could, at least in theory, have just a unitary authority. Frankly, with different systems in place it’s no surprise it all becomes a blur and it’s easy to lose track of who is meant to be responsible for what.

As Mr Halfpenny mentioned, if the recommendations of Maud Commission had been implemented in full then the Local Government Act 1972 would have led to unitary authorities everywhere, including here in east Kent. While I am awaiting the government’s proposals with interest, it is perhaps already clear any move towards unitary authorities would be best balanced with the creation of new parish and town councils, perhaps with a broader range of powers, to ensure a best of both worlds outcome of economies of scale over a multi-district area with genuine, accessible, worthwhile democracy at the most local level.

With everything else going on in the world at the moment, local government reform may seem incredibly dull and little more than wonkery. But given how rarely such major changes are considered, the outcome of the upcoming review may be with us for a good few decades - so any new system desperately needs to have as strong a set of foundations as possible and I’m sure this paper and many of its readers will play a crucial scrutiny role in the months ahead.

Neil Baker (Con)

Canterbury City Councillor, Tankerton Ward