Why effective local councils are vital to ‘levelling up’

DURING the last week plenty of ink has been spilt about the results of the local elections – which did not take place everywhere.

But beware of predicting too much from them. Fewer people turn out in local elections than national ones, and not all treat them as referendums on national politicians. Some do genuinely vote on local issues. I think the swing against Labour in County Durham in 2021 was influenced by local issues such as the new County Hall and the future of the DLI, rather than simply national ones.

But having said all this, it is fair to say that a big swing in local government elections does indicate bigger issues. I think the most significant results in this election were the swing away from Unionism in Northern Ireland and the fact that Labour has begun to recover its position in Scotland. In both areas everyone had a vote.

Few commentators, however, actually comment on the quality of local administrations. This is disappointing because local government is important, and particularly so if we are ever going to achieve levelling up.

The first thing to think about is what is local government for? The Redcliffe-Maud Report in 1969 recommended unitary (that is one level) councils for the whole of England. The Labour Government at the time accepted it, but there was considerable resistance from Conservatives in rural areas, and the Conservative Government after 1970 introduced the structure that continues more or less to this day with unitary authorities in metropolitan areas such as Newcastle and twotier counties and districts elsewhere.

Since then, there has been a gradual move to establish unitary counties outside the metropolitan areas too with Durham, Northumberland and North Yorkshire all becoming one-tier unitary councils.

The main argument for unitary councils is that they are more efficient at delivering services. They seem to work so long as they are accompanied by structures to involve people such as the Area Action Partnerships in Durham.

Councils, however, are not just about delivering services. They are also about involving people in deciding how their area is run. A properly financed council would be able to decide on how best to achieve levelling up, rather than having to bid for funds from the government which seem to be first inadequate and secondly only delivered if you have the right politics.

Since the 1970s the powers of local authorities have diminished. Social housing, once one of the main functions of districts has been both reduced and moved to independent bodies. Public health has moved to the NHS. Powers over education have been drastically reduced. There has been a move towards economic development. The national grant to local authorities has been cut, and local authorities now have to rely more on raising their own business rates.

This sounds fine in theory, but emphasis on economic development when local authorities are competing can mean the construction of business estates which are not used. Businesses may be attracted by “rate-free” deals, and then move elsewhere when this expires. Industrial estates are built which can stand empty.

It would seem better to deal with big issues such as industrial development and transport, which cuts across local authority areas, on a regional basis. At the same time more power over activities which can be better delivered locally should be returned to local authorities.

The government’s approach, and that of some local authority leaders I have to say, to effective regional authorities has been lukewarm.

Where they have been established, powers vary. North of Tyne does not have the same powers over transport that Manchester has for example. Funding seems to be delivered on the basis of political allegiance. Making counties “mini-regions” seems a silly idea and seems to be mainly about political loyalty. They will not be able to deal with transport on a regional basis and the problems of economic development I have outlined would persist.

Properly organised regional bodies would have considerable clout when negotiating with the Government, and this explains the contradictions in their approach. They seem to want strong and efficient local government, but nothing powerful enough to challenge them.

A structure of strong local authorities and regions would improve the effectiveness of local government. Two questions remain. How do we attract the people to run it and how is it to be funded?

Being a councillor on a big authority is very time-consuming. It is difficult to hold down a full-time job at the same time. Full disclosure – I was a councillor for 20 years – so I know. It certainly stops chances of promotion. The allowances are small – and the Government knows increasing them is unpopular. The job is also precarious. Two very able local politicians – Simon Henig and Nick Forbes both fell foul of political manoeuvres.

Then there is the question of finance. Local authorities need more control over their own money, and not have to spend considerable energy begging for it from the Government. A more equitable form of local taxation than rates has to be found. Local authorities which have to provide amenities for tourists should be able to levy a tourist tax. Funding allocations have to be based on fair indicators, not political favouritism.

“Levelling Up” will not be achieved without effective local government. The Government needs to look seriously at how to make it better.

“

Two questions remain: How do we attract the people to run local authorities and how are they to be funded?