In spite of the lack of public awareness at times, local authorities in the UK actually have a great deal of responsibilities – being involved with social care, schools, housing, planning and much more.
This confusion has in part been due to the complex relationship between central and local government. With many differing tiers of local authorities each offering different services, it is unsurprising that citizens can be unclear as to the levels of service they should expect and from whom.
This situation can become even more heightened due to the ability of central government to make changes to the services which councils are obliged to provide and those which will be provided nationally.
To improve democratic accountability it is important that local authorities receive the credit for running these effectively for the local taxpayer and held to account at the ballot box if and when levels of service reach unacceptable levels.
It is of course right that Westminster retains the ability to implement national policies to shape its agenda. However, our current system leaves local authorities at the whim of the government in power at any given time, without any recourse to effectively argue their corner.
Tackling this issue is more relevant now than it has been in the past, because a new stage in the relationship is developing for three reasons:
Firstly, proposals in the localism bill will give local authorities a ‘general power of competence’. This change will give local authorities greater authority to improve their communities and provides them with greater security in law for doing so.
Secondly, the government has indicated a commitment to progressing with ‘community budgeting’. This involves the pooling of funding and resources from a wide range of public and private bodies at a localised level to tackle a specific policy area. Pilots are currently ongoing across the country focusing on ‘families with complex needs’.
Any extension of this policy will invariably lead to a shift in power and resources from Whitehall down to local communities.
Finally, the role of the Audit Commission is being substantially reduced. They often provided a burdensome and inefficient service, but at least attempted to quantify the quality of services on offer through the CAA.
Due to these changes in the relationship in practical terms, codifying this very situation in law can help to ensure that both local and central government hold up their side of the bargain.
Currently, an informal ‘concordat’ exists to clarify the nature of the relationship between central and local government. This agreement, reached in 2007, is a 17 point plan, which loosely defines the rights and responsibilities of both layers of government.
For example, it states that ‘councils have the right to address the priorities of their communities as expressed through local elections and to lead the delivery of public services in their area’.
While this document is an important step, Localis notes that ‘it is little more than a statement of intent’.
On the other hand, in France for example, local government practice is conferred within their Constitutional Code, which states:
‘The autonomy guaranteed by the Constitution has to be respected by Parliament when regulating local government by law, as it is entitled to do… There is a core – undetermined – which should not be infringed by acts of Parliament.’
Such a clause provides for greater stability in law making and helps to balance the relationship between central and local government, which is currently tilted heavily towards Westminster.
It will in the long run encourage central and local government to work together as partners, through greater mutual respect and understanding. This in turn will help citizens understand the significant role of local government in service provision in communities across the country.
In my role on the CLG select committee, we have touched on codifying the relationship in law during our ongoing review of the government’s localism agenda.
We noted that the issue is being looked at specifically by the political and constitutional reform select committee within Parliament and I hope that they will make some ambitious proposals.
Constitutional reform is high up in the government’s priorities and the role of local government should be considered fully as part of this process.