Write for us!
A few years back I was tasked by my party, namely The Liberal Party, in my capacity as chair of the policy sub-committee, to formulate policies for local governance. This was a subject I had not studied before and I soon realised what a fragmented and disjointed system it is. Hence, the need for reform.
England has in some places up to four layers of Local Government (Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have one by contrast, namely unitary authorities) but by the same token, England is one of the most centralised states, certainly in Europe if not the OECD. County councils (two-tier councils), unitary authorities, are the top layers, followed by district authorities being the middle layer and finally Town/Parish councils being the bottom layer. Not to mention combined authorities, where two or more councils come together to form a larger authority, metropolitan district councils which make up a larger area than your standard district council, borough councils which are only specific to London – akin to districts – and finally certain areas have community councils too, which are purely voluntary and have no enforceable power, only influence.
This plethora of local government structures has been a disaster in more ways than one and hasn’t been clearly reviewed in the light of earlier legislation. For example, the Local Government Act 2000 did not consider the Local Government Act 1972 or indeed the Local Government Act 1963 when adopting the former.
This is my view of what I believe local government should look like in England in the 21st century, from a liberal perspective.
Regional government
Regional inequality in the UK is amongst the highest in the OECD (it ranks in the top 10 of unequal countries out of 38), due to a chronic lack of investment and a London-centric model of governance which has largely benefited the capital and the South-East only. Furthermore, regional productivity is also a major problem with productivity in London measuring around 170% of the UK average.
One way to remedy this, would be to devolve substantial power and fiscal autonomy away from Whitehall and down to the various regions that make up England, namely the North West, North East, Yorkshire and the Humber, West Midlands, East Midlands, East Anglia, the South East, the South West and finally Cornwall – each with a directly elected mayor akin to the mayor of London.
This would not only address some of the issues I have already raised, namely regional inequality as well as regional productivity, by equipping regional governments with the necessary tools to act on specific regional economic, social and environmental needs. In addition, regional governments could create specific tailored growth plans for transport, housing and skills to boost local productivity and competitiveness against not only London (and the South-East) but also other regions. Moreover, I would advocate that regional governments should have power over locally raised taxation, namely council tax and business rates (including fees/charges) at a rate of at least 50%, in order for them to retain most of their revenue and thus spend it according to local needs rather than being dictated to, by the central government in Whitehall. Finally, regional governments would have powers over strategic highways, economic development, etc.
County Councils
County councils in their current form, largely date from the Local Government Act of 1888. The 48 ceremonial counties of England are distinct and mostly separate from these. Abolishing both combined authorities and unitary authorities in favour of modernised county councils would offer economies of scale. County councils could manage services that cover a broad footprint, such as housing, health + social care, education, local transport, policing and firefighting, more efficiently than smaller councils such as current district councils or indeed larger ones like unitary authorities. From a wider point of view, because they cover a larger geographical area, though not as large as a unitary authority, county councils are better suited for strategic planning, including that of transport infrastructure, education, etc. when compared to much smaller district councils.
The recent announcement that the Labour government is to reform local government is welcome. However, I take issue with the details of the proposals, in particular the one to remove county councils and district councils in favour of unitary authorities.
The argument put forward by Labour is that by removing two-tiers level of local government and replacing them with one, governance is simplified and costs are reduced. However, this fails to take into account the following: unitary authorities create larger units of local administration which are more remote from local communities and may make local government less responsive to local concerns.
Furthermore, large county areas, such as Kent and Essex, with populations of over one million people, might have to be split into several unitary authorities. This would necessitate the abolition of the traditional counties, that many voters identify with.
District councils
Removing district councils and replacing them with unitary authorities fails to take into account two factors. Firstly, forming large county-wide unitary authorities can result in rural areas and smaller settlements being marginalised as larger towns are prioritised. Secondly, district councils are a substantially smaller local authority that better understands community needs when compared to unitary authorities and are less remote and thus more responsive. Moreover, being closer to communities fosters greater accountability and identification.
Furthermore, district councils are a smaller unit of local government than a county council, though considerably larger than a town or parish council, which should mean greater efficiency when delivering services compared to the larger county council.
As well as this, because they are usually larger than a town or parish council, they are better equipped at dealing with more burdensome services, that require more resources, than their smaller counterparts.
District councils will have direct responsibility for planning decisions, non-strategic highways, environmental health etc. There would be around 250, approximately 10 within each county council area.
Town or Parish Councils
The final layer of local government would be town or parish, however, with substantially more powers than they have in their present form. The argument for town or parish is two-fold. Firstly, they offer enhanced local representation – they ensure that community needs and preferences are directly addressed by people who live in the same area – a voice that is independent, confident, and able to engage as equals with larger district councils. Secondly, they can provide a rapid and localised response – they can react quickly to local crises or events, as shown during the COVID-19 pandemic when they quickly acted to support the most vulnerable in their communities.
Town or parish councils currently have responsibility for parks, community centres, public toilets and street lighting. My proposals would give them additional powers over leisure & recreation, waste management and libraries. There would be approximately five hundred town or parish councils across England.
Lastly, compensation from equalisation amongst the various sub-divisions of local government will be set by an independent body, funded by a formula similar to that which compensates local government as a whole from central government.
Kayed Al-Haddad is spokesperson for The Liberal Party for Economics, Fiscal Policy and Monetary Policy.
