“Devolution white paper announcement accompanied by hint on unitary push”

So, Blackdown House could be a super-white elephant … worth less than Knowle, even at the Knowle’s knock-down price!

“Local areas could get more powers and cash from central government – but face government pressure to adopt unitary models, following this week’s Conservative Party conference.

Speaking this week at the conference in Manchester, chancellor Sajid Javid announced that the government was rebooting its devolution drive, promising a new white paper on the issue.

He said the move would give “more local areas more local powers to drive investments in the infrastructure and services they know they need”.

The English devolution white paper will set out how further powers and funding would be devolved across England, the Treasury said in a statement.

Director of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership, Henri Murison, welcomed the announcement, “particularly if it extends to taking more control of existing local spending from Whitehall, as well as retaining taxes raised locally and allowing areas to capture the additional revenues their investments generate.”

He said that passing investment directly to mayors and combined authorities was the best way of funding local transport services. …”

Devolution white paper announcement accompanied by hint on unitary push

SWIPE – South West Independent Party for England! A pipe dream …?

A post from East Devon Watch August 2015 is recently seeing revived interest from readers. Here it is again – the points it makes no less relevant now:

“Following on from our post about how much the South-West loses out to other areas of Britain, particularly the South-East, we have been considering the suggestion that we should create in this region a party similar to (but definitely not the same as) the Scottish National Party – a party representing an area which finds itself time and again the poor relation to other areas.

One should recall that the South-West has had a long tradition of non-conformity. Indeed, search on the words “south west england” and “nonconformity” and a whole host of links will turn up. Devon County Council even has web pages for it:

http://www.devon.gov.uk/index/councildemocracy/record_office/north_record_office/leaflets/sources_for_history_of_nonconformity-2.htm

Admittedly, this refers specifically to religious non-conformity. But the South-West showed its independent thinking by being a hotbed of liberalism when liberalism was something more than Nick Clegg getting into bed with the Tories. From Yeovil to Cornwall, this area steadfastly refused to be buttonholed into conformity to the pendulum swings between Labour and Conservative.

So, given that the area is now so definitely politically blue, are we getting a better deal? The post from earlier this week shows very definitely that we are not:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/07/31/is-it-time-the-west-country-had-its-own-party/

So, Owl thinks it is time we started thinking about alternatives.

Firstly, what is the South-West? Officially (for political and statistical purposes) it consists of nine official regions of England: Gloucestershire, Bristol, Wiltshire, Somerset, Dorset, Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. The Owl thinks that we can discount Gloucestershire (hunting, shooting, fishing, the residences of Prince Charles and the Princes Royal and MI5 keep them firmly blue!) and Wiltshire seems just a little too close to the Home Counties and includes Swindon – definitely out. Dorset we dismiss too – they are totally conformist (see Letwin, Oliver and Grand Designs)!

That leaves Bristol, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. Bristol has gone extremely green over recent years and are likely to remain so (hopefully) and the Isles of Scilly have always done their own thing and have never considered themselves part of mainland life, but they can have the option of joining us within Cornwall (as at present). This leaves Devon, Cornwall (including the Isles of Scilly if they so wish) and Somerset. These three counties have so much in common. Long sea coasts, poor infrastructure and transport links, large retirement communities, large number of second homes, tourism forming an important part of economic life, a history of being overlooked when the honey pot is being shared out.

Imagine a specific party for Devon, Somerset and Cornwall! Imagine what a group of people from this area who held the balance of power in Parliament could achieve. Imagine just how powerful that could be.

And the acronym: South West Independence Party England – SWIPE!

Take a SWIPE at London-centric politics – devolution for the Cornwall, Devon and Somerset region!

Alas, just a pipe dream – for now …”

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/08/02/swipe-south-west-independence-party-england/

House of Commons Council (and LEP) scrutiny report – tough new measures recommended

Recall that East Devon Alliance submitted in March 2017 a wide-ranging report on the situation in East Devon, which was considered by this committee:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/03/23/east-devon-alliance-provides-evidence-on-poor-scrutiny-at-eddc-to-parliamentary-inquiry-eddc-provides-woeful-response-ignoring-major-problems/

and

that this report calls for pilot projects of strengthened scrutiny arrangements. Wouldn’t East Devon District Council AND our LEP make wonderful pilots!

”The Government must encourage a culture change at local authorities to ensure overview and scrutiny is truly independent of the executive and can properly contribute to improving services for taxpayers, the Communities and Local Government Committee concludes.

“Lack of constructive challenge

The Committee’s report on overview and scrutiny in local government, warns that scrutiny is often not held in high enough esteem, leading to a lack of constructive challenge to improve services for residents.

It recommends measures to strengthen the independence of overview and scrutiny committees and for increased scrutiny of combined authorities, Local Economic Partnerships (LEPs) and arm’s length bodies.

Scrutiny marginalised at too many local authorities

Clive Betts, Chair of the Communities and Local Government Committee, said:

“Scrutiny is marginalised at too many local authorities, which in extreme cases can contribute to severe service failures, letting down council taxpayers and those that rely on services.

Scrutiny of those in power is a vital part of any democratic system and has huge benefits for all. We are calling on the Government to strengthen guidance to make overview and scrutiny committees truly independent of those they are charged with holding to account and to make sure the process is properly funded and respected.

Only by rebalancing the system and ensuring scrutiny is held in high esteem will we see better decisions and the outcomes that residents who pay for council services deserve.”

Report recommendations

That overview and scrutiny committees should report to an authority’s Full Council meeting rather than to the executive, mirroring the relationship between Select Committees and Parliament.

That scrutiny committees and the executive must be distinct and that executive councillors should not participate in scrutiny other than as witnesses, even if external partners are being scrutinised.

That councillors working on scrutiny committees should have access to financial and performance data held by an authority, and that this access should not be restricted for reasons of commercial sensitivity.

That scrutiny committees should be supported by officers that are able to operate with independence and offer impartial advice to committees. There should be a greater parity of esteem between scrutiny and the executive, and committees should have the same access to the expertise and time of senior officers and the chief executive as their cabinet counterparts.

That members of the public and service users have a fundamental role in the scrutiny process and that their participation should be encouraged and facilitated by councils.

That overview and scrutiny committees should be given full access to all financial and performance information, and have the right to call witnesses, not just from their local authorities, but from other public bodies and private council contractors. They should be able to follow and investigate the spending of the public pound.

That the DCLG works with the Local Government Association and the Centre for Public Scrutiny to identify councils to take part in a pilot scheme where the impact of elected chairs on scrutiny’s effectiveness can be monitored and its merits considered.

Local Economic Partnerships

The Report also recommends that the scrutiny committees of combined local authorities have a role in monitoring the performance of Local Economic Partnerships (LEPs) and that the Government commits more funding to the scrutiny of mayoral combined authorities.

The inquiry was set up to examine whether the overview and scrutiny model is meeting its objectives and how decision-makers can best be held to account.

Read the report summary:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcomloc/369/36903.htm

Read the report conclusions and recommendations:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcomloc/369/36913.htm

Read the report: Effectiveness of local authority overview and scrutiny committees:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcomloc/369/36902.htm

Full report:

Click to access 369.pdf

Want to comment on LEP’s business plan for us? Go to Torbay council website says Sidmouth Herald!

Sidmouth Herald (as part of Archant a BIG supporter of our LEP) prints a press release on the Sidmouth Herald website on “consultation” on the LEP’s new, improved, answer to all our prayers business plan, citing the enthusiastic words of Paul Diviani, the Deputy Chair of an un-named committee.

Unfortunately, according to the press release, the consultation document appears to be only on Torbay’s website! No link to an EDDC website or the LEP’s own website!

Sloppy.

Perhaps the first consultation comment might be: put your own house in order before you attempt to put a nuclear cell in those of other people!

Here is the press release, in full, in all its glory, where 20 or so business and council members, many with nuclear interests or nuclear-industry-supporting industries attempt to persuade the rest of us that most of their (ie our) money going to Hinkley C is a good thing:

County and district councils in the two counties, along with the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), Dartmoor and Exmoor national park authorities, and NHS commissioning groups from Northern, Eastern and Western Devon, South Devon and Torbay, and Somerset, have worked together to come up with a draft productivity strategy for the area, referred to as the Heart of the South West.

This has now been put out for a consultation, which will run until November 30.

The partnership is said to be seeking the views of businesses, organisations, groups and individuals.

It says its ambition is to double the size of the area’s economy to £70 billion by 2036 and is seeking the right interventions and Government backing to achieve this.

The partnership says the area has ‘unprecedented opportunities’ in sectors including nuclear, marine, rural productivity, health and care, aerospace and advanced engineering, and data analytics.

Councillor Paul Diviani, deputy chair of the prospective joint committee of the leaders of the Heart of the South West, said: “The Heart of the South West economy is larger than that of Birmingham, so we need to be recognised for our true potential as a cohesive economic area.

“Our vision is for all parts of the Heart of the South West to become more prosperous, enabling people to have a better quality of life and higher living standards.

“To achieve that, we have to create a more vibrant and competitive economy where the benefits can be shared by everyone, and by working in partnership we can present a stronger proposition.

“We urge our stakeholders in business and the wider community to give us their views and help us create an effective strategy for delivery.”

The results from the consultation will be considered by the joint committee of the leaders of the Heart of the South West and the Heart of the South West LEP board, before a final productivity strategy is agreed early in 2018.

The consultation documents are available to view on Torbay Council’s website at

http://www.torbay.gov.uk/devolution.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/south-west-business-plan-up-for-consultation-1-5242862

Devon and Somerset devolution deal goes wrong on Day One

The leader of Exeter City Council has complained that he was left out of talks in London to secure devolution for Devon and Somerset.

Devon county council leaders as well as those from Plymouth and Torbay council chiefs were invited to the Westminster meeting this week with Jake Berry, the Minister responsible for devolution and coastal communities.

Following the meeting, it was announced by Devon County Council Tory leader John Hart that an agreement had been reached to devolve powers to an economy estimated to be worth £34 billion, more than Birmingham.

Peter Edwards, leader of the Labour-controlled city council, warned that the deal had no “mandate” from Exeter and revealed he had not been invited nor even told about the planned announcement.

Tory MP Gary Streeter, who organised the meeting and drew up the guest list, said he had never heard of Mr Edwards but offered an assurance that he would be “pleased” with the deal being struck.

Mr Hart emerged from the gathering on Thursday to declare that a plan had been agreed by “the two county councils, the two unitaries, all the district councils, the Local Enterprise Partnership, the two national parks and NHS representatives”.

“We have 17 local authorities working closely together on this plan with our other partners,” he added in a statement.

But hot on the heels on the press release came a strong response from Cllr Edwards.

He said: “Mr Hart went to this meeting without my knowledge. I would be interested in knowing if any other district councils took part or knew about it.

“He met me the day before and didn’t feel the need to mention it, let alone say he intended to indicate we were all signed up. I don’t have that mandate from my council – and he certainly doesn’t.

“We agree there is a need to go to Government and to unlock funding. We have been eager to see this happen and to see what is on offer.

“But we don’t agree that you should be offering up a new combined authority for Devon and Somerset blindly without knowing what any deal is. Councils could be giving up all their powers – without knowing that the prize is.

“Exeter has a strong economic agenda – it would be madness to jeopardise that without knowing what any benefits could be – or even if there are any benefits.

“My council’s position is that we could welcome devolution – but only once you know what any benefits are.”

Mr Streeter, MP for South West Devon, told Devonlive.com that there had been no snub and said “none of the districts” had been invited.

“I invited the county and unitary councils,” he added. “It was just a meeting to find out where we are in the devolution process with ministers, post election, with councils to report back.

“It was a lively successful meeting – the others will find out next week when a full report is made.”

Asked if Cllr Edwards, a longstanding councillor and city leader since 2010, was right to feel aggrieved, Mr Streeter added: “I don’t know him but I am sure he is a wonderful person.

“We don’t have dealings with Exeter or North Devon – it is very parochial. I know know who this gentleman is but once he gets the full story he’s going to be very pleased.” …”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/council-leader-angry-exeter-snub-483839

“Lack of transparency threatens English devolution and LEPs, warn small firms

“Local bodies responsible for economic growth and business support across England need to become more accountable and transparent to gain full support from the country’s small firms, according to the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB). The call comes ahead of the 100-day anniversary this weekend of elections for six new Combined Authority mayors.

A previously unreleased FSB survey finds that the majority (70%) of small firms in England with an opinion on devolution support the principle of giving more powers to local leaders. Two thirds (64%) feel devolution deals are good for their individual businesses.

However, small firms are concerned about their ability to feed into devolution deal making. Only one in seven (15%) feel they have been consulted on the devolution process in their area. More than half (57%) feel they cannot contribute to ongoing decision-making and a similar proportion (53%) believe there are not means to hold locally elected leaders to account.

Mike Cherry, FSB National Chairman, said: “The success of devolution deals will hinge on effective collaboration between new and existing local leaders. Transparency is key. Combined Authorities must clearly demonstrate how they are promoting growth and establish channels through which they can be held accountable. No doubt they’ll be heeding the NAO’s warning about becoming ‘a curiosity of history’.

“With new devolution proposals in the pipeline, future deals must be established on the basis of need. What we can’t have is the political affiliations of negotiators playing any role in fresh agreements.

“It’s encouraging to see that our new mayors are already engaging with small businesses in some areas. A number have established business advisory groups, and we urge those that haven’t to follow suit, ensuring they bring together representatives from all sections of the business community.”

Small businesses also flag the need for greater accountability among Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). Less than half (45%) of those with an opinion on the issue believe they are able to communicate directly with their local LEP.

More encouragingly, the majority (53%) believe their LEP represents the interests of their local business community, though only one in three (32%) feel LEPs represent the views of their individual firms.

Mike Cherry added: “LEPs do some great work across England and it’s crucial that they’re equipped to maintain their vital business support services beyond Brexit and play a key role in delivering an ambitious Industrial Strategy. That being said, reform is urgently needed.

“All LEPs are obliged to have a small business champion in place and that obligation needs to be met right across the country. Equally, the Government should produce comprehensive business data, including unregistered businesses, at a LEP level so Partnerships can tailor local growth strategies effectively.”

“LEPs need to be beyond reproach in terms of their governance, overall transparency and representativeness. They should be channels for economic growth and targeted business support, not old boys’ clubs.”

https://www.fsb.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases/lack-of-transparency-threatens-english-devolution-and-leps-warn-small-firms

”Devolution deadlock’ putting economic growth across England at risk’

A Local Government Association document draws attention to the failure of LEPs and the need to base devolution on English counties not artificially created areas that have little synergy and where control is ceded to unrepresentative interests and lack of scrutiny and accountability:

“Mark Hawthorne, chairman of the LGA’s People and Places Board, said councils wanted to use greater powers to build more homes, secure the infrastructure essential for economic growth, improve roads, close skill gaps and increase access to fast broadband but feared opportunities were being missed because devolution has “stalled”.

He added: “To reignite the devolution process, the government needs to engage in a debate about appropriate governance arrangements with local areas.

“This is fundamental to ensure that the momentum around devolving powers to local areas is not lost and the billions of pounds worth of economic growth, hundreds of thousands of jobs and homes on offer through non-metropolitan devolution deals is not lost with it.”

The LGA wants the government to publish its annual devolution report, setting out progress on negotiating deals, when parliament returns this week.

Under the Cities & Local Government Devolution Act, the secretary of state is expected to provide annual reports to parliament setting out the progress on devolution across England – this year’s report has yet to be published.

Concern has been sparked as no new deals have been announced for 18 months although the election of six combined authority mayors earlier this year was hailed as a significant milestone for devolution in England. …”

https://www.local.gov.uk/about/news/devolution-deadlock-putting-economic-growth-across-england-risk

The ‘ Growing Places’ report referred to above is here:

https://www.local.gov.uk/growing-places-building-local-public-services-future

W(h)ither LEPs and devolution?

“The Local Government Association has called on the government to urgently release its annual devolution report amid fears the process has stalled across the country.

The umbrella-group’s plea, released on Monday (see next post), marks two years since the government set a deadline for local areas to submit devolution proposals.

Around 34 proposals – from cities, towns and counties across England – have been submitted.

The LGA argues that billions of pounds worth of economic growth and hundreds of thousands of new jobs and homes risk being lost as a result of the so-called “devolution deadlock”.

Mark Hawthorne, chairman of the LGA’s People and Places Board, said councils wanted to use greater powers to build more homes, secure the infrastructure essential for economic growth, improve roads, close skill gaps and increase access to fast broadband but feared opportunities were being missed because devolution has “stalled”.

He added: “To reignite the devolution process, the government needs to engage in a debate about appropriate governance arrangements with local areas.

“This is fundamental to ensure that the momentum around devolving powers to local areas is not lost and the billions of pounds worth of economic growth, hundreds of thousands of jobs and homes on offer through non-metropolitan devolution deals is not lost with it.”

The LGA wants the government to publish its annual devolution report, setting out progress on negotiating deals, when parliament returns this week.

Under the Cities & Local Government Devolution Act, the secretary of state is expected to provide annual reports to parliament setting out the progress on devolution across England – this year’s report has yet to be published.

Concern has been sparked as no new deals have been announced for 18 months although the election of six combined authority mayors earlier this year was hailed as a significant milestone for devolution in England.

Council leaders said this was not the only model of devolution possible and the government should explore further options for the widespread transfer of powers and responsibilities to the whole of England to boost the economy and improve people’s lives.

A Department for Communities & Local Government spokesman said: “This government is 100% committed to devolving powers to local areas where there is strong local support for plans to deliver better local services, greater value for money and clear accountability.”

Localis think-tank chief executive Liam Booth-Smith said: “The wait has simply been far too long for the two-thirds of England that lacks the capacity and robust governance structure to deliver the government’s national industrial strategy.

“Given the economic urgency of Brexit, all parts of England, from major cities to small towns, deserve new powers to revive moribund local economies and with it the opportunity to help themselves.”

Booth-Smith said a Localis report on the industrial strategy recommended the establishment of 47 strategic authorities – based on existing county and combined authority boundaries – to control devolved powers to help drive economic growth.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/09/publish-progress-report-devolution-now-lga-tells-government

Final big nail in Heart of the Southwest Local Enterprise Partnership coffin?

The type of organisation detailed here is exactly how our LEP is structured. Surely, now someone, somewhere will pull the plug on it?

“The six mayor-led combined authorities risk becoming “a curiosity of history” as there is little evidence to back their assumption that devolution will improve local economies.

That is among findings by the National Audit Office in a report Progress in Setting Up Combined Authorities.

Parliament’s spending watchdog said the six – Liverpool City Region, Tees Valley, West Midlands, Greater Manchester, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough and West of England – could have been joined by other areas but these had “been unable to bring local authorities together to establish combined authorities”.

The NAO said there was “a logic to establishing strategic bodies designed to function across conurbations and sub-regional areas, and there is a clear purpose to establishing combined authorities especially in metropolitan areas, as economies and transport networks operate at a scale greater than individual local authority areas”.

Most combined authority proposals were put to the government on the basis that they would deliver more rapid economic growth by spending money and exercising powers locally.

But the NAO noted the combined authorities were “inherently complex structures” and evidence that investment, decision-making and oversight at this level was linked to improved local economic results was “mixed and inconclusive”.

It said combined authorities “often assume in their plans that there is a strong link between investment in transport and economic growth, for example”, but evidence on the additional value that governance at this level can bring to economic growth is mixed, the NAO said.

It was also concerned that combined authorities’ administrative boundaries do not necessarily match functional economic areas, or the existing boundaries of local enterprise partnerships.

“We assessed combined authorities’ draft monitoring and evaluation plans, and found that while they are working to link spending with outcomes and impact, they vary in quality, and measures tend to vary depending on data already available,” the report said.

Despite this, the combined authorities’ economic regeneration role “would become more pressing” if Brexit leads to reductions in regional funding at present received from the European Union.

Combined authorities “are generally in areas which receive the most EU funding”, it noted.

NAO head Amyas Morse said: “For combined authorities to deliver real progress and not just be another ‘curiosity of history’ like other regional structures before them, they will need to demonstrate that they can both drive economic growth and also contribute to public sector reform.”

The County Councils Network strongly opposed the government’s requirement for elected mayors to lead combined authorities – and only Cambridgeshire and Peterborough involves a county council.

CCN director Simon Edwards, said: “This report from the NAO highlights many of the concerns the majority of CCN members raised over the prospect of mayoral combined authorities in county areas: an added layer of bureaucracy in an already complex landscape, a lack of co-terminosity with key public sector partners, and questions over whether this format would lead to economic growth in rural areas.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/07/combined-authorities-risk-becoming-curiosity-history

A northern Tory councillor and his view on devolved power

Tomorrow I’ll be toddling across to Leeds where, among other momentous matters, the West Yorkshire Combined Authority with consider whether to change its name to Leeds City Region Combined Authority. This has caused a ripple of disgruntlement in my city as people ask quite why this decision is being taken now and whether it marks the end of Bradford’s separate and individual identity.

I don’t like the proposal. Mostly this is because it is totally unnecessary. We’re told by officers that the current brand (essentially ‘West Yorkshire’) is confusing because there’s another brand – ‘Leeds City Region Local Enterprise Partnership’ – within the purview of the combined authority and having two brands might be confusing for high-powered, multi-million pound wielding international business folk wanting to invest. That and all the others are named after cities (well Sheffield, Manchester and Liverpool at least but not Birmingham and Bristol).

The report tells us that the basis for the change results from ‘comprehensive research’:

“…benchmarking the WYCA against other combined authorities nationally or internationally, an audit of existing communications activity by the organisation, and substantial engagement with audiences including elected members, local authority chief executives, private sector business leaders, central government officials, partner organisations and WYCA employees.”

Sounds good – just the sort of paragraph I’d have put into a client presentation about research when I didn’t have any budget. What we have here is a series of chats with existing connections such as members of the LEP, political leaders (but not opposition leaders) in the West Yorkshire councils and senior officials who we work with. There’s no script, no presentation of findings, no suggestion that we’ve done anything other than ask the opinion of a few people who we already know.

In the grand scale of things all this probably doesn’t matter much. Except that, for us in Bradford at least, we’ll begin to recognise that plenty of decisions previously made by councillors here in Bradford are now made somewhere else (Leeds) by a different organisation. This – as councillors on Bradford’s area committees have discovered – includes mundane and very local stuff like whether or not to put speed bumps on a street in Cullingworth.

What annoys me most about this stuff is that we are gradually replacing accountable political decision-making with technocratic, officer-led decisions. So us councillors, for example, get pressure to put in speed cameras but have precisely zero say in whether and where such cameras are actually installed. Somewhere in the documentation of the soon-to-be Leeds City Region Combined Authority there’ll be a line of budget referring to the West Yorkshire Casulaty Reduction Partnership. That is what ‘member decision-making’ means most of the time these days.

So to return to the name change. I’ll be opposed because it’s unnecessary nd divisive. But when it goes through (I love that they’re planning an extensive ‘member engagement’ after they’ve made the decision) it will at least be a reminder that most of the big investment decisions out there are being made on the basis of Heseltine’s ‘functional economic geography’ rather than using the democratically-elected local councils we all know and love. OK, not love- that’s going too far – but you know what I mean.”

http://theviewfromcullingworth.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/so-is-bradford-part-of-leeds-on.html

No money trees in Devon – or are there?

“Workers in the South West are £1,500 a year worse off in real terms than they were before the financial crash, according to new figures published by the TUC.

The analysis shows that real wages in the region are 6.7 per cent lower, on average, than they were in 2008. …

One in three jobs created in the South West since 2011 have been in insecure work, according to the figures. The TUC estimates that 281,223 people now work in insecure jobs in the region. That represents one in 10 workers in the South West.

TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady said: “Workers in the South West are £1,500 a year worse off than before the crash.

“This region badly needs a pay rise. It’s nearly ten years since the financial crisis, and working people are still suffering. Politicians have to explain to voters how they’ll create decent jobs that people can actually live on.

“And there needs to be recognition of the damage pay restrictions in the public sector are having. Hard-working nurses shouldn’t have to use food banks to get by.”

http://www.devonlive.com/figures-reveal-devon-workers-are-1-500-a-year-worse-off-than-in-2008/story-30369615-detail/story.html

AND YET:

“The head of a publicly funded body tasked with boosting prosperity in Devon and Somerset has been awarded a 26 per cent pay rise.

Chris Garcia will now earn £115,000 a year for his role as chief executive of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership.

The controversial proposal was approved by the LEP board at a meeting in Tiverton on Tuesday, January 17.

Devon County Council had signalled that its representative on the board, Councillor Andrew Leadbetter, would vote against the proposed pay award in light of “the tight financial times in which we live”.

http://www.devonlive.com/figures-reveal-devon-workers-are-1-500-a-year-worse-off-than-in-2008/story-30369615-detail/story.html

“Austerity has made local government financially unviable. Radical reorganisation may be the only answer”

Owl says: But alas not before EDDC has spent £10 million plus of our money on a new HQ which may be redundant before they move into it!

“Tory councillors popping celebratory corks after last week’s haul of seats should bear in mind the old adage: be careful what you wish for. Now they occupy council leadership positions from Maidstone to Morpeth, it is they alone who must now carry the can for sorting out local government’s two Rs, revenue and reorganisation. The latter is going to haunt county halls for the next political cycle.

The blue tide isn’t going to wash away any of local government’s fundamental problem of a lack of money. Jonathan Carr-West, chief executive of the Local Government Information Unit, has said he hopes “emboldened county leadership” could campaign for sustainable funding for social care and children’s services; he’s an optimist.

Residents may be willing to pay more for looking after older people. But how? Council tax won’t provide enough, so it will be down to central grants. Whoever is communities secretary after June 9 (and Theresa May looks unlikely to keep Sajid Javid) must now devise a distribution and needs formula for England that will protect Tories in the north as well as those in the heartlands of the south.

Short of May tearing up the spending plans set out by Philip Hammond barely a couple of months ago, financial pressure isn’t going to ease. So, come June 9 we’re back to the Christchurch question. A month ago, councillors in the solidly Tory Dorset district decided to defer a referendum on an outline plan to reorganise local government in that county, getting rid of two tiers and replacing the county council, districts and existing Poole and Bournemouth unitary councils with two new, big unitaries. Without reorganisation, the story goes, austerity has made local government financially unviable.

Reorganisation details are different in the various, but the same kinds of argument have been playing in Lincolnshire, Oxfordshire, Kent, Bucks, Essex, Hampshire and the other shires. If you notice something similar about those names, gold star: they are all Tory. What’s in prospect is largely an intra-Tory party argument which, in Kent, for example, is already pitting Tory MPs against councillors, as well as setting up massive squabbles between councillors themselves.

We’ve been here before, several times. Those with long memories will recall the long hours and bitter debate within the John Major government in the 1990s over reorganisation. The fruits of that included the demise of Avon county council in 1996, which the West of England combined authority is a bodged attempt at recreating.

Reorganisation is back because consultants’ reports say it should in principle be cheaper to run services over bigger areas with a single tier council and county executives usually agree. But those reports perennially underestimate transitional costs and rarely factor in the hard-to-quantify but vital element of the identification of residents and staff with particular places and local history.

Besides, most reorganisations turn into messy compromises. Take Christchurch. A “rational” reorganisation based on economic geography would align it with Southampton and the Solent, with the New Forest a sort of park in between urban areas. But few Tories are willing to abandon entirely the historic boundaries of Dorset even if the county council goes, just as few Tories want to see the (non-Tory) urban areas of Oxford and Cambridge being allowed to swallow the districts around them.

And all that is just local government. Summing up the costly and largely ineffective debates of the 1990s, Michael Chisholm, chair of the Local Government Boundary Commission, complained of the folly of reorganising without simultaneously considering council powers and finance – which these days has to include the interrelationship of councils and the NHS as well as the fraught consequences of councils’ keeping the proceeds of business rates and the end of central grants.

There’s trouble ahead but at least reorganisation would weaken the political hegemony the Tories have now established across a wide swath of English local government.”

https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2017/may/09/english-local-government-tory-revenue-reorganisation

Undemocratic mayors, undemocratic scrutiny

“The mere election of a mayor … does not mean these new mayoralties are automatically democratic. Mayors work within combined authorities, with cabinets made up of council leaders – all of whom are indirectly elected through a broken First Past the Post voting system.

But there is no directly elected assembly to hold them to account, like that of the London mayoralty. Instead, the Mayor is scrutinised by Overview and Scrutiny Committees made of councillors and within the council chambers themselves. This means who sits on those committees really matters.

At the Electoral Reform Society, we want to see a better democracy. And the metro mayors are the biggest change to the governance of England in decades. They are an exciting opportunity to change the way our cities are governed to be more inclusive, more local and more visible.

But we are concerned that this structure passes up existing legacies of problems in local government to the new mayoralties, as we point out in our new report From City Hall to Citizens’ Hall: Democracy, Diversity and English Devolution.

Due to our electoral system, Britain has a multitude of local ‘one-party states’, with almost no opposition in the council chamber. Many of these abound in the areas electing metro-mayors, with some councils having just one member from outside the controlling party.

Previous work for the ERS has shown that these councils risk an extra £2.6bn on public procurement each year, due to a lack of scrutiny.

Concerns around scrutiny are particularly strong in some of the metro-mayor areas because the council leaders – who will make up the cabinets – lack any diversity whatsoever. Only two of the council leaders of the six areas electing combined authorities are women. Only one is from a BAME community. This carries with it risks within the policymaking process, narrowing the experience and knowledge-base around the cabinet table.

So far the combined authority scrutiny committees have also demonstrated a lack of diversity, both political and demographic. On the West Midlands Overview and Scrutiny Committee, for instance, ten of twelve political members are drawn from one party, and ten are men.”

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2017/05/03/whos-going-to-hold-the-new-metro-mayors-to-account/

Owl says: Should Devon and Somerset EVER become a combined authority, our councillors and the Mayor will bend their knees to the nuclear and property vested interests of the majority of businessmen (men) who run our Local Enterprise Partnership – forget scrutiny. It didn’t help when the self-same people gave their CEO a 24% payrise and there was NOTHING councils could do about it.

English devolution – undemocratic and unrepresentative

“… The ERS (Electoral Reform Society) has been vocal in pointing out the solely economic focus of devolution – and the corresponding lack of attention to the democracy of devolution. With the public largely shut out of the process, and models imposed rather than chosen, so far citizen involvement in the constitutional future of their own areas has been minimal. …

… The creation of combined authorities highlights a continuing shift in the role of the councillor. Where once councillors took decisions directly on committees they are increasingly scrutineers: holding to account formal executive structures in the form of mayoral or cabinet/leader structures, or scrutinising bodies such as Clinical Commissioning Groups, Local Enterprise Partnerships, Police and Crime Commissioners, and now combined authorities.

The traditional argument for First Past the Post: that it elects ‘strong’ governments, cannot hold up to the reality of modern councillor life in which councillors are as often scrutinisers as decision-makers, not only of their own executives but of bodies external to the traditional council governance structure.

Yet, there are still many councils overwhelmingly dominated by a single party. …”

Click to access From-City-Hall-to-Citizens-Hall.pdf

Devon County Council witholds payment to LEP over CEO 24% salary increase

Owl says: treat the LEP’s comments about the size of its investment with tons of salt, ask for a REAL breakdown of the figure, particularly all expenses related to Hinkley C nuclear power station in Somerset.

Politicians from across the political spectrum have joined forces to condemn a publicly-funded local enterprise partnership for giving its chief executive a £24,000 pay rise.

Devon County Council has withheld £10,000 of the funding it gives to the Heart of the South West LEP after Chris Garcia, its boss, took a 26% pay rise. Eight Devon district councils have each held back £1,000 in protest.

The LEP was one of six set up in the South West in 2011 to replace the regional development agency (RDA), which was abolished by the incoming coalition government.

Its chief executive’s pay leapt from £90,729 to £115,000 in January, voted through by business representatives on the board in the face of fierce opposition from local authority members.

John Hart, leader of Devon County Council, told a meeting of the full council that Plymouth was the only council on the board which supported the increase. He said the LEP should be called in for scrutiny after Thursday’s local elections “to ask them to justify their existence”.

Alan Connett, Devon Lib Dem leader, asked councillors to pull out of the partnership “until common sense prevails with regard to top management pay increases”.

He told last week’s meeting: “To award a £24,000 pay rise was obscene in the circumstances, at a time when teachers, nurses, doctors and the public sector generally had been under restraint of low or no pay rises for years.”

Coun Hart said the council should take no further action because it had gone past the point where anything could be achieved. He said the RDA was a body that was strong and represented the whole region, and it had some clout behind it. “The six LEPs are six mini-RDAs,” he said.

Coun Hart said the Government put up £189 million to be shared among the six LEPs. “The initial allocation for Devon and Somerset was abysmal. It did improve, but at the same time it’s not much in relation to what was being asked for,” he said. “Now, unfortunately, a decision has been taken by the LEP which is beyond our control, but I think it’s right that we show that we are not happy with what’s going on.”

Coun Hart said some of the money allocated in the second tranche of funding still had not been spent, while the third tranche was on the way.

Exeter Labour county councillor Rob Hannaford said: “The time for this body to be abolished has clearly come.”

A LEP spokeswoman said: “We look forward to working with the confirmed leaders of the local authorities following the elections and working with them on how we can together increase productivity and prosperity for all in Devon, Somerset, Plymouth and Torbay.”

She said the LEP had brought in £722.70 million investment and that the LEP was spending tranche two.”

http://www.devonlive.com/politicians-protest-as-devon-enterprise-boss-takes-24-000-pay-rise/story-30305397-detail/story.html

“Tory candidate defends spending up to £1m on West Midlands mayor campaign”

You just KNOW when a Tory candidate has £1 million behind his campaign that most of the people or companies contributing are not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts!

Labour’s campaign spending is thought to be between £100,000 and £200,000. It has focused on social media campaigning and phone banks, where volunteers call up voters to ask for their support. The Lib Dem candidate has spent about £50,000.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/01/andy-street-mayor-campaign-spending-labour-sion-smith-west-midlands

LEP announces 8 new board members – four of which already held LEP positions

No surprises here:

Karl Tucker, Joint Managing Director Yeo Valley Farms (Production) Ltd
· Member HotSW LEP People Group
· Member Somerset E & Skills Steering Group
· Member Somerset Economic Growth Board
· Member SW CBI Council

Richard Stevens Managing Director, Plymouth Citybus Ltd
· Chairman Plymouth & Devon Chamber
· Chair Plymouth Growth Board
· Member PRTFu
· Numerous other local groups

Fiona McMillan Non-Executive Director, EDF Energy New Build Gen Co Ltd
· Member HotSW LEP People Group
· Chair Somerset E & Skills Steering Group
· Member Somerset Economic Growth Board
· Previously Principal Bridgwater College

Helen Lacey, Managing Director, Red Berry Recruitment
· Member HotSW LEP People Group
· Chair IoD Somerset
· Vice Chair Somerset Chamber
· Previously Vice Chair FSB Somerset
· Non-Executive Director Inspire To Achieve

Mel Squires, SW Regional Director, NFU
· Member SW CBI Council
· Member SWRFN
· Previously Member HotSW LEP Executive
· Chairman of the Seale-Hayne Education Trust

Jackie Jacobs, Board member and joint owner
EIC Group / SW Metal Finishing Ltd
· Board member WEAF

Stuart Brocklehurst, Chief Executive, Applegate Marketplace Ltd
· Governor Petroc College
· Patron of Pilton House Trust
· Previously Group Communications Director Amadeus IT Group Madrid, Senior Vice President Visa International, Bishop’s Council Diocese of Exeter

David Bird, Santander Corporate and Commercial Banking
Board member DCBC

http://heartofswlep.co.uk/news/eight-new-non-executive-directors-appointed-heart-south-west-lep-board/

Strike threat at Hinkley C – bonus said to be not enough for skilled workers

“Workers on EDF’s 18 billion pound Hinkley Point C nuclear project in southwest England could go on strike over bonus payments, two labour unions said on Thursday.

The GMB and Unite trade unions will hold a vote among 700 workers employed by the Bouygues-Laing O’Rourke (BYLOR) construction consortium appointed by EDF to build parts of Britain’s first new nuclear plant in decades.

The ballot is scheduled for May 2-5, the unions said.

“The bonus rate offered by BYLOR is insufficient to attract the quality of workers needed to ensure that the civil works phase of the 18 billion pound project is completed on time,” the unions said in a joint statement.

EDF Energy, the French utility’s British subsidiary, said that discussions with its contractor and trade union partners were ongoing.

“We are committed to a continuing dialogue on this issue,” said an EDF spokesman, also speaking on behalf of Bouygues and Laing O’Rourke.” …

Source: Reuters

Toshiba’s nuclear mistakes – a warning for the UK

“The roots of Toshiba’s admission this week that it has serious doubts over its “ability to continue as a going concern” can be found near two small US towns.

It is the four reactors being built for nuclear power stations outside Waynesboro, in Georgia, and Jenkinsville, South Carolina, by the company’s US subsidiary Westinghouse that have left the Japanese corporation facing an annual loss of £7.37bn.

Construction work on the units has run hugely over budget and over schedule, casting a shadow over two of the biggest new nuclear power station projects in the US for years.

Events came to a head last month when Westinghouse was forced to file for bankruptcy protection to limit Toshiba’s losses.

Experts said the delays and cost problems were due to America’s lack of recent experience in building atomic power plants.

“I don’t think it is necessarily because of an inherent issue of US skills but rather the lack of practice,” said Richard Nephew, a professor at the Centre on Global Energy Policy, Columbia University. “There simply have not been as many new reactor builds in the US and this has reduced the overall pool of skilled labor, no question.”

The absence of a mass production supply chain, due to the small number of the Westinghouse-designed reactors being built, played a part too, he added. Regulatory issues had also delayed construction. …

Richard Morningstar, chairman of the Global Energy Centre at the international affairs thinktank Atlantic Council, said: “What is happening to Westinghouse and Toshiba only emphasises the need to double down on research on new, safe, nuclear technologies, such as small modular reactors. If we do not do so in the US, leadership will be ceded to other countries.” …

One such aspiring atomic leader is the UK, where the government wants to build a new generation of nuclear power stations to help satisfy the country’s power needs for decades to come.

But there are obvious parallels between the two countries on the issues of recent experience and supply chains. The UK has not completed a new nuclear power station since Sizewell B on the Suffolk coast started generating power in 1995.

EDF, the French state-owned company which has started pouring concrete at Hinkley Point in Somerset, where it plans to have two reactors operational by 2025, maintains it has had plenty of recent practice.

The EPR reactor design for Hinkley is the same as that for the reactors it is building in Finland, and at Flamanville, in France, though both of those are running late and over budget.

The other new nuclear projects proposed around the UK, all by foreign companies, look less certain and all are still years from construction starting in earnest.

Toshiba said this week it would consider selling its shares in the consortium behind another plant planned at Moorside, in Cumbria, which would utilise three of the same AP1000 Westinghouse reactors being built for the two crisis-hit US plants.

The South Korean power company Kepco last month expressed an interest in buying into the project, and the business secretary , Greg Clark, went to South Korea last week for talks on collaboration on nuclear power. …

Justin Bowden, GMB national secretary, said: “The big moral of the story is what on earth we are doing as a country, leaving our fundamental energy requirements to foreign companies or foreign governments?”

While the government has argued that it has plans in place to keep the lights on if new nuclear projects do not materialise, others said the deepening crisis at Toshiba this week showed the need for ministers to consider a new energy policy.

“It’s time to come up with a new plan A,” said Paul Dorfman, of the Energy Institute, at University College London, who believes the Moorside project is dead. “It’s time for a viable strategy that talks about grid upgrades, solar, energy efficiency, and energy management.”

A report published on Thursday highlighted another alternative: a U-turn on the Conservative party’s manifesto commitment to block new onshore windfarms. Analysis for the trade body Scottish Renewables suggested wind turbines on land had become so cheap they could be built for little or no subsidy, compared to the lucrative contract awarded to EDF for Hinkley.

But the prospect of a rethink by the government on wind power looks about as likely as new nuclear power stations being built on time.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/apr/14/toshiba-us-nuclear-problems-uk-cautionary-tale

What SHOULD super-Mayors (and LEPs) be doing?

This is what a think tank believes Mayors (and by extension Local Enterprise Partnerships) SHOULD be tackling.

Can anyone see any of these issues being given attention in our Devon and Somerset super-mayoral area?

… Mayors are due to be elected in May in Greater Manchester, the West Midlands, Tees Valley, Liverpool City Region, Cambridgeshire/ Peterborough and West of England, the latter an area based around Bristol.

The IPPR said its evidence base showed mayors should deliver inclusive growth by using their transport policy to prioritise poor neighbourhoods, establishing development corporations and championing the living wage and higher employment standards.

They could improve infrastructure by integrating land use planning and working with central government on housing investment and seek to embed health in all public policy.

The IPPR also urged mayors to set up companies to pilot ‘invest-to-save’ models in employment support, and to collaborate with councils to tackle homelessness….”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30775%3Athink-tank-urges-new-mayors-to-make-full-use-of-powers&catid=59&