No doubt our Local Enterprise Partnership is on the case. What, it isn’t? What a surprise! Wasn’t “connectivity” one of its responsibilities?
But perhaps it won’t be long before Hinkley C gets its own station to make up for such losses!
Will we be seeing DCC transport supremo Stuart Hughes commenting on this? Hhhmm …
http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/hands-off/story-29925191-detail/story.html
Autumn Statement 2016 – Cities, regions, and nations
3.49 Local infrastructure – The government will award £1.8 billion to Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) across England through a third round of Growth Deals.
£556 million of this will go to the North of England,
£392 million to LEPs in the midlands,
£151 million to the east of England,
£492 million to London and the south east, and
£191 million to the south west.
Awards to individual LEPs will be announced in the coming months. This funding of local infrastructure will improve transport connections, unlock house building, boost skills, and enhance digital connectivity. The government will give mayoral combined authorities powers to borrow for their new functions, which will allow them to invest in economically productive infrastructure, subject to agreeing a borrowing cap with HM Treasury. The government will also consult on lending local authorities up to £1 billion at a new local infrastructure rate of gilts + 60 basis points for three years to support infrastructure projects that are high value for money.
3.50 English devolution – The government remains committed to devolving powers to support local areas to address productivity barriers. The government will continue to work towards a second devolution deal with the West Midlands Combined Authority and will begin talks on future transport funding with Greater Manchester. The government will transfer to London, and to Greater Manchester, the budget for the Work and Health Programme, subject to the two areas meeting certain conditions, including on co-funding. The government has also confirmed the Greater London Authority’s (GLA) affordable housing settlement, under which the GLA will receive £3.15 billion to deliver over 90,000 housing starts by 2020-21, and will devolve the adult education budget to London from 2019-20 (subject to readiness conditions). The government will continue to work with London to explore further devolution of powers over the coming months.
3.51 Regional productivity – The government has published a strategy setting out an overall approach to building the Northern Powerhouse, through addressing the key barriers to productivity that the region faces. The government will also publish a Midlands Engine strategy shortly.
3.52 Northern Powerhouse Investment Fund and Midlands Engine Investment Fund – The Autumn Statement confirms the arrangements for these funds, and the British Business Bank will make its first investments from the Northern Powerhouse Investment Fund in early 2017 to support local SMEs and its first investments from the Midlands Engine Investment Fund shortly after.
3.53 Scotland – The government will work with local partners and the Scottish Government towards a city deal for Stirling. The government has confirmed funding for city deals in Aberdeen and Inverness, is making progress towards a deal with Edinburgh, and will consider proposals for a deal with the Tay cities once they are brought forward, meaning all Scottish cities have the opportunity to agree a city deal. The government is also continuing to work with the Scottish Government to implement the Scottish Government’s fiscal framework and new powers set out in the Scotland Act 2016. (37)
3.54 Wales – The government is making good progress in discussions with local partners and the Welsh Government on a city deal for the Swansea Bay City Region. It will also consider options for a growth deal in north Wales and looks forward to receiving proposals from local partners. The government is also continuing to support the implementation of the £1.2 billion city deal for the Cardiff Capital Region, which was agreed in March.
3.55 Northern Ireland – The government continues to work closely with the Northern Ireland Executive towards the introduction of a Northern Ireland rate of Corporation Tax, subject to the Northern Ireland Executive demonstrating it has placed its finances on a sustainable footing.”
Remember, that small amount of money for the south-west has to be shared with:
Swindon and Wiltshire LEP
West of England L
Dorset
Cornwall …
… Devon and Somerset
Not quite the Mighty Boosh then, our LEP!
What they have in common is, now The Donald has won his election, he is involving his family, his own businesses and his cronies in his political appointments and “strategic” decision-making.
If we have an elected Mayor with vested interests in Devon or Somerset or Devon AND Somerset, what checks and balances do we have to stop the Mayor putting his or her own interests first like The Donald?
If we get a Mayor with Hinkley C connections can we be sure that, where a decision on Hinkley C conflicts with a Devon interest, the Devon interest will have equal weight? Or vice-versa if the Mayor is Devon-centric.
And what if the Mayor has allegiance to neither county – only a national interest as a developer, a developer’s friend or is a large developer’s shareholder. What then?
We all know of politicians and business people with dubious reputations. Few politicians and even fewer members of our Local Enterprise Partnership are trusted. Who can we trust to represent us all?
“… local authority funding (for services) will become far more volatile as year to year income will be intrinsically linked to those who pay rates locally and those who choose to appeal. So, in sum business rates devolution in its current guise is less about devolved power and more about the devolution of risk and the associated, potentially negative, effect on services. …
… In 2016, there is no such thing as the UK housing market, rather a polarised collection of divergent, individual markets (hyper-dynamic price inflation in London versus low demand and price stagnation in parts of Liverpool & East Lancashire, for example) bearing little or no resemblance to the situation at the time of the last revaluation some 25 years ago.
The effect of this is an increasingly unfair council tax banding where a resident in Blackpool in a Band A property currently pays 35% more in council tax than a resident in a Band A property in Kensington and Chelsea, where average gross earnings are more than double that of those living beside the Pleasure Beach. …
… So far, devolution has only served to deflect risk and responsibility for the local effect of national cuts and add a further layer of complexity to an already intractable local government governance system. The lack of real power in devolution deals to date does not fully equip places or the incoming City Mayors to effectively deal with the challenges of the modern economy whilst driving tax revenue.
Without true devolution of power, the potential contribution of local government towards a prosperous future for people and place is in danger of drowning in a mire of unnecessary fiscal constraints and excessive levels of localised risk.”
Any council in Devon prepared to call time on the Somerset/Devon deal so Devon can stand on its own two feet? Not EDDC for sure – Diviani and Williams are enjoying themselves too much with the Local Enterprise Partnership …
“Plans to devolve powers to Norfolk and Suffolk with a mayor have been scrapped by the government in their present form.
It follows Thursday night’s vote by King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Council to overwhelmingly reject the deal.
The devolution plans were set to bring to the East £750m over 30 years for infrastructure and £130m for housing.
The new set-up would have given the new authority road and housing powers from central government.
A meeting of Norfolk County Council due to take place on Monday to consider devolution has been cancelled.
Analysis by Andrew Sinclair, BBC Look East Political Correspondent
I am told the Local Government Secretary Sajid Javid has decided that the deal can’t go ahead in its present form.
As a result Norfolk County Council has cancelled Monday’s meeting when councillors would have voted on the plan.
But Suffolk is being told to continue with its meetings next week as ministers feel Suffolk devolution on its own may work.
Norfolk County Council leader Cliff Jordan said: “The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government has been clear throughout the devolution process that for a combined authority to be set up all participating councils would need to consent to his draft order. As a result of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk’s decision, we understand the Secretary of State will be writing to the Norfolk and Suffolk authorities to take the current devolution deal off the table.
“I will be making clear to the Secretary of State that Norfolk County Council continues to be willing to discuss alternative proposals.”
Jennie Jenkins, chair of Suffolk County Council’s public sector leaders group, said she was disappointed by King’s Lynn’s vote.
“We will be seeking to explore the potential for a Suffolk-based devolution deal and to investigate options for establishing interim governance arrangements for any such alternative deal,” she said.”
In an article on the London School of Economics website by Bob Hudson, a Professor in the Centre for Public Policy and Health, University of Durham, he argues that the current process has four major deficits and goes i to detail about each one. The four are:
Democratic Deficit
Constitutional Deficit
Financial Deficit
Strategic Deficit
An interesting comment on the article from Malcolm Bell reads:
“The whole trend in contemporary government is to suppress democracy and impose control by unelected elites. The principle is established in the EU where the commission trumps the elected Parliament. Devolution to the regions is intended to develop this theme. The British government is rapidly changing to decision-making in the increasingly remote “executive” as the House loses control. It used to be said that we had an elected dictatorship, that is rapidly being replaced by an unelected dictatorship of the elite. Accountability is almost entirely a thing of the past, this is not accidental but deliberate policy.”
So much for sovereignty of Parliament!
And does our Local Enterprise Partnership value tourism in its ” growth” agenda? Not on your life, unless you count trips around Somerset nuclear plants, perhaps! And does EDDC have a dynamic tourism strategy? Attempts to find a councillor “champion” for tourism on the EDDC website were fruitless.
“New figures have revealed that the value of tourism in East Devon is continuing to rise.
In 2015 alone, tourism contributed £3.5million more to the local economy than it did in 2014, rising to £252.5million.
“The figures come from a new report provided to Visit South Devon and the Devon Tourism Partnership, which analyses trends in tourism year-on-year.
The latest findings show that UK-originated and overseas trips to East Devon increased four per cent to 521,000 trips in 2015, compared to 502,000 trips 2014.
The average number of nights per East Devon trip rose by eight per cent, equivalent to 166,000 additional nights in the local area.
Associated spend by tourists visiting from outside the local area leapt by £7.6million to £117.3million in 2015.
However, income from day trips fell by £4.1million to just over £135million – equivalent to a three per cent drop.”
“A member of the landmark Layfield inquiry into local government finance has said the government’s devolution drive is unlikely to succeed because not enough fiscal powers have been localised.
George Jones was speaking at an event to mark 40 years since the publication of Sir Frank Layfield’s review, which called for a new constitutional settlement between central and local government. He echoed one of Layfield’s recommendations, saying devolution would need some kind of local personal taxation if it was to be successful. The Layfield report had called for a local income tax in its report in May 1976.
Asked if the current round of devolution was limited or doomed, he said: “I’d say it is doomed because, in all the schemes, there’s no devolution of fiscal powers other than business rates, which are irrelevant because they don’t bear on voters.”
Jones said the Layfield report focused on political responsibility and accountability rather than the technicalities of rates and grants, which gave it considerable constitutional importance.
“It proposed a choice based on two sets of arrangements – one based mainly on central responsibility and the other based mainly on local responsibility.”
Layfield argued no system of local government finance would be satisfactory if it did not follow from a “desired pattern of relations”, Jones added.
However, the Labour government led by Jim Callaghan did not opt for either of these arrangements, nor a middle way with minimum standards paid for by grant. Instead, the government pursued what Jones called a “muddle way” that was not clear where the main responsibility for local government finance should lie. This confusion allowed centralisation to increase in subsequent years, he said.
Both central and local government were embarrassed by Layfield, Jones argued, as it had raised fundamental questions they did not want to answer about the distribution of power in society.
Also speaking at the event, Sir Michael Lyons, who led a review of local government funding published in March 2007, agreed that Layfield pointed to a different way of running the country. Like Layfield, Lyons said, his report concluded that changes to local government finance could not effectively happen without its role being made clearer.
“Like him, I stressed there was no simple magic formula,” Lyons told attendees. “I said that key debates had to be about the key relationship between the centre and localities – not a simple call for devolution but a new contract that established very clearly those things that are national entitlements and those things that should be left to local determination.”
The government was also embarrassed by the scope of his proposed reforms and, in particular, was “petrified” they would be caught out on the issue of council tax revaluation.
While the coalition and the current governments had shown interest in devolution, it was a permissive kind, with rules councils had to meet. While business rates localisation was interesting, it was “manifestly not” the way to reach a new constitutional settlement, he said.
“If I’m working for an individual authority looking to further the interests of my community, I would take every opportunity that came along, believing that there is no appetite for the big questions set out in Layfield. I wouldn’t criticise folk for doing that, but it no more than a partial, limited improvement from where we are.”
Also speaking at the event, Tony Travers, the director of the Greater London group at the London School of Economics and chair of the London Finance Commission, said this amounted to “centralised decentralisation”.
He added: “If you have a system as centralised as this one, decentralisation is part of a centralised process, so it is very much step by step,” he said. “It is such a centralised system that even a tiny step towards decentralising a little bit of service freedom requires not only the Treasury to be convinced of it, but the service department. It is where we are starting from that makes this such a difficult process.”
Mike Owen, chief executive of Bury Council, said the Layfield report had highlighted a series of issues – including who held the purse strings and controlled public services – that were still of importance today.
Layfield had decided local autonomy was the right way to go. “This was absolutely right,” Owen concluded. “It really did start a debate that has gone on for 40 years, and that is a great credit to Layfield and a great credit to the report itself and to the [inquiry] committee.”
http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/devolution-doomed-says-layfield-inquiry-member
Lincolnshire County Council in late October voted against having an elected mayor (see below).
Will it be back on the cards now Javid has said clearly ” No Mayor, No money”?
Imagine – this is a single county voting against it, where we are being forced to take a two-county deal – two counties with very different aims and objectives which would have one mayor deciding alone on differing priorities.
And has anyone worked out how much these extra tiers of government will cost, offset against the very small sums being offered over 30 years – sums already cut from local authority budgets and for which less is being handed back than taken away?
Has anyone thought about the effect of the myriad “partnership deals” each district and city has already signed with other devolution subsidiaries which may conflict with mayoral interests (eg Greater Exeter v. Somerset v devolved Somerset/Devon or the Strata IT project (4 councils) v a devolved authority IT project?). p
Here is what they said in Lincolnshire:
“Lincolnshire county councillors have decisively rejected a proposed devolution settlement and directly elected mayor.
A total of 43 councillors voted against the proposals at a meeting on Thursday, October 20 [2016], with 17 voting in favour and five abstentions.
Many councillors expressed their anger at the plans for an elected mayor, a perceived failure of government to listen to their concerns, and fears of two extra layers of local government bureaucracy. …
… Councillor Colin Davie, portfolio holder for economic development, was another high-profile dissenting voice.
He said: “What we have on the table is a dog’s breakfast of a deal. We have a contract that has holes in it, and if I was in the private sector, I would never sign a deal like this.””
Alongside business people with dubious business interests, our Local Enterprise Partnership has three leaders from further and higher education. All of them blindly follow the mantra that economic growth is the only thing that government should be concentrating on.
This is what Public Service Finances currently has to say about this sector:
“The financial sustainability of higher education is uncertain, according to the government’s university funding body.
The Higher Education Funding Council for England said its analysis of the latest financial forecasts submitted by higher education institutions showed some could prove unsustainable by 2018-19 due to inadequate surpluses, declining cash levels and increased borrowing. …
… Financial forecasts to 2018-19 showed a widening gap between the lowest and highest-performing institutions.
Surpluses were projected at 2.3-4.3% of total income, which HEFCE called “relatively small margins in which to operate, particularly in an uncertain external context”.
Student number projections showed predicted growth of 10.3% among home and EU students and a 26% increase in fee income from international students, to £4.8bn by 2018-19.
HEFCE warned the sector might find these goals hard to reach due to a declining cohort of 18-year-olds, uncertainty about EU students’ long-term eligibility for loans and grants and potential changes to student immigration rules.
“These challenges, taken together, could have a significant impact on the sector’s financial projections, even if the currently weaker pound assists in the recruitment of international students in the short term,” HEFCE said.
Universities and colleges expect to invest £17.8bn in infrastructure over the next four years, 51% more than the previous four-year average.
However, within this total though nearly a quarter intended to cut their infrastructure spend, even though across the whole sector £3.6bn still needed to be spent to bring non-residential buildings to a sound condition.
HEFCE said the sector’s trend of falling liquidity and increased borrowing had continued with borrowing expected to exceed liquidity levels by £3.9bn at July 2019.
It described this as “not sustainable in the long term”.”
http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/hefce-issues-warning-university-finances
So that’s that – either Devon will be ruled by a Somerset super-mayor, or Somerset will be ruled by a Devon super-mayor or BOTH will be ruled by a super-dodgy-business-person with vested interests in one or both counties!
Speaking to the County Councils Network on Monday, the local government secretary said:
“… he was open to reorganisation proposals, such as that put forward by Buckinghamshire County Council to abolish its districts and form a county unitary.
This proposal was “exactly the kind of proactive, locally driven thinking I want to see”, he said.
While not committing commit himself on Buckinghamshire’s plan, he said: “Unitary status can be a great model…but I’m not for one moment saying it’s for everyone. This is not compulsory. It’s not going to be imposed.
However, he dashed hopes that he would allow devolution in county areas without the creation of elected mayoralties.
Former chancellor George Osborne had insisted on mayors as a condition of devolution deals but after his departure some county leaders hoped to change this policy.
Javid told the CCN: “I get that directly elected mayors aren’t universally popular within local government. And I know that’s especially true of the counties.”
He recognised arguments that counties were too large for one person to control but said: “I’m not going to devolve significant new powers and more taxpayers’ money without a corresponding increase in local accountability.”
Mayoralties would be “a real red line for me when it comes to negotiating devolution deals”, he added.”
Owl has lost count of the number of tiers and organisations and partnerships currently interfering in so-called “local” government, see:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/11/03/unitary-councils-save-money-yet-a-few-years-ago-they-didnt/
Which leads to the question: just how many tiers of government do we NEED and how many can we AFFORD? And how many is too many?
For example, the savings by eliminating district councils, regional super-authorities and makeshift arrangements such as Greater Exeter would almost certainly be huge. You could still have flexible cooperative arrangements such as Strata, without having all the paraphernalia and bureaucracy.
Anyone campaigning for the County Council who includes on their platform local government reorganisation, with County and Parish Councils as the only tiers of local government might well be very popular. It would be possible to combine such a package with maximum localism/subsidiarity. For example, if the District Council was dissolved, all its responsibilities, where practicable, could be transferred to the lower tier councils for truly local management.
Removing two or three tiers of government would almost certainly produce enough savings to eliminate local NHS cuts and debts at a stroke. “Save the NHS by cutting local government bureaucracy” would be a heck of a slogan!
And the elimination of all that bureaucracy and repetitive form-filling and buck-passing could bring enormous efficiency savings and productivity.
In East Devon we would probably be immediately £15-20 million better off just with the cancellation of the new HQ at Honiton.
Whilst many staff would be transferred to town councils to continue to do the jobs that they presently perform, there would probably be a loss over time through natural wastage of perhaps 100 to 200 jobs, representing a cost saving of £3-5 million per annum. Plus reduced operational running costs of around £2 million.
This means a cash windfall of about £300-400 per household to everyone in the District, and average council tax bills would be about £130 lower.
But the big benefit would be in greater efficiency and local connectivity. A huge democratic boost.
Discuss!
A report of a meeting of local Green Party and Devon United groups in south Devon:
“DEMOCRACY – LOCAL:
The meeting in Kingsbridge last week demonstrated, through the participation of a small, engaged and knowledgeable group, that the topic of Devolution has yet to excite a broader segment of the local population.
The group present, largely drawn from Totnes and Dartington with a majority representing the Open Democracy group, Devon United, engaged in a serious and considered debate of the merits and limitations of the present Devon County Council devolution prospectus.
The discussion was greatly facilitated by a thoughtful and grounding presentation from Professor Chris Balch who was able to set the present proposals in a broader historical and geographic context as well as highlighting some of the conclusions from his research on the role of the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs).
The group, which included County and District Councillors from Green, LibDem and Tory parties, worked towards a conclusion which suggested action on two fronts:
1. The Constitutional Question – at some stage, if the present proposals are supported by Government in the Autumn statement, Devon and Somerset County Councils are bound to consult their resident populations more directly on their intention to create a Combined Authority for Devon and Somerset to incorporate the interests of County and District Councils and Unitary Authorities.
This consultation exercise is unlikely to lead to a local referendum, but there will be an opportunity, probably in the Spring 2017, for a concerted campaign by progressive parties and independent groups to express concerns about the formation of another tier of local Government and one which seeks to combine two Counties for the convenience of an unelected LEP.
As Julian Brazil so clearly stated in his opposition to this proposal, the Combined Authority would be directly in support of the highly problematic nuclear power station, Hinkley Point C as well a significant defence industries unidentified within an Aerospace label, both located in Somerset.
SDGP members are encouraged to join with Devon United and other progressive groups to mount an effective campaign of education and mobilisation once the consultation is announced.
The Economic Prospectus
– it is clear that DCC has no intention of consulting on the content of the Devolution Prospectus.
As Chris Balch pointed out, this is essentially aimed at meeting central Government’s requirements for economic growth through ‘high value added’ industrial sectors. The whole basis of the highly optimistic outcomes of the prospectus in terms of jobs and wages is assumed through growth of large scale enterprise in Exeter and Plymouth, in Data Analytics and Marine Industries respectively, and significant growth in housing.
The group agreed that an ‘alternative prospectus’, based on a broader understanding of the economy of the County and on progressive values and concerns could provide the basis for an election campaign by Green parties across Devon along with Independents and other progressive candidates.
At present a small group of Green party members from across Devon is working on such a prospectus and Robert Vint, for the LibDems, proposed that a broader alliance might engage with this work recognising established topics with democratic legitimacy.
Subsequent to the meeting Alan White and Georgina Allen, initiator of Devon United, have published a set of ideas on the South Devon Watch facebook page.
Common themes to emerge so far include:
Affordable Housing
Renewable Energy
Farming, fishing and food
Support for Micro- small and medium sized enterprises
Health and social services to recognise the population and geography of the County.
As one would expect from the Green Party’s core values, each of these topics combines economic with social and environmental implications, and that has to be emphasised in the alternative prospectus.
While there were a number of points of view expressed in the meeting towards differing geographical areas that might constitute an effective location for devolution of fiscal responsibilities and services, it was unanimously recognised that England is, by far the European country with the most centralised form of government. As the present proposals for devolution really do not address this issue, with primary negotiations clearly being with Government on their terms, the alternative prospectus also need to consider how we would intend to engage the relevant population in a discussion that could affect their lives far into the future.
The group at the meeting responded to a number of questions suggested by the notion of ‘Resilient Community’ fundamentally based on the recognition of identity with Place and People as the foundation for local politics. It was clear from the attendance at the meeting and many of the comments made that a politics based on Place and People needs to be rebalanced with the present politics based on party positions and power.
Members are encouraged to engage in the development of campaign strategy and support through attending relevant meetings and engaging in the growing discussion on social media.”
Owl is confused.
A few years ago, EDDC spent more than £250,000 to persuade us – and the Government – that they should NOT be forced to amalgamate into, basically, a “Greater Exeter” OR a unitary authority.
NOW:
We have East Devon District Council
We have Devon County Council
We have Greater Exeter – EDDC, Mid-Devon, Teignbridge and Exeter Councils – the very thing EDDC fought only a few years ago
We have STRATA – an IT partnership between EDDC, Teignbridge and Exeter but NOT Mid-Devon
We have the Local Enterprise Partnership – all of Devon and all of Somerset
AND
Research apparently reveals that unitary councils could save several billion pounds:
“Creating 27 unitary councils across the whole of England could save as much as £2.9bn, according to an independent analysis of local government reorganisation options undertaken for the County Councils Network.
The report by consultants EY examined six different single and two-tier governance scenarios for county and district authorities, using existing county boundaries. Based on the analysis of national data, EY found that creation of unitaries along county boundaries could save between £2.37bn and £2.86bn over five years, and average up to £106m per county. The single unitary option has the shortest payback period, generating savings within two years and two months, according to the review. …”
Owl’s head hurts…
” … HotSW LEP is committed to delivering the benefits of our strategic work and funding bids to the companies and communities that fall directly within our area. These are our partners and are stakeholders in our successes and achievements. Sometimes business interests don’t neatly match administrative boundaries and for some time we have been working where appropriate with our neighbours on common campaigns or programmes.
Elsewhere in the country, the numerous LEPs in the Northern Powerhouse and the Midlands Engine also work together on their common agendas.
So we’ve been working with our LEP partners in Dorset and Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly to form a new thought-piece to market our area and its growth agenda where these cross our boundaries; which we’re calling Connecting the South West as a working title. It’s early days, but there’s real commitment in this group to build on the years of expert evidence building and strong Strategic Economic Plans that have risen from the government’s mandate to generate growth through LEPs and localism.
It’s often the case that when there is a mood and an appetite for change, that several organisations are on a similar journey, albeit in different ways. Earlier this month saw the South West Growth Summit – organised and led by Pennon and the Western Morning News – welcome businesses and local leaders to discussion panels and an inspirational speech by Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Sajid Javid, who hailed the South West as an area with “almost unlimited potential”.
We expect more to happen on this theme in the coming months and years as the South West embarks on its renaissance.”
http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=4e59660292bd6b4a5c7d7b8a7&id=e747106254&e=fa5cdb1f18
“Uncertainty surrounded firm devolution plans for some areas before Brexit. But what about now? This timely post gives a useful update on what we can expect next on the big issue for our regions.
By PANEL WRITER Will Mapplebeck
Back in June, just before the Brexit vote, I wrote a blog post for comms2point0.co.uk called Eight Things You Always Wanted to Know About Devolution But Were Afraid to Ask. Given that quite a lot has happened since then, I thought it might be worth an update.
1. It’s not going anywhere
Despite some ‘wobbles’ at the start of Theresa May’s premiership when it appeared the policy of having directly elected mayors might be ditched, it appears that devolution is still a ‘big deal’ for Theresa May’s Government. The elected mayor elections are still on (see point 5) and the Government is still talking to and encouraging applications from groups of local authorities for devolved powers.
2. A new buzz phrase – inclusive growth
Back in June, I pointed to the fact that devolution had a strong economic case behind it, but that the social aspects were growing in importance. This is the idea that you can’t really create growth if you leave people behind as this actively damages the economy. This policy direction towards inclusive growth – making sure everyone shares in the proceeds – has continued, perhaps driven by Theresa May’s surprising play for the centre ground in her first speech as PM. The key message from Core Cities UK and others – see the RSA’s Inclusive Growth Commission interim report – is that inclusive growth can only happen at a local level, and will only happen when places are given more freedoms and powers.
3. Brexit changed everything… and nothing
The biggest decision in post war British politics was bound to cause a few high profile casualties, but so far the idea of more power to place has not been one. In fact, there’s wide acceptance that the reasons behind people voting to leave was partly due to a sense of alienation from mainstream politics and a feeling of helplessness in the face of global economic forces. People wanted to ‘take back control’ and devolving powers to local level gives them a chance to do that. There’s also a general cross-party understanding that, whatever the outcome of Brexit, our cities and other places remain relatively underpowered compared to their European Counterparts and our country is one of the most over centralised in the World.
4. Move over Northern Powerhouse, there’s a new slogan in town
While at Conservative Party Conference in Birmingham, I couldn’t help noticing that Midlands Engine was everywhere – the subject of numerous fringe programmes and receptions. Last year, in Manchester it was another slogan that sounds like a bad gay nightclub, Northern Powerhouse. Make no mistake, the powerhouse isn’t dead, despite being tied strongly to former Chancellor George Osbourne, but the Midlands Engine is the slogan of choice in various parts of Government at the moment.
5. The Metro mayors are coming
Metro mayor candidates are now lining up for battle in May, don’t under-estimate how visible they will become when they are elected in Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Tees Valley and the West Midlands (South Yorkshire’s mayor is still the subject of debate at time of writing). Metro Mayors will make sure they become the go-to for media comment and they’ll be full of ideas to raise their public profile, proving they are actually doing something. Expect new mayors to zero in on issues like transport and housing, everyday things that make a difference to voters. Interestingly, there are no high profile independent candidates, the idea of a ‘celebrity’ mayor like Terry Christian or Alan Shearer doesn’t seem to have materialised.
6. Cities still at the heart, but other places need some love as well
One big criticism of the devolution agenda that it was all about cities, big cities. I work for Core Cities UK, so I’m a little bit biased on this point. For us, the economic evidence is clear – they are the country’s economic driver and given more freedoms – like their European counterparts – and they will do far more for UK Plc. But Theresa May has signalled that other, smaller, places are important too.
7. Not everywhere got a deal… or a mayor
George Osborne would have liked mayors to cover all the big cities, but political infighting and suspicion of the Government’s agenda put paid to that. Some big areas, notably the North East and West Yorkshire, ended up with nothing at all although talks still continue. Devolution is about more than just mayors, but the Government has stayed true to the original idea that if you want the best deal, you need to accept the idea of a mayor.
8. Remember, it’s still all about the people
I’m going to say it again, at the end of the day all this policy theorising and political manoeuvring comes down to people. People’s services, homes, jobs and lives. If you want to communicate it well, think about the difference it will make and what will actually change in terms of everyday life.”
Must be a credible figure … now, THAT is going to take some finding! From Devon or Somerset? Career councillor or business person? Nuclear interests or not? LEP member or not? Brexiter or not? Developer or not? Ruralist or Urbanist? And where is DCC, Greater Exeter and EDDC in all this? …
AND Sajid Javid manages to disparage tourism and older people in one paragraph.
“Ambitious devolution plans for Devon and Somerset need an elected mayor, the region’s economic leaders have been warned. Sajid Javid, secretary of state for communities and local government said there has to be a credible figurehead for economic growth for the Government to be prepared to hand over powers for investment, transport and infrastructure.
He made the stark statement at the South West Growth Summit, a major meeting of business leaders, politicians and academics from across all sectors in the South West.
The assertion comes as all 17 Devon and Somerset councils reach a critical stage in their bid for devolved powers – and the sticking point is the need for an elected mayor.
Mr Javid said that only an elected mayor could bring the kind of ambitions devolution that the region is calling for. To a packed Reed Hall at the University of Exeter, the minister, who is an alumni, said: “If you want an ambitious devolution deal then you have got to have a mayor.”
And he argued that Cornwall’s Devolution Deal without an elected mayor was not ambitious and did not involve any hand over of money. “What’s the point of going down that route?” he said.
Mr Javid called for the region to have one voice on its plans for economic prosperity. In a region that is challenged by disparate communities and historical rivalries, he said: “If you are going to make a success of the south-west that whole attitude has to change.”A region of collaboration and co-operation can make a difference. It has to happen,” he said.
The beauty of the region means as strong reliance on tourism, but it is a double-edged sword, he warned. “It perpetuates the idea that this is a low skill and part-time economy. It is not just a sunny playground for the rest of the country nor a retirement community for Britain’s pensioners.”
He said the 3 million population of Devon, Cornwall, Somerset and Dorset were leading the way in aerospace and creative industries and it is a question of taking that message to the rest of the country and the world.
The South West Growth Summit was hosted by the Pennon Group in conjunction with the Western Morning News and the region’s Local Enterprise Partnerships. The debate held at the event will go on to help form a Growth Charter for the South West, a document that will be presented to the Government ahead of next month’s Autumn Statement.
The region’s MPs joined business leaders to discuss a number of key issues facing the region, including keeping the brightest talent and attracting investment.
Connectivity in terms of mobile and broadband coverage and investment in the road, rail and air routes continue to be high on the agenda.
Chris Loughlin, Chairman of the Pennon Group called for the region to embrace the digital revolution, the kind of business that makes a virtue of working in remote communities.
He said that the region must decide what the South West is and formulate a concept to rival the Northern Powerhouse or Midlands Engine to capture the collective consciousness. “It is essential that we have a clear unified voice to stand up strong for the South West.”
“The company building Britain’s first nuclear power station for 21 years has been ordered to shut down five more reactors in France for emergency tests.
The order from the French Nuclear Safety Agency is a further blow to the finances and reputation of EDF, the state-owned company behind plans to build an £18 billion nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset.
It brings to 12 the total number of French reactors being examined by experts to determine whether they contain hidden weaknesses in their reactor pressure vessels, a key component that houses the reactor.
Theresa May approved plans for Hinkley Point, which will generate 7 per cent of Britain’s electricity, last month, despite intense criticism of the high price tag and concerns about EDF’s reactor technology.
The safety agency’s order for EDF to shut reactors at Civaux, Fessenheim, Gravelines and Tricastin for tests has also sparked concerns that the group, the world’s biggest nuclear generator, may struggle to meet French demand for electricity this winter. Nuclear power provides nearly 80 per cent of the country’s electricity.
French power prices hit a four-year high yesterday amid fears of a supply crunch. Experts also warned of a possible impact on the UK, which imports French electricity during periods of high demand in January and February.
Dominic Whittome, an independent energy consultant, said that the shutdowns would mean “less spare electricity to export to Britain” at a time of tight supply margins, after the closure of a string of ageing British coal stations.
Greg Clark, the business and energy secretary, signed a final contract for EDF to construct two European pressurised reactors at Hinkley Point on September 29. The French group has a two-thirds stake, while China General Nuclear has a one-third stake in the project.
However, EDF is grappling with controversy after the disclosure last year that the reactor pressure vessel at a similar plant that it is building at Flamanville in Normandy contains unusually high levels of carbon. Experts say that this could make the structure unsafe.
Amid fears that the Flamanville vessel could crack once the plant enters service after 2018, France’s nuclear watchdog ordered stress tests on other reactors. These have highlighted a series of problems.
There are also financial concerns for EDF, which has debts of €37 billion. A total of 21 of its 58 French reactors are now shut down, either for scheduled maintenance or because of the nuclear watchdog’s demands. Le Monde said that EDF was losing €1 million a day for each of the reactors currently off-stream.
A spokesman for EDF said that the 12 reactors undergoing tests would be returned by the end of the year.”
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/edf-ordered-to-switch-off-five-reactors-3zsnzbl6b
This Friday … Exeter University … usual suspects … best place to do business … opportunities … vision … spin … more spin … puff … more puff … and:
“After the summit, the aim is to develop a South West Growth Charter, backing Local Enterprise Partnerships with a strong business voice to complement the work being done by local government leaders. This will be presented to government ahead of the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement next month, where he will set out the government’s economic plans.”
Ah, yes … now Owl gets the idea! A re-brand for our LEP to make it look more democratic … good luck with that one.
QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR VINT
Re: HOTSW and Economic Development Consultation
“When drafting the economic development elements of the Heart Of The South West Devolution Prospectus how were the primary employment, housing and social needs of the region identified, and how were residents and small businesses consulted to help identify these needs?”
REPLY BY COUNCILLOR HART
“On the 19th September 2016, I gave a presentation at a Member Development Session on Devolution which is available on the Councils website at
The presentation is clear in setting out the next steps for the partnership.
In respect of further engagement with key stakeholders in the development of our joint economic priorities; this will be undertaken through the development of a Productivity Plan. This plan will replace the current Single Economic Plan developed by the Local Enterprise Partnership and is an opportunity for all local authority partners and stakeholders to fully engage in developing proposals that will deliver greater prosperity across the Heart of the South West.
The Partnership is starting work on this in Autumn and will be engaging with groups through to Spring. Members will have the opportunity to consider the draft Productivity Plan before final approval.”
This presentation also set out a timetable for formal public and stakeholder consultation starting in the early New Year on the creation of a Combined Authority and a draft deal with Government.
At this meeting I did, however, emphasise that this timetable is subject to Government formally engaging with the Partnership.
I can confirm that the Partnership is not actively engaged in formal negotiations with Government and therefore this timeline will be amended.
The Partnership is clear that it will only go to formal public consultation when it has an offer from Government for the public and stakeholders to consider. I will, of course, continue to keep Members updated on progress with Devolution.
East Devon Watch 