What do leaders need to make a bigger difference in the civil service?Click here to join our online discussion in the Make a bigger difference group.
September 22, 2011 by Suzannah Brecknell
Comments (0)
localsim, local government funding
It's no surprise to hear debates about localism at the Liberal Democrat party conference – it’s a central tenant of their identity. One key theme this year seemed to be the crucial link between power and money.
At a fringe discussion on planning reforms, one audience member complained of central government’s reluctance to devolve meaningful financial powers to councils, and his point was supported by Stephen Gilbert MP, who said he was hoping for “fairly radical things” from an ongoing review of local government finance. At a later discussion on the future of localism, employment relations minister Ed Davey made a case for introducing local income tax and said that “unless we fundamentally grasp as a government the disparity between power and money at central and local [levels]; we will never grasp a true localist agenda.”
Leaving aside longer-term calls for reforms to local funding or taxation arrangements, delegates also pointed out that money – or at least resources – will be an important factor in the success or otherwise of the coalition’s current localising agenda.
At the planning discussion, a number of audience members and speakers made the point that communities will need expert support if they are to take a meaningful role in local planning. That support is likely to require resources from somewhere, and with central and local government both feeling the pinch, that presents a problem.
The argument that communities will need support to take advantage of localism applies to many other areas, and of course the government plans to train an army of community organisers who will provide some of this help. But is there more that civil servants can do?
Perhaps there are innovative ways that central teams can help communities, service users or frontline staff without huge resources? And if they decide to do this, how can they walk the line between central support, and central management which would undermine the point of the localising reform?
If you are in a policy team wrestling with this issue, or a frontline team with ideas on the support you'd like, please do share your thoughts below.
