Some years ago I had a long stint (3 terms) as a local councillor. Local government has changed in various ways since then, but I remain very well tapped-in locally and have plenty of first-hand perspectives. I like to think I've seen, and indeed participated in, some genuinely useful Local Authority actions over the years. Lots of folk reckon that giving local people "more say" in matters makes for better, more informed decision-making, as well as creating an important cadre of people that step up to take responsibility for stuff. Doing this for the most part in the properly-constituted, formal Local Authority framework is only right to protect all concerned. But we can also applaud, for example, the many benefits of healthy local media organisations, albeit precious few local newspapers survive that are worthy of the name.
From Burke and his "little platoons", through Simon Jenkins and his localist enthusiasms, to Andy Burnham et al with some decent track record to display, there are many advocates of wholesale transfer of powers to local authorities. I should stress that I, too, see major benefits of localisation in sectors where / governance arrangements under which, it is shown to work in practice. These should be carefully identified and reinforced. But there are just so many examples of utter nonsense in play. To take just a few:
- Lutfur Rahman
- the outrageous goings-on at the Teesside Development Corruption - sorry, Corporation, that would disgrace a banana republic
- Rebecca Long-Bailey
Ah, LRB - remember her? In a substantial pre-GE 2019 document (by weight, that is, not genuine substance) she planned to hand the whole of our energy infrastructure, physical and supply, over to local authorities (the irony! when you see what a cock-up they've always made of their energy endeavours), right down to the level of parish councils and even "local communities ... of around 200 homes"; and of course all workers in the sector to be unionised. 200 homes! That's when you know you're dealing with a doctrinaire head-case. OK, nobody ever paid it any serious attention at the time; and she languishes, whipless, on the back benches now, having been the "continuity Corbyn" candidate in 2020, thoroughly trounced by Starmer, and reduced to feeble parliamentary protest-votes. But still, it shows what some people mean by localisation.There are other worries, too - see this article by the intelligent-for-a-Grauniad-writer Martin Kettle.
The Labour government itself is of course deeply conflicted on all this right now. More power for LAs - but don't dare stand in the way of our house-building or energy plans, because we ain't gonna let you. Ah yes, local people know best - until they run into a Thatcher or a Starmer who "really knows best".
What do we all think?
ND
15 comments:
'Local people' - another vanishing breed. As I understand it the whole of Sussex (East and West), primarily rural in nature a few largish towns is due to be joined with Brighton, a major city with its own distinct social fabric and financial needs. That's where the lion's share of funding will go - straight into the loony money pit.
"Local people' - another vanishing breed."
30-odd years ago my wife was district nursing, and in various Cotswold villages she'd hear from a patient that "I'm the only local left in the village, all the rest are incomers". My current village has been transformed over the last 25 years, the postmasters, farmworkers, nurses are now IT directors and the Range Rover has replaced the pickup as the most commonly-seen vehicle.
Can Bradford have its reservoirs back? On second thoughts, given the corruption at the heart of the Labour Clowncil, might as well leave them in the hands of the slightly less incompetent Yorkshire Water...
Should we reverse the Londonised control of the hospitals? That, after all, is what the NHS means.
My father was a public-spirited chap - the Harbour Trust, the Savings Bank, the Sea Scouts, cheap letting of allotments, and funding a prize at the Academy.
But when invited, several times, to stand for the Council he vigorously rejected the idea. His public-spiritedness tended to be based on a feeling that he had a duty to protect the "sma' folk" and he thought that that was not how the Council tended to view its duties.
He was supported in this view by my mother who had, when young, worked for the Council. As she said, anyone who couldn't finish a "day's work" there in an hour-and-a-half must be a dud.
Referencing the piece a few weeks back about The Prince of Darkness, is it time to add a MAGA cap to the drawing?
https://pbs.twimg.com/grok-img-share/1870020786301370368.jpg
Given my old stamping ground had to have the police turn up to the council meeting the other night, as a couple of Tory councillors started to square up, might be a hard sell around there. Plus, the place is a hole due to decades of mismanagement. Looks to be turning a corner though.
@BQ speaking of MAGA, looks like even Trumpism falls to O'Rourke's view that Republicans complain government doesn't work, and when elected, prove it.
I'm really hoping the last 24 hours isn't going to set the stall out for Trump's Presidency, where he's Musk's tail. Time was manchilds were not readily tolerated, now, so long as they're a fellow traveller, they are.
My experience of local gov is limited to running a small branch of the Tories (yes them) for a while, making local planning applications and knowing a few councillors socially. The less the public know about what goes into politics the happier they will be. From the inside the setup is pretty unappetising.
Councillors are mostly decent enough folk but the job does attract the bossy, the loud, the venal, the sharp elbowed and the mad. They can make life a misery for 'normal' people if not reined in.
Fairly rational for councillors to say no to development, nothing but trouble and the developer's lawyers will leap on any fool who said 'yes' and say 'why not us, we'll sue'. Add in lack of new roads, doctors etc etc and no one but a fool would want development.
Perhaps a 'Central Planning Authority' staffed by mouthfoamers armed with wide felt tip pens. Letter to XYZ council - start digging or we'll send in the CPA!
I remember South Wales councils, and Scottish ones for that matter, where they weighed the Labour votes rather than counting them, were bywords for corruption back in the day. Newcastle, Poulson, T.Dan Smith.
OT, but the WSJ has gone public on what most of us knew all along - that Joe Biden was pretty senile from the start. I still think the 2020 vote was rigged. Umpteen million more than Obama?
It seems that when one expounds what is commonly called a “conspiracy theory” nowadays after a while it becomes an acknowledged fact. I’ve been saying for years the 2020 USA election was rigged only to be told what rubbish that was. Thanks to cowering numpties like the WSJ, freed of vengeance for a few years, now coming clean we now see that the American people probably did not elect a demented, corrupt old fool.
Easier for the well connected local bigwigs to influence their local councillors through brown envelopes than central government cronies.
One of the key "reforms" they seem very keen on this time round is ditching District and County Councils in favour of unitaries.
My initial thought was that this was a moderately pointless as well as bad idea - round my way the Districts seem fairly well run and the County is fairly poorly run.
Then the penny dropped and I twigged what this is all about. The reason the District's are good and the Country bad is that the Counties has to fund the Social Care bottomless pit, the Districts don't. The main point of this reorganisation is to steal the District's money to stuff into the County's Social Care/Special Educational Needs black hole. This means the is a truly terrible idea, and should be resisted to the last man.
Adult social care needs fixing (and most of the SEN spend needs junking), but the fix isn't to destroy the best run of all the tiers of local government to plunder their budgets.
Post a Comment