By Ed Hammond, CfGS deputy chief executive
What's in a name?
The English local state is at the start of one of its biggest shake-ups in 100 years via the English Devolution Bill, currently before Parliament. It will set up a new model of local governance built around larger, unitary councils, and more powerful mayoral authorities – as well as a duty for councils to provide neighbourhood governance. In time, where and how decisions are made, where accountability sits, and how millions of people experience democratic life will all change. But if we’re making boundaries bigger, how will we also build a sense of identity for them that’s meaningful for residents?
In the 1970s – the last time local government underwent significant boundary changes – that challenge was largely ducked. Ask residents of Worksop if they identify with Bassetlaw. Or people living in Clacton if they think much about Tendring and the answers you’ll get are likely to vary from confusion to a simple shake of the head. While those institutions survived, the prospect of new councils and strategic authorities covering larger areas inevitably presents questions for legitimacy, belonging and connection.
The English Devolution Bill’s new duty for councils to provide effective neighbourhood governance may help to anchor place into new institutions. And right now we’re examining how councils can make the most of this. But it won’t be the end of the story. We also need to think about a wider system of place governance – how it can work and what can make it a success – can be realised.
We’ve always known good governance and a sense of place go hand in hand. Where people feel a sense of ownership and belonging to a place it can help them set priorities and a direction for what they want, collectively, to achieve – whether that’s through traditional representative democracy (electing people who will do right by the whole area) or active participation as citizens, through consultation and other forms of engagement. Without that sense of common understanding, governance risks becoming fractured – with councillors, and local people, unwilling to look beyond their own communities and, hence, unable to make strategic decisions in the interests of the wider area.
This comes into still sharper relief at the strategic authority level, where mayoral governance relies on local leaders being able to recognise that sometimes, where something is in the interests of their wider area, not every part of that area will benefit equally. Building this sense of place, of shared identity, is thus a critical part of building the capability for new institutions to prioritise and make decisions. So…
How do we do it?
There are probably several connected needs to address…
Intentional priority-setting for new authorities
You only get one chance at setting up a new authority, so setting its priorities should be at the forefront of every new council’s – and strategic authority’s – thinking. This absolutely includes thinking about how residents are directly involved in setting that direction.
New institutions need to convene and develop relationships with a wider range of partners
It is widely recognised that the success of strategic authorities hinges on mayors’ ability to work generously in partnership, and to convene local conversations, rather than by imposing their will on others. The same philosophy will need to inform the operation of new councils. Of course, in local government we know that partnership working is now in our DNA, but the commitment to this, for new institutions, may need to be one that is deeper and more meaningful.
Connecting communities to councils and authorities
Neighbourhood committees and other hyper-local governance arrangements will be vitally important but finding a way of coming together at scale is just as crucial. New authorities will need to think more creatively about how they put local people at the heart of policymaking.
Creating strong place-based systems of accountability and assurance
Making sure that new authorities work with other partners to ensure that services are being delivered well, no matter who is responsible, will give them a greater sense of legitimacy – a role for overview and scrutiny that is framed around the place, rather than just the institution of the council, will help with this.
Governance that brings the whole system together
Creating a “relational” constitution that puts collaboration and participation at its centre, can anchor those mechanisms – ensuring that a more pluralistic approach to policy development and decision-making is properly coded in to new authorities’ governance framework.
We have worked with some authorities to begin exploring these mechanisms – but as a sector we need to do more to understand how this can happen more generally, and more quickly.
All this is about creating, across a “place”, a governance framework for new institutions that is safe (in that it creates clear mutual accountabilities, and a framed for partnership and participation that happens in a predictable, consistent way) and meaningful (in that it directly contributes to the improvement of services for local people).
Join the conversation
As joint committees and shadow authorities are established at local level, and as new strategic authorities take shape, we are going to undertake further thinking on these issues – informed, we hope, by the councillors, officers and others with whom we work. If you have thoughts, we’d love to hear them!
All news