Decentralisation and Localism Bill
Posted by Diane Abbott, MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington, at 16:03, Mon 17 January 2011:
Later today the Localism Bill will enter its second reading in which MPs will debate it's general principles and vote on whether or not it should advance to committee stage.
The Government's aims for the bill are admirable: the bill will seek to grant local politicians greater decision making powers and will aim to empower citizens while diminishing the responsibility of Whitehall in this area. This Bill will definitely change the face of Local Government substantially, but I am interested in your views as to whether this will be a change for better or for worse?
The Government claims that the Bill will reduce costs, cut bureaucracy and empower local officials to make their own decisions, as well as be held to account to local residents.
However councillors from all three major parties across the country claim that by introducing this policy whilst simultaneously issuing crippling frontline cuts to local services, the Government is merely shifting blame away from itself and onto local officials, whilst handing them an impossible task.
Your experiences, views and opinions are extremely important to me in the work I do as your MP, so I hope you do feel encouraged to have your voice heard. If you would like to know more about the work I do in Parliament or would like to get in touch with me, please visit me at www.dianeabbott.org.uk. For those on Twitter you can also follow me at @hackneyabbott.
Diane Abbott MP
Comments
If you are subscribed to HearFromYourMP in this constituency,
log in to post a reply.
Otherwise, if you live in the UK,
sign up in order to
HearFromYourMP.
Posted by Martin Ridley, 16:41, Mon 17 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
Diane,
My issue is that this is driven by reducing cost not choice or improvement to services. If a council decides to cut support for the old or infirm or reduce support to children in difficult situations we will simply see greater failure to look after the vulnerable. I am also worried about the Politicisation of the Police through elections of Chief constables. I do agree with local choice but I want a national minimum standard for key services that must be delivered. Martin Ridley
Posted by Jon Theo, 16:42, Mon 17 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
I have no doubt that one of the reasons the Localism Bill has reached this stage is because the government sees it as a way of shifting the blame onto "poorly performing" local councils and officials (many of which are Labour controlled: of course it depends on how you define "poorly-performing"). It seems a fairly transparent strategy to me.
However, this still does not diminish the importance of devolution of government down to the local level. I am sceptical that the current government however, really believes in this. The last government certainly didn't. Anyone who has any experience of community groups and local politics knows that most local officials and groups have enough problems getting anyone apart from themselves engaged enough to think about and comment on even the most crucial local issues. Most people are more concerned with the pressing issue of earning enough money to pay their rent, bills and debts.
I have not read the Localism Bill, but unless it makes some financial provision to encourage the formation of local policy-making associations and groups formed from ordinary members of the public - crucially these must have NO party political affiliation - then the legislation will likely lead to nothing more than a few more committees forming within the council.
If, however, the bill were to make it worth people's while to be involved with policy-making decisions, i.e. they would benefit financially in some way, then this would mean people of all persuasions might start to take an interest in local affairs. Then the Localism Bill might actually have some teeth. The fact is changing the face of politics costs money - just like everything else in our horrribly corrupted society :) However in the present climate of stringent cuts I doubt there's any new money being stumped up to make the provisions of the bill effective, and therefore it will be up to local politicians and community groups to try and enourage participcation from the wider community, for free.
In conclusion I think the Localism Bill should go through, but I wonder how effective it will be without some extra "carrot" to encourage participation from local people.
Posted by Yusuf Molade, 16:51, Mon 17 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
Seems like a good idea as it is often hard to know who should be held accountable for certain occurrences in the local area. There are so many elected bodies that it is very difficult to know who to turn to when you have a complaint.
Posted by Alias Cummins, 17:22, Mon 17 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
Can you repeat the question in less than 500 words?
Can you vote yes or no? What's the labour party line? No I suppose? Impossible tasks are good for people, they build character.
Will it make a lick of difference? You never listen to my opinions, and now I'm a thought criminal thanks the whole "violent porn" thing that you wouldn't even consider talking about.
Alias Cummins Unimpressed with the lot of you.
Posted by Michael O'Sullivan, 20:41, Mon 17 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
Wouldn't it be cheaper to get rid of hackney council, made up in my experience largely of time serving pen pushers, and privatise the lot? No I'm not a tory, just fed up with that lot after living in the borough for over 2 decades!!!
Posted by Paul Treloar, 22:33, Mon 17 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
At the same time as Jules Pipe is bemoaning the ~10% cuts to Hackney Council's budget from central government, he is overseeing a 70% cut to funding for pan-London voluntary sector services through the London Council's grants programme. The "repatriated" funding is not ring-fenced and only 2 councils, (not Hackney obv) out of 33, have expressly said that they will ring-fence the funding for VCS groups.
If that is a reality of "localisation", I feel deeply suspicious of the motives, outcomes and equity of any such measures introduced. Services for BME communities will be decimated under these proposals, which go for vote by the Leader's Committee on 31/01/11 - Pipe and Labour are completely discredited by their actions in rushing through these hasty cuts.
Posted by Pastor Ola Akinleye, 01:06, Tue 18 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
We voted to empower the politicians to govern us. They are there to represent the people. Devolution of governance to the local level or the people, to my understanding, is making mockery of serious business of governing. So then, no wonder the Nation's economy is drifting in the direction undesired! I am of the opinion that the bill is not essential, and leaders should take charge and govern; with the people they represent at heart.
Posted by Margaret Pitt, 12:43, Tue 18 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
What's the point of devolving 'power' if local authorities rely for most of their funds on Central Government. I believe Council Tax provides only around a quarter of what local authorities need to spend. This is a sham sort of power. Especially with the swingeing and front-loaded cuts being imposed. It will make it easier for the Tory led goverment to blame local authorities when they have to cut front line services and jobs.
However, as a retired public sector worker, I do welcome the prospect of reduced control by central government if it means less performance targets and endless provision of data. Thanks to the contract driven culture and central government requirements, monitoring and report grew from around 10% of my work to 50% before I retired in 2009. And who had time to look at all the reports we e mailed or uploaded on to the internet??
Margaret Pitt
Posted by Simon Treen, 13:18, Tue 18 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
I broadly support this bill. Personally I think it will be hard to shift blame as we all know that the Tories are the ones swing the axe on public services.
Posted by John Knight-Barnard, 15:01, Tue 18 January 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
A lesson from the past.
At the time,I became chairman of a local committee of volunteers, experts and council officers, I was advised by one of the latter that the real decision-making would take place in the Council about three months prior to our discussing the matter!
If HMG intends to treat this bill in a similar way, we may be kidding ourselves re decision-making but become liable for the financial consequences.