Mike Hedges outlines the options he believes are viable for a reform of local government.
There are two statements that have almost unanimous support. The first is that we cannot keep on reorganising local government every 20 years and that the second is that the current 22 authorities covering the current service areas is not the right number for sustainable local government.
Interestingly at the time of the last local Government reorganisation there was almost unanimous support for the creation of unitary authorities with most of the criticism, except by existing County Councillors, about the merging of district councils to create some of the new unitary authorities. At the 1973 reorganisation it was again almost unanimously agreed that the small urban and rural district councils needed to be merged into larger district councils. It was also agreed that we needed uniformity across Wales and that led to the end of the previous county boroughs that were unitary authorities to be replaced by a uniform two tier system.
To change the number of local councils in Wales will inevitably be expensive and time consuming so if it is going to be done it must create authorities large enough to provide services and small enough to make residents feel connected, but more importantly able to last over 20 years.
Every suggestion so far has been based upon the existing Councils that were created in the mid 1990s as the building blocks. I suggest using the District Councils created in 1993 would provide smaller building blocks and an opportunity to draw a map much closer to communities. Obviously to split existing authorities will be more disruptive and slightly more expensive but if we want a long term solution then we need to accept disruption and also not be tied to boundaries, such as health boards, which may well change in the next few years.
Assuming that the Councils will continue to provide Education and Social Services then a population of over 200,000 is needed. I also remain unconvinced that Powys has to be left alone; if you need 200,000 people to provide services then it has to apply to all of Wales.
Suggested make up of such a map:
North West Wales-Gwynedd, Aberconwy and Ynys Mon/ Anglessey, Dwyfor, Merionydd and Arfon
North East Wales– Alyn and Deeside, Colwyn, Delyn, Glyndwr, Rhuddlan and Wrexham Maelor
Central Wales– Ceredigion, Dinefwr, Brecknock, Radnorshire , Montgomeryshire
South West Wales– Preselli Pembrokeshire , South Pembrokeshire, Llanelli and Carmarthen
West Glamorgan– Lliw Valley, Neath, Port Talbot and Swansea
Mid Glamorgan – Ogwr, Rhondda and Taff Ely
East Glamorgan– Rhymney Valley, Cynon Valley and Merthyr Tydfil
South Glamorgan– Cardiff and Vale of Glamorgan
North Gwent– Monmouth, Torfaen and Blaenau Gwent
South Gwent- Newport and Islwyn
These smaller building blocks give a greater opportunity to try and get a structure that is closer to communities.
Of course within that there is a case for minor alterations for example the Ystradgynlais area of Brecknock could come into West Glamorgan .
I do not believe everyone will see this map as the ideal solution but I hope people find it a great deal more rational than that produced by the Williams commission and that it can act as the basis for further discussion. We have also seen the map produced by the Welsh Government which sees a return to something similar to the former 8 counties and Plaid Cymru’s proposal to produce regional boards above the 22 unitary authorities.
If Social Services and Education are removed from Local Government Control or the functions carried out by area boards then there is, in my opinion, no need to change to larger councils.
In England services are divided as follows.
|
Service |
Non-metropolitan district |
||
|
Education |
|
|
|
|
Housing |
|
|
|
|
Planning applications |
|
|
|
|
Strategic planning |
|
|
|
|
Transport planning |
|
|
|
|
Passenger transport |
|
|
|
|
Highways |
|
|
|
|
Fire |
|
|
|
|
Social services |
|
|
|
|
Libraries |
|
|
|
|
Leisure and recreation |
|
|
|
|
Waste collection |
|
|
|
|
Waste disposal |
|
|
|
|
Environmental health |
|
|
|
|
Revenue collection |
|
|
Also the English Unitary authorities have control of Fire and rescue which in Wales has been organised into three Fire Authorities.
Derbyshire, with a population of about 1 million, has eight district Councils plus Derbyshire County Council and Derby as a Unitary Authority. It would appear that the size of the smaller Councils in Wales is suitable to act as a District Council but not to carry out the County functions that are carried out by unitary authorities.
I believe that we have three options
-
8 to 10 Unitary Authorities carrying out the current Council functions
-
The current Council structure but with Education, Social Services and regional planning carried out by joint boards
-
The current Council Structure but with some other body in charge of Education, Social Services and Regional planning.
Mile Hedges outlines the issues well. Of his three options, the first is least desirable: it would be the end of truly ‘local’ local government.
The second would be the best option if the boards were co-ordinating bodies that remained accountable to their constituent unitary authorities. Independent statutory boards, especially if directly elected, would be a return to the old two-tier system, which no one wants.
In his third option, ‘some other body’ can only imply the Assembly itself taking direct responsibility for education and social services. At first glance, this means more centralisation rather than decentralisation, and therefore falls to the same objection as the first option, that it makes government less local
Unless…
Here is a bold vision. If – huge if – the Assembly could abandon its ideological addiction to centralisation, it could use its powers over education and social services to decentralise to a level even below that of a unitary authority. In particular, it could decentralise management of schools to the schools themselves to an extent even greater that that being promoted in England. ‘All power to the schools’ might be a tough sell to the leftist education Establishment, but on the principle that ‘only Nixon could go to China,’ the Assembly could get away with it. On the same principle, social services could also be decentralised by more contracting out to local charities, community organisations, and locally-based enterprises.
Although this would go against all its dogmatic prejudices, it would have several advantages for the Assembly itself. First, it would finally find a useful role in local government terms. Second, it already has overall responsibility for these functions, but has so far failed to get a grip on them. Third, decentralisation is the surest way to improve those services.
The irony here is that this suggestion of how the Assembly could finally make itself relevant and actually do some good for the people of Wales comes from a Unionist who would happily see the whole mess abolished tomorrow – and it is made in the certain knowledge that it will be ignored and the mess will continue.
Mike Hedges offers a fascinating menu for considering how we might further develop local government in Wales. If only the Williams Commission had started a debate on such a menu rather than seek to close the debate with a presumption of ever further centralisation. As we consider the Hedges menu we might need to note that major services can usefully be unpicked. The support that schools might need in building maintenance, human resource and financial management can often be best provided quite locally; whilst the support that they might need in challenging performance improvement might be provided on a regional basis. Similarly the support that older people might need in their own homes can often best be organised on a local basis whilst the commissioning of residential and specialist care might best be done regionally. Given the need for flexible and detailed inter-relationships the option of managed networks of relatively small authorities might be the best and most cost-effective way forward.
I have reflecting on the issues of large and small local authorities for some time see https://pgriffithsblog.wordpress.com/home/
Unionist is the opposite of separatist. It is not the opposite of devolutionist. The opposite of devolutionist is centralist. I a a unionist and a devolutionist. JWR shows uncharacteristic confusion over terms.
Paul Griffiths is entirely right. Start with small atoms and combine them into bigger compounds as and when necessary. Avoid wholesale redrawing of boundaries. But is education a matter for local government at all? Wales has only 3 million people. Education policy could be a WG matter with local implementation the responsibility of government prefects, satraps or gauleiters. I get the impression some people would be happy with that for all state services and don’t see the point of local democracy at all. Own up GTD. given your views the preferred number of local authorities in Wales is one.
Good article, Mike.
There has been no discussion about the position of Powys, truth is that it is far too small to do the basics, uncertain about the proposed link with Ceredigion (still too small). Dyfed-Powys probably better.
Little discussion that huge placement costs (education/health/Social Services) can bust the budget of a small council. These costs are almost outside democratic decision making as no council can refuse to fund in the long run. There are some really tricky issues about local versus national commissioning that we have not sorted out.
Mr Tredwyn, at the risk of going over old ground, there is no confusion. As you know, those of us who oppose devolution have two practical objections to it: (1) the Assembly has been since its inception, and is likely to remain, subject to a centralising ideology, the latest manifestation of which is this proposed local government reform, so a believer in real decentralisation, to the lowest possible level, is more likely to get a better deal directly from the UK government than from the Assembly; and (2) far from killing nationalism stone dead as was promised in 1997, devolution has brought the Union closer to destruction, so we have solid support for our view that anyone who, in perfect good faith, likes to think of himself as both ‘a unionist and a devolutionist’ is basically kidding himself. Sorry to be so blunt but there it is.
To end on a conciliatory and fair-minded note, however, your second contribution to this thread is both sensible and, sadly, perceptive. There are very few us, on either side of the devolution debate, who really care about the localism of local government and true decentralisation.
22 or 6 local authorities are still too much and a waste of resources and too high a cost for the tax paying public. You remember them, they are the cash cows these faceless burocrats seem to think will pay for all their stupid programmes. Better government will come from one national body who control all the departments, but we also definately need more input and say from the general public and less from big business, unversitys, quangos, and other political lobbying bodies.
Jeff you have obviously never dealt with the Welsh Government directly, or you would appreciate why them running everything would be a bad idea, also one centralised monolith would mitigate against engagement with the general public not promote it!