As the Local Government Bill makes its way through parliament, a small section of the Bill has caused great anxiety in London. The legislation paves the way for the creation of parish councils in the capital. This is in keeping with the Bill's purpose – creating stronger communities by devolving powers down from the centre. While localism is a sound principle, and one that should be encouraged, I believe parish councils could be very harmful. Instead of empowering communities, they run the very real risk of tearing them apart. You need only to cast your mind back to last year's local elections to see one of the dangers – when an extremist party very nearly gained control of one London borough. Then there was the story about a recent BNP leaflet in Barking and Dagenham which was designed to increase racial tension within the community. Parish councils could provide another avenue for extremist groups to try to split a community along racial or religious lines. Even if a parish bid ultimately failed, simply petitioning in the streets could increase community tensions. And what would happen to the population of a parish that was set up following an extremist party's successful campaign? What would happen to the rights of ethnic minority communities living within that parish? Who would guard their interests? Local government has a duty to promote community cohesion – and the misuse of the parishes must not be allowed to undermine that duty. But the extremist element is only one side of it. What if a particular group of people viewed parish councils as a way of separating themselves from the rest of the greater community in which they lived – a Passport To Pimlico scenario, whereby, as in the 1950s Ealing comedy, a group of residents declared their own independent state? Most London boroughs have areas which see themselves as different – often with better housing, shops and local facilities. Residents in these areas may seek to separate themselves from the problems of the wider community by setting up as a parish council. Maybe they oppose a specific council policy, a parking scheme or a new school, for instance. The narrow concerns of a small area could dominate and overturn the greater needs of the community as a whole. As I have said, I am not opposed to the concept of parish councils. The idea of powers being handed down from the Government is a sound one, and most London councils are doing it in ways that suit local circumstances. However, devolution should not come at the cost of community cohesion. London Councils lobbied on this issue last year, and we were delighted that secretary of state, Ruth Kelly, intends to devolve the decision about whether a new parish should be set up from the Government to the local authority. However, we believe that the current wording in the Bill will not provide enough protection for a council faced with this decision. We need to ensure that, if a local authority opposes the setting up of a parish on the grounds of community cohesion, it is secure to make that decision. The fear of legal challenge could prevent local councils from making the right decision for their community. This is unacceptable, and we will continue to lobby the Government to ensure democratically-accountable councils will be secure in their ability to decide what is right for their community. Cllr Merrick Cockell is chairman, London Councils
