Title

Hazel Blears at a local radio station in London last week, launching the new engagement White Paper Just like motherhood, apple pie, raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens, last week's ‘engagement' White Paper's basic sentiments are hard to fault – who after all could possibly oppose involving more people in the democratic process? And few could fault the fervour of the paper's architect, the irrepressibly enthusiastic Hazel Blears, for whom building more community engagement in governance is a key driver of her political career. But the question many on the local government circuit are asking is why the subject requires legislation just two years after the last White Paper launched by Ruth Kelly, how it will be implemented and just what further layer of red tape is heralded in such plans as the new duty to promote democracy. National media coverage has also reacted with some bemusement, ranging from the quirky (prizes to encourage voting) to the predictable (more elected mayors) and the downright hostile (if Hazel Blears wants to encourage participation just give councils real financial powers). However the core theme in the paper Communities in control: real people, real power, about councils encouragin Seven key White Paper themes: Being active in the community £2m fund for the disabled £70m Communitybuilders fund faith groups to provide services encourage volunteering Access to information council duty to promote democracy extend ‘duty to involve' from April 2009 £7.5m empowerment fund for third sector Having an influence council duty to respond to petitions councils to lead petitions relating to PCTs inspections to regard petitions as evidence participatory budgeting for every council by 2012 incentives for voting more neighbourhood councils residents' say in commissioning of services Challenge regular public hearings for top officers Redress community contracts community pledgebank review into extending redress, early 2009 Standing for office Widdicombe rules amended more budget powers to ward councillors employers' information pack formal accreditation for members return of aldermen and alderwomen Ownership and control new asset transfer unit to enable community ownership more community land trusts new CLG social enterprise unit more social enterprises to bid for council contracts g more involvement by the public in local governance, should no longer be in question. Most councillors accept that ticking a box in a polling booth every few years is not the only way residents should be allowed to participate in council affairs. As Hazel Blears said in an interview with The MJ (July 3): ‘Participatory democracy doesn't threaten representational democracy. It's an empty argument that is in the past.' And with often abysmal turnouts at their local elections, councils should be keen to welcome any initiative that encourages response, feedback and participation among its residents. Councils' community leader roles combined with the new area focus of the CAA and the LAA targets all point towards a greater need to ensure local engagement. The principle that councils must devolve down in return for central Government devolving more to them is also now cross-party. In his speech to the LGA conference a fortnight ago David Cameron said his ‘bargain' to councils - should he ever be PM - was that he would reduce inspection and grant more powers but in return they must devolve more to local groups. The LGA reacted to the White Paper with caveats, its chairman Sir Simon Milton saying giving local people more say was highly welcome but adding: ‘It is through representative democracy that elected councillors make tough decisions based on the interests of residents and this should remain the lynchpin of involving people locally.' And he also said that the duty to promote democracy ‘must avoid prescription.' But there are challenges. One is ensuring that devolving more powers and scrutiny does not simply mean delegating to interest groups. Residents' associations for example may be representing the views of their members in blocking, say, a development plan for social housing but the council, especially in its community leader role, has to take a wider perspective. The paper also says council chief executives and cabinets should face the public in more regular hearings. While a sound idea it must come with a health warning, namely that people who turn out on wet Monday evenings to grill their councillors and officers are not themselves necessarily representative. They tend to be older, retired, or with particular axes to grind. And the new duty to promote democracy could be manna for the tick-boxers. Most of the proposals, such as better information, support for members, or ‘getting people involved,' are surely already operating. Presumably some officer in democratic services will now be allocated the task of putting these into an accessible list so the ‘duty to promote' box can be ticked. There are also a stack of contributions from the School of Stating the Bleeding Obvious. The paper opens with a ‘what can I do?' box accompanied by a ‘sticky' presumably so it can be fastened to a noticeboard or fridge. Such advice includes going to the council website, petitioning it, setting up a neighbourhood council or becoming a councillor. Many proposals such as responding to petitions or ensuring accountability of officers already take place. The paper also assumes there is pent-up demand by the public to be involved in local governance. While there are doubtless many residents', even tenants' groups, keen to acquire extra powers by setting up as neighbourhood councils or run assets, most of the public remains content to be uninvolved in the time-consuming business of running things. A key task for councils must be therefore how to tap into this resource, the silent majority, who represent no interest group other than themselves.

Title

WHITEHALL

Are the public ready to take the call?

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING