Central government departments aren’t exactly covered in glory right now. So why do they still think they can run local government services? asks Jo Dungey Centralisation isn’t working. The Government has faced a series of recent political controversies which highlight this. The Home Office has faced unprecedented criticism, about the failure to implement the law on deportation, and the poor administration of immigration. There is to be judicial review of the former home secretary’s plans to create regional police authorities. Parts of the country have serious shortages of social housing, or of the occupational skills needed for secure employment in the modern economy. Yet the Housing Corporation or the Learning and Skills Councils are not held to account for this. More and more of our public services are run by appointed boards, driven by top-down directives. One positive route out of these problems, based on decentralisation and real democracy locally, is set out in LGIU’s new pamphlet, Whitehall to town hall: strengthening democratic choice. This pamphlet, part of the LGIU’s Making local democracy work campaign, argues that democratic local government is undermined by the many local services provided by quangos – now estimated as 50 to 60% of local public spending. Far from tackling the issue of quangos, the current government is expanding their role. New government proposals – to amalgamate police forces, abolish local probation boards, and create much larger Primary Care Trusts – are based not on devolution and localism, but on creating fewer, larger units of service delivery and decision-making. The pamphlet argues that this expansion is neither popular nor effective. To investigate the issue, the LGIU commissioned an opinion survey from YouGov. A representative sample of the public was asked what approach – choosing up to two – they thought was best to run local services. Of the poll, 31% said elected councillors and 28% service-users, such as parents and tenants. Only 8% said boards appointed by central government. The survey revealed that despite all the criticism levelled at politicians, the public still would prefer elected representatives making decisions on their behalf. It is striking that in 1998, the Government endorsed the European Charter of Local Self-Government (1) which, in principle, was intended to enhance the role of local councils. However, the Democratic Audit of the UK in 2002 reviewed our democratic arrangements, and said (Politico’s, 2002): ‘In effect, local government has been reduced to a system of local administration, subject to a central regime of legal restraint, policy rules, spending controls, inspection and audit’. It is vital for the future of service provision that the Government recognises the capacity of local government, and delivers on its stated support for double devolution. The Government should acknowledge that, on its own terms, councils are running things well. The Lyons review and the forthcoming local government White Paper must set out proposals to reverse the growth of quangos, in favour of a newly empowered local government. This would strengthen democracy and expand local choice. n Jo Dungey is a policy officer at the Local Government Information Unit
