localism: community rights and challenges monday 10 september 2012
TRANSCRIPT
Localism: Community Rights and Challenges
Monday 10 September 2012
Conference Chair
Cllr Chris Millar, Daventry District Council
Localism and the Localism Act:An overview
East Midlands CouncilsAlan Waters, Learning & Development
ManagerLGIU
Building the Big Society throughthe Localism Act
Decentralisation – giving away power to individuals, professionals and communities
Big Society - people, neighbourhoods and communities have more power and responsibility and use it to
create better services and outcomes
Right to BidRight to Challenge
Right to Build &
neighbourhood planning
We have been here before?
Localism Act
• Introduced on 13th December 2010
• Passed final Commons stage 7th November 2011 and Royal Assent 15th November with key implementation April 2012 onwards
Headline areas of impact
• Powers to call referendum (Council Tax)• Power of General Competence• ‘Community Rights’ (Planning, Services, Assets)• Council / social housing tenancies and rents• Councils (governance)• FinanceIn short - touches on all areas of local
authority activity
A plain English guide to the Localism Act
Familiar language
• ‘local’; ‘localism’; ‘choice’; ‘community’; ‘accountability’; ‘freedom’; ‘decentralisation’;
BUTA wide range of views about what this
means in practice for local government; elected members and the ‘communities’ they represent.
What’s in a word? -‘community’
Different meanings under different parts of the Act (and the wider localism agenda)•Community Right to Challenge•Neighbourhood Planning•Community Right to Bid•Applications for Free Schools•Academy conversions.
Localism: What sort of hand is local government holding?
Different views of ‘Localism’
“ I think it is reasonable that councils shouldn’t use their new found freedom to saddle up the horses, arm their citizens and invade France. Apart from that, the world will be your oyster”.
Eric Pickles MP, Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government. Local Government Association Conference, July 2010.
Localism: What sort of hand is local government holding?
Different Views of ‘Localism’
‘The Localism Act is conditioned by the dominant centralist culture of central government… it could as well have been called the Centralism Act’
George Jones & John Stewart ‘The World will be your Oyster’
Reflections on ‘The Localism Act 2011’
Henry VIII Clauses
• These allow a Minister to use regulations to create new laws which have the same force as Acts of Parliament but which don’t undergo the same rigorous process.
• Localism Bill peppered with HVIII clauses.
Freedoms: General Power of Competence
• Framed as though local authorities can act as an individual (i.e. anything not expressly illegal)
• Duties still exist around e.g. competition, equalities; ‘reasonableness’ and Human Rights
• Secretary of State reserves the power to make orders preventing specific activities using the power
• E.g. no abolition or variation of any tax.
Restrictions: Council Tax Referendums
Requirement for local authorities to hold a referendum if they seek to set a level of council tax that this above the threshold considered ‘excessive’ by reference to regulations made by the Secretary of StateA centralising mechanism for the SoS to set the amount of council tax.
Devolving contentious issues
• Welfare Reform changes• Housing reforms• Budget reductions
Just the beginning
• Within the possibilities and constraints of the legislation elected members must map out their own political direction:
• There is no ‘blue print’ but central government will try to influence what happens on the ground.
It takes three to Tango?
• Must be seen as part of an even larger landscape encompassing
- Welfare Reform - Open public Services White Paper - Health Service & Police reforms - Reform of Local Government Finance - Public expenditure cuts - National Planning FrameworkA number of which have strong ‘localist’
characteristics
Localism is more than the Localism Act
Understanding the bigger picture
Localism and finance
Finance: ‘self funding’ – driving growth
• Reform of the funding of local government (from 2013) predicated on individual local authorities driving growth
- Community Infrastructure levy - New homes bonus - Reform of Business Rates - Discretionary RSG Stability of the system to fund services?
Open Public Services White Paper: ‘Right to Choice’
• Presumption toward choice in the provision of services
• Services at lowest possible level:– Individual services £ follows the individual– Neighbourhood services– Commissioned services
• Includes minimum standards, consumer champions and performance
Does the future of Local Government look like this?
A new role for elected members?
Government policy in one phrase (or two)
• “This means replacing top-down monopolies with open networks…so that governments at all levels become increasingly funders, regulators and commissioners…instead of attempting to run services.”
• …• “In place of a one-size-fits-all approach…we
are making sure that the taxpayer’s money follows the decisions that each individual makes, so that priority is given to what the individual believes is in their own best interest.”
• Open Public Services 2012 – 29th March 2012
Role of members
• Currently have influence over direct services or contracts and partnerships
• Delivery models, within financial constraints, currently broadly shaped by councillors
Current accountabilityDirect service
Partnership agreementContracted service
Members
Future accountability?Service 4(national charity)
Service 2(local
voluntary)
Service 3(local firm)
Service 1(national
firm)User
National Trustees
Local board / trustee
Sole Owner
Members?
Regulator?
Indicators?
Shareholders
Role of Members in the future?
• Future potential for myriad of diverse type and scale of providers –
• Local government to act as a backstop?• Residents have contractual relationship with
providers?• Is this still in essence the same type of
constituency work as before?• Become “citizen champions” and commissioners
– “Compare the council .com?”
New skills & new roles for councillors?
• As a ‘commissioner’ of services • Contractor• Partnership builder and co-ordinator• Scrutinizer • ‘Facilitator’• Community champion and advocate• Monitor of ‘council contracts’ with local
citizens.Review of member training needs and
support
LOCALISM: A LOCAL AUTHORITY PERSPECTIVE
Cllr ROGER BLANEYLeader, Newark & Sherwood District Council
Newark and Sherwood
Area: 65sq m: largest DA in Nottinghamshire
Population: 114,800: 2nd largest BUT fastest growing 9.7% increase in households (2001-11)
“A district of three thirds”
Newark and Sherwood
Conservative/Independent administrationExecutive Leader and Cabinet
BUT
Commitment to Committee-based governancefrom May 2013
Newark and Sherwood
3 Town Councils51 Parish Councils22 Parish Meetings76 Total
Community Right to Bid
• Due to start in July. Now delayed until 12th October• LAs required to draw up and maintain list of “Community
Assets”: buildings and land (but not services)– Identified by LA– Nominated by PC or “locally connected”
voluntary/community body• Moratorium on sale of “community assets” until
community have had:– Opportunity to express interest in buying (6 weeks)– Subsequent opportunity to raise funding for purchase
(6 months)
Community Right To Bid
• “Right to Bid” NOT “Right to Buy”– Does not force sale– Only applies to freehold sale/leases over 25 years– No right of 1st refusal to PC/community group (as
Scotland)– Owner free to sell to any bidder
• Protected period of 18 months to dissuade against repeated attempts to block sale
Community Right To Bid
• Open to appeal against listing by owner• LAs responsible for paying compensation to
owners for “real costs” incurred in going through CRtB process (funded through government’s “New Burdens Assessment”?) But:– Legal/admin costs of handling appeals borne by LA– Liability for commercial losses from unprofitable
shops/pubs?• Listing last 5 years. Process repeated
“Potential to be expensive, bureaucratic nightmare”
Community Right To Bid
• NSDC: Drawing up list of Community Assets – liaise with PCs etc
• Concern about resource implications• Ambition of CRtB absolutely right. BUT
Beware “Law of Unintended Consequences”• Delay in sale of Community Assets may be
counter productive• “A Tale of Two Pubs”
Community Right to Challenge
• In place since 27th June• Opportunity for “relevant bodies” to submit “expressions
of interest” (EoI) to run LA services• If EoI accepted, LA must run procurement exercise• Can consider social economic and environmental well-
being of area in tender selection process: (Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012)
NB: Delegation of function NOT of responsibility
Community Right to Challenge
• Only includes services which LA currently provides – less relevant to “lean and mean” councils
• “Relevant body” does not have to be local - from other parts of the county, even country- “dog eats dog”
• Potential to over-ride rigidities of LA boundaries– could help charities serving ‘virtual communities’ (e.g.
people with disabilities)
Community Right to Challenge
• Duty of Best Value (September 2011)“secure continuous improvement in way
functions are exercised, having regard to economy, efficiency and effectiveness”
– Same service at lower cost; or– Enhanced service at same cost
Community Right to Challenge
• Procurement exercise triggered by “relevant body” BUT, thereafter, open to all– Serco? Capita?– Wolves in sheep’s clothing?
• “Chicken carcase council”
Community Right to Challenge
• EoIs for easier to deliver parts of a service• LA left to provide remainder at higher unit
cost (c.f. Royal Mail Universal Service Obligation)
- TC’s v PC’s?- Cluster solution?
• Note: LA can seek bids for larger or more complex service than EoI proposed
Community Right to Challenge
NSDC• Be proactive, not reactive• Engage with “relevant bodies”• Establish clear time-lines for EoI’s
– Schedule of services– Specify periods for submission
Community Right to Challenge
2013 March – April: Submission of EoI’sMarch – August: officer assessment and analysisSeptember: recommendation to Cabinet/CommitteeOct – Dec: preparation of tender documents and procurement process
2014 Jan – Sept: procurement / OJEU processOct – Dec: transition management, TUPE contract performance
and risk management frameworks
2015 April: go live
*Assumes minimum 3 year contract of c£170k (to fall within OJEU)
Community Right to Challenge
• Strategic commissioning: -“getting the right things done, in the right way, at
the right time, for the right price”
• NSDC:-– Considering each priority service in turn– Engaging with providers/potential providers– Commission services to meet the key outcomes
for the community
Community Right to Challenge
• Strategic Commissioning:- – Initial 4 pilots
• Mandatory service– Food Hygiene inspections
• Discretionary services– Tourism– Palace Theatre
• New Service– Growth Investment Fund
Community Right to Bid and Right to Challenge
“ A victory for democracy over bureaucracy” Eric Pickles
Sam AshbyBig Society and Community Rights DivisionDepartment for Communities and Local Government
Localism, Communities and CouncillorsHow will the Localism Act work on the ground?
The Challenge
‘There is a gap between the kind of future to which most people aspire and the future they are likely to create if they carry on thinking and behaving as they do now’
Matthew Taylor, RSA June 2011
The Strategic Context
• Financial climate is difficult and will remain so for the next few years
• Innovation is needed• Councillors can enable local communities to use
local knowledge and expertise to help improve local services and neighbourhoods
• Central government is an enabler: enthusing, informing, networking and supporting
Localism, Decentralisation, Big Society
Is the vision…
LocalismLocalismIs the ethos…Doing everything at the lowest possible level and only involving central government if absolutely necessary
DecentralisationDecentralisationIs the process…Giving away power to individuals, professionals, communities, local councils and other institutions
Big SocietyBig Society A society where people, neighbourhoods and communities have more power and responsibility and use it to create better services and outcomes
What Difference Will the Localism Act Make?
Right to Build
Neighbourhood Planning
Right to bid (assets of
community value)
Right to Challenge
Powers to Communities
Transparency
Governance and Accountability
Freedom over governance structures
Autonomy for local government
Greater control over
finance
Freedom to act(General Power of Competence)
Freedoms for Cities
The Role of Councils and Councillors
• Leaders of communities – councillors are democratic representatives of their local communities
• Greater powers over issues that matter to communities - councillors can use provisions in the act to foster greater localism and community engagement
• Councils are champion of public services in the area - working with other parts of the public sector
• Commissioner of services - in partnership with communities
New Rights For Communities
Neighbourhood Planning
Right to Bid Right to Challenge Right to Build
Gives communities a fair chance to bid to take over land and buildings that are important to them. Provides time and support to bid for assets
Gives community groups with ideas on how to run local services differently and better the right to challenge councils to run services
Gives communities new way to gain planning permission for small new developments – homes, shops, businesses, facilities - in their area
Gives neighbourhoods greater influence in deciding where facilities should be and the development they want locally. Plans subject to a local referendum
Community Right to ChallengeCommunity Right to Bid
Right to
challenge
Right to
bid
1. Community or parish identify
assets of community value
2. Local authorities hold and control a
list of assets of community value
3. Communities get time and support to bid for assets
4. More communities take control of
local assets
2. Expression of interest from VCS, charity, parish, or
staff
3. Relevant authority reaches a decision on
the expression of interest
1. Relevantservices are subject to challenge
4. Authority accepts, or accepts with modification then runs a
procurement exercise, or rejects and publish reasons
for rejection
Community Right to Challenge
Relevant services
subject to challenge
Voluntary or Community
Group
Charity
Parish Council
Relevant Authority
Staff
Expression of
InterestR
elevant Authority
Accept
Accept with modification
Reject
Relevant authority
undertakes procurement
exercise in line with legal
requirements
No procurement triggered; relevant authority publishes reason for rejection
1
Time during which expressions of interest,
can be submitted
2
Time for authorities to reach a decision on
expressions of interest
3
Time between accepting expressions of interest and
starting a procurement exercise
List of Assets of Community Value
List of land nominated by unsuccessful
community nominations
Community Organisation
Neighbourhood Planning Forum
Parish Council
Local Authority decides to list asset
No objection from owner
Owners objection unsuccessful
Owner’s objection successful
Local Authority decides not to list
asset
Added to list of Community Value
Local Authority publicises and maintains list
Community Right to Bid
Owner decides to sell listed asset and informs
Local Authority
LA informs nominator and publicises to community
Window starts when owner tells LA of intention to sellInterim window of opportunity ends
6 w
eeks
Full window of opportunity ends
6 m
on
ths
Owner can sell to community
group
Where Next?
• Helping communities use the new rights
• Helping local authorities to understand their duties and implementing the Right
• Support programmes launched
http://mycommunityrights.org.ukhttp://mycommunityrights.org.uk
Workshops
Workshops
Workshop 1 Community Right to Challenge: a ‘right’ for the community?
Delegates with Orange dots attend this workshop first, in Suite 1
Workshop 2 Community Right to Bid – learning from the Highfields Centre, Leicester
Delegates with Green dots attend this workshop first, in the Fernley Suite
Alan Waters, Learning & Development Manager, LGIU
Community Right to Challenge:
A ‘right’ for the community?
‘Your Community Rights’: CRtC
Community Rights: CRTC
“It enables communities to challenge to take over local service that they think they can run differently and better. The Right to Challenge could be used to run a wide range of local services”.
(Your Community Rights)
Community Rights:CRtC
• Minister announces £30m Community Rights funding
• Andrew Stunell, Communities Minister, announced on Friday 6 July that there will be £30m available to help local communities use the Community Rights, including the £11.5 million Community Right to Challenge programme. Communities with good ideas for how they can run local public services and want to use the Community Right to Challenge, can access advice and support to develop their skills to be able to bid for and run excellent local services.*
(Your Community Rights Website)*No information about how to apply for these grants.
CRtC – Statutory Guidance
• A shift of power from Whitehall back to communities
• ‘Creative authorities welcome innovative ideas from communities about how services can be run’.
• CRtC ‘may act as a springboard for radical reshaping of services’
Andrew Stunell – Ministerial foreword
Central Government isn’t giving power to councils to
then see it recentralised locally
Grant Shapps :
Localism Act: new right of contestability to allow organisations to
challenge councils to consider new ways of working
‘Localism’ & Decentralisation
71
Community Right to Challenge
• Only applies to England – though devolved administrations can introduce similar legislation
• CRTC provides ‘genuine freedom’ for local people to choose the services they want. Reality – heavily proscribed by the Secretary of State through use of reserve powers.
CRtC: Overview
Came into force 27th June:• In essence: local authorities must
consider expressions of interest in providing a service, and where they accept an expression of interest, must carry out a procurement exercise for the service.
CRtC: Overview
• Two sets of regulations - Requirements for making an expression
of interest and specifies services excluded from the Right - Specifies grounds on which an
expression of interest may be rejected.
CRtC: ‘relevant authorities and relevant bodies’.
• Relevant authorities (all principle local councils and fire and rescue authorities) must consider expressions of interest by relevant bodies:
- voluntary and community bodies; - organisations set up for charitable purposes; - parish councils, and by two or more employees of the local authority.Aim is to cover a wide range of civil
society organisations.
Which services will be covered by CRTC?
• A distinction is made between local authority ‘functions’ – where the decision-making process resides (e.g. Waste Strategy) which is outside CRTC and service delivery (e.g. waste collection) which would be subject to CRTC.
• Secretary of State has the power to exclude (or include) certain functions
DCLG Consultation February 2011
The Language of ‘community’
Two tests of CRtC - Will it meet the realistic expectations of community groups and ‘civil society’ organisations? - Local authorities to deliver services on the basis of Best Value and in the interests of local people?
Working with the Voluntary Sector
• Unhappiness that EO1usually triggers a full procurement process.
• Local authorities must work with the VS to help them understand full implications of making an EOI.
Important that the council isn’t seen as the problem rather than the legislation.
Community Right to Challenge
• ‘Two or more employees’ eligible to exercise the right are expected to form an employee-led structure to take on the running of the proposed service.
• ‘Relevant bodies’ through ‘partnership working’ or ‘joint ventures’ can submit an ‘expression of interest’ with ‘non relevant bodies’.
Community Right to Challenge: Who will be the winners?
Eric Pickles assurances, according to the local government press -“that large multi-national companies and big conglomerates cannot use the right”. He would “ come down hard on private firms that that abuse the new community right”. But in reality firms can bid legitimately in partnership with local ‘relevant bodies’.
Moving Goal posts:Henry VIII Clauses
• These allow a Minister to use regulations to create new laws which have the same force as Acts of Parliament but which don’t undergo the same rigorous process.
• Localism Bill peppered with HVIII clauses.
Moving the goalposts
“The Secretary of State may by regulations –(a) Amend or repeal any of paragraphs (a) to (d) of subsection (6); amend or repeal any of subsections (7) to (9); make other amendments to this Chapter (including amendments to any power to make regulations).
Preparing for an ‘Expression of interest’
Either judging which services are likely to be open to expressions of interestORFootball ‘transfer window’ approach – specifying periods during which expressions of interest can be submitted.Separate timetable for contracts coming to an end?
Requirements
• Submissions within the specified period• Definition of a relevant body• Information to demonstrate financial robustness;
capable of delivering the service• Community well-being and meeting the needs of
service users• Impact on remaining employees of the local
authority.• Timetable and modification of ‘expressions of
interest’ before going into a full procurement.
Grounds for refusal
Essentially practical in nature. •Failure to comply with statutory requirements•Inadequate or inaccuracy of information•Unsuitability of organisation or sub-contractors•Decision to stop service already been made•Integrated packages with the NHS•Procurement process/ negotiations already underway in writing with a third party.•Employee bid•Vexatious or frivolous expression of interest
Community Right to Challenge: ability to protect
public services?• Local authority must accept or reject an
‘expression of interest’ and give grounds for doing so.
• Local authority in coming to a judgement must “ consider how it might promote or improve the
social economic or environmental well-being of the authority’s area” -Section 83 (8) of the Act.The Guidance encourages the use of social clauses in
contracts (subject to EU rules)
Best Value
Parliamentary Answer 14th June about the compatibility of BV duty and the CRtC. Confirmed that it doesn’t change any aspect of the duty of Best Value.
In-house bids
• No guidance in the final regulations• But an ‘In-house’ team is not a legal
entity, so cannot enter into a contract with the council
• Possible risk of challenge• Best Value comparator using In-
house service (s) as a measure may be the determining factor?
Community Right to Challenge
• Unknown number and scale of challenges and subsequent procurement processes
• Fragmentation of service delivery• Cost• Democratic deficit• ‘Trojan Horse’ for major private sector contractors to
secure more of the local government services market.• Several routes in for the private sector to take over
Local Authority contracts.• Impact on the workforce where services contracted out
to new providers.
Concluding remarks
• Will CRTC be a ‘damp squib’?• Fragmentation of services and costly and complex
service delivery: negative political consequences: but for whom?
• Full implications of ‘Localism’ not yet really understood by local government.
• Privatised public services funded by the tax payer – taking some reputational hits:
• Opportunity to argue the case for the value of in-house public services, run by accountable and democratically elected bodies.
Community Right to Challenge:
A ‘right’ for the community?
Workshops
Workshop 1 Community Right to Challenge: a ‘right’ for the community?
Delegates with Green dots attend the Health Watch workshop, in Suite 1
Workshop 2 Community Right to Bid – learning from the Highfields Centre, Leicester
Delegates with Orange dots attend the Health Inequalities workshop, in Suite 2
Understanding Local Action: engaging the voluntary sector
10th September 2012
Fiona SheilNational Council for Voluntary Organisations
[email protected] @fionapsdn
Who are we talking about?
• Trustees• Volunteers • Donations
The three tiers of volunteerism.
What do they do?
Delivering Services
Information & commissioning
Participation,Democracy &
representation
Social capital & assets
Workforce &Economic weight
Where does this meet Localism?
1. Delivering Services
VCS Grants and Contract Income 2000/1 - 2009/10
The Compact – 5 key principles
• A strong, diverse and independent civil society
• Effective and transparent design and development of policies, programmes and public services
• Responsive and high-quality programmes and services
• Clear arrangements for managing changes to programmes and services
• An equal and fair society
www.compactvoice.org.uk
2. Social Capital(volunteering)
2. Participation, Democracy and Representation
Participation in the UK
• Political• 65% voted in 2010• 53% very or fairly interested in politics
• Local public participation• 2009/10 10% direct decisions; 18% consultations• 11% contacted local councillor
• Networks and memberships• 2007 53% total population• 300,000 Neighbourhood Watch; 156,754 Amnesty UK• 9.1mill professional• 13.5mill trade unions
What does this mean for you?
Further SupportFiona Sheil0207 520 [email protected]/psdnetwork
Vicky Redding, Engagement Development Officer, East and West Midlands, Compact [email protected]
Unlocking local capacity: from challenge to collaboration
Phillip Copestake, Office for Public Management
Conference close