The Brave New World of Localism - Part One

Today I have attempted to read the whole 405 pages of the Localism Bill. A meeting, quite a few phone calls, and the need to respond to emails prevented this, but I got half way through. Nerd that I am, I believe in reading the legislation rather than the government summaries. They always leave out critical points. So, from the first half of the Localism Bill...

Three Centralist Things

• Local authorities have a new duty to ‘determine whether council tax is excessive’. A referendum must be held if a proposed increase is ‘excessive’. The decision as to whether it is excessive must be based on a set of principles determined by the Secretary of State annually. The net result here is central control of council tax levels, because few would answer ‘yes’ to the question, ‘Do you want an excessive increase in council tax next year?’ justified or not. (Vol 2, section 52ZB)
  
  
• A 'community right to challenge' is being introduced. This will allow voluntary bodies, charitable trusts, parish councils, two or more local authority employees, or other bodies to be specified in regulations, to express interest in providing public services. Local authorities can accept or reject expressions of interest, but only based on grounds to be specified by the Secretary of State.
  
  If an expression of interest is accepted, a procurement exercise must take place. The regulations require the social, economic, and environmental well-being of the area to be considered as part of the procurement process. However this can only apply (as the Act notes) insofar as is consistent with procurement law. This obscures the fact that the contract may very likely then be awarded to a private company rather than the community body that originally challenged. There are no provisions in the bill to deal with the possible failure of the ‘challenger’ to adequately provide the service, nor any recognition of the contracting and enforcement challenges this would pose for local authorities.
  
  It is also worthy of note that this power results in local councillors having effectively no say in whether local services are outsourced. If an expression of interest must be accepted according to Secretary of State guidance, procurement has to go ahead. (Vol 1, section 66)
  
  
• Local authorities will no longer have the ability of local authorities to encourage domestic waste reduction by payments and charges. It would be interesting to see if similar schemes could be managed under the ‘power of competence’... (Vol 1, section 29)

Three Random Things

• Fire and rescue authorities will be allowed to charge for extinguishing fires - as long as they are at sea or under the sea (Vol 1, section 18B).
  
  
• Failing councils will have their elected mayors taken away as a punishment, until the Secretary of State decides they deserve to get them back. Given that the vast majority don't want them in the first place, how is this a punishment? (Vol 2, section 9HI)
  
  
• Which comes first, the neighbourhood or the neighbourhood forum?
  
  Local authorities must designate a ‘neighbourhood forum’ for each neighbourhood. This must be an open organisation, established to further social, economic, and environmental well-being of people living, or wanting to live, in an area. Membership must be open to people living, or wanting to live, there. Only one forum can be designated per neighbourhood and they must apply for the privilege.
  
  ‘Neighbourhood areas’ must also be designated by local authorities, but only when a neighbourhood forum has applied for their area to be designated. If no such body existed, presumably the area would remain in non-neighbourhood limbo. Moreover, how do local authorities arbitrate between overlapping applications? There is a real chicken and egg situation here! (Vol 2, section 61G)

One Thing That We Will All Need To Get Used To In The Localist Future

The plural of referendum. There are going to be a lot of them. Local authorities will have to hold referenda if:

• 5% of electors in a district or 'neighbourhood' sign a petition;
  
  
• A local councillor requests it;
  
  
• The council passes a resolution to hold one. (Vol 1, section 40)
  

That's a pretty low bar. Referenda can only be denied if they're unlawful, non-local, vexatious, abusive, or cover something the Secretary of State doesn't like (to be specified later). Results of local referendums must be published and local authorities must decide what to do about them & why. But they are free to do absolutely nothing if they see fit. I've yet to decide whether this is sensible or just renders the whole procedure an entirely pointless waste of time.

Stay tuned for Part Two, featuring What the hell are Neighbourhood Development Orders and Why Should I Fear Them?

Edited To Add Like an idiot, I forgot to link to the bill itself, which can be found here. Also, it's 431 pages, not 405. Bugger.