Thursday, 11 September 2014 1.45 pm
Westminster Suite, 8th Floor, Local Government House, Smith Square, London, SW1P 3HZ
Guidance notes for visitors Local Government House, Smith Square, London SW1P 3HZ
Welcome! Please read these notes for your own safety and that of all visitors, staff and tenants.
Security All visitors (who do not already have an LGA ID badge), are requested to report to the Reception desk where they will be asked to sign in and will be handed a visitor’s badge to be worn at all times whilst in the building.
Fire instructions In the event of the fire alarm sounding, vacate the building immediately following the green Fire Exit signs. Go straight to the assembly point in Tufton Street via Dean Trench Street (off Smith Square).
DO NOT USE THE LIFTS. DO NOT STOP TO COLLECT PERSONAL BELONGINGS. DO NOT RE-ENTER BUILDING UNTIL AUTHORISED TO DO SO.
Open Council “Open Council”, on the 1st floor of LG House, provides informal meeting and business facilities with refreshments, for local authority members/ officers who are in London.
Toilets Toilets for people with disabilities are situated on the Basement, Ground, 2nd, 4th, 6th and 7th floors. Female toilets are situated on the basement, ground, 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th floors. Male toilets are available on the basement, ground, 2nd, 4th, 6th and 8th floors.
Accessibility Every effort has been made to make the building as accessible as possible for people with disabilities. Induction loop systems have been installed in all the larger meeting rooms and at the main reception. There is a parking space for blue badge holders outside the Smith Square entrance and two more blue badge holders’ spaces in Dean Stanley Street to the side of the building. There is also a wheelchair lift at the main entrance. For further information please contact the Facilities Management Helpdesk on 020 7664 3015.
Further help Please speak either to staff at the main reception on the ground floor, if you require any further help or information. You can find the LGA website at www.local.gov.uk
Please don’t forget to sign out at reception and return your badge when you depart.
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
There will be a meeting of the LGA Executive at:
1.45 pm on Thursday, 11 September 2014 in Westminster Suite, 8th Floor, Local Government House, Smith Square, London, SW1P 3HZ
Attendance Sheet Please ensure that you sign the attendance register, which will be available in the meeting room. It is the only record of your presence at the meeting.
Apologies Please notify your political group office (see contact telephone numbers below) if you are unable to attend this meeting, so that a substitute can be arranged and catering numbers adjusted, if necessary.
Labour: Aicha Less: 020 7664 3263 email: [email protected] Conservative: Luke Taylor: 020 7664 3264 email: [email protected] Liberal Democrat: Group Office: 020 7664 3235 email: [email protected] Independent: Group Office: 020 7664 3224 email: [email protected]
Location A map showing the location of Local Government House is printed on the back cover.
LGA Contact Frances Marshall 0207 664 3220 / [email protected]
Guest WiFi in Local Government House This is available in Local Government House for visitors. It can be accessed by enabling “Wireless Network Connection” on your computer and connecting to LGH-guest, the password is Welcome2010LG.
Carers’ Allowance As part of the LGA Members’ Allowances Scheme a Carer’s Allowance of up to £6.31 per hour is available to cover the cost of dependants (i.e. children, elderly people or people with disabilities) incurred as a result of attending this meeting.
Social Media The LGA is committed to using social media in a co-ordinated and sensible way, as part of a strategic approach to communications, to help enhance the reputation of local government, improvement engagement with different elements of the community and drive efficiency. Please feel free to use social media during this meeting. However, you are requested not to use social media during any confidential items.
The twitter hashtag for this meeting is #lgaexec.
LGA Executive
LGA Executive – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor and Role Authority / Representing
Labour ( 10 ) Cllr David Sparks OBE (Chair) Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Jim McMahon (Vice-Chair) Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Sharon Taylor OBE (Deputy Stevenage Borough Council Chair) Mayor Sir Steve Bullock (Deputy Lewisham London Borough Council Chair) Cllr Keith Wakefield (Deputy Leeds City Council Chair) Sir Richard Leese CBE (Board Manchester City Council and City Regions Chair) Board Cllr Claire Kober (Board Chair) Haringey LB and Resources Board Cllr Ann Lucas OBE (Board Coventry City Council and Safer and Stronger Chair) Communities Board Cllr Peter Box CBE (Board Wakefield Metropolitan District Council and Chair) Economy, Environment, Housing and Transport Cllr Judi Billing (Balancing North Hertfordshire District Council Member)
Conservative ( 8) Cllr Gary Porter (Vice-Chair) South Holland District Council Cllr Mike Jones (Deputy Chair) Cheshire West and Chester Council Cllr Philippa Roe (Deputy Chair) Westminster City Council Cllr David Hodge (Deputy Chair) Surrey County Council and People and Placed Board Cllr Neil Clarke MBE (Deputy Rushcliffe Borough Council Chair) Cllr David Simmonds (Board Hillingdon London Borough Council and Chair) Children and Young People Board Cllr Izzi Seccombe (Board Chair) Warwickshire County Council and Community Wellbeing Board Cllr Peter Fleming (Board Chair) Sevenoaks District Council and Improvement and Innovation Board
Liberal Democrat ( 4) Cllr Gerald Vernon-Jackson Portsmouth City Council (Vice-Chair) Mayor Dorothy Thornhill MBE Watford Borough Council (Deputy Chair) Cllr Chris White (Balancing Hertfordshire County Council Member) Cllr Jeremy Hilton (Balancing Gloucestershire County Council Member)
Independent ( 4) Cllr Marianne Overton MBE Lincolnshire County Council (Vice-Chair) Cllr Ian Stephens (Board Chair) Isle of Wight Council and Culture, Tourism and Sport Board Cllr Peter Reeve (Balancing Cambridgeshire County Council Member) Cllr Robert Dutton OBE Wrexham County Borough Council (Balancing Member)
Substitutes
Regional Representatives ( 10 ) Cllr John Hart CON South West Councils (Devon County Council) Cllr Tony Jackson CON East of England LGA (East Herts DC) Cllr Gordon Keymer CBE CON South East England Councils (Tandridge DC) Mayor Jules Pipe LAB London Councils (Hackney London Borough Council) Cllr Martin Hill OBE CON East Midlands Councils (Lincolnshire County Council) Cllr Roger Lawrence LAB West Midlands LGA (Wolverhampton City) Cllr Stephen Parnaby OBE CON Local Government Yorkshire and Humber (East Riding of Yorkshire Council) Cllr Paul Watson LAB Association of North East Councils (Sunderland City Council) Cllr Barrie Grunewald LAB North West Regional Leader's Board (St Helens MBC) Vacancy WLGA
Named Substitutes
Non-voting Members of LGA Executive
Councillor Representing Alderman Sir David Wootton INDE Local Partnerships (City of London) Cllr Mark Hawthorne MBE CON County Councils Network SIG (Gloucestershire County Council) Cllr Gillian Brown CON District Councils Network (Arun District Council) Sir Stephen Houghton CBE LAB SIGOMA (Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council)
Agenda
LGA Executive
Thursday 11 September 2014
1.45 pm
Westminster Suite, 8th Floor, Local Government House, Smith Square, London, SW1P 3HZ
Item Page
1. Declarations of Interest
2. Adult Social Care Reform and Funding 1 - 6
a) Appendix A: Authority Level Comparison Option 1 7 - 10
b) Appendix B - Authority Level Comparison Option 2 11 - 14
c) Appendix C: LGA and ADASS Response to Government 15 - 20 Consultation
3. Local Growth Deals 21 - 28
a) Appendix A: Funding Stream Infographic 29 - 30
b) Appendix B: LGA Press Release 31 - 32
4. LGA Nominations to EU Committee of the Regions 33 - 38
LGA BUSINESS Page
5. Membership, Terms of Reference and Appointments to the LGA's 39 - 40 Governance Structures for 2014/2015
a) Appendix A: LGA Executive Membership 41 - 42
b) Appendix B: LGA Executive Terms of Reference 43 - 44
c) Appendix C: LGA Governance Structure Appointments 45 - 58
6. Note of the last Leadership Board meeting - Tabled
7. Note of last LGA Executive meeting 59 - 64
8. Dates of Meetings in 2014/15 65 - 67
Date of Next Meeting: Thursday, 23 October 2014, 1.45 pm, Westminster Suite, 8th Floor, Local Government House, Smith Square, London, SW1P 3HZ
Agenda Item 2
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Adult Social Care Reform and Funding
Purpose of report
To provide a brief update on health and social care issues, and for discussion and approval of the response to the consultation on the distribution of the grant to pay for new burdens arising from the Care Act.
Summary
The pace of change in the health and social care landscape remains very rapid. This paper gives a brief update on recent developments on Care Act Implementation, Better Care Fund, the Supreme Court Judgment on Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, and the Integrated Personalised Commissioning programme announced by Simon Stevens at LGA Conference in July.
This report also provides a draft joint LGA and Association of Adult Social Services (ADASS) response to a recent government consultation on the distribution of the £283.5 million grant for new social care burdens arising in 2015/16. The consultation response is attached at Appendix C for Executive’s clearance.
Recommendation
That the Executive discuss the report and approve the LGA’s response to the consultation on funding formulae for implementation of the Care Act in 2015/16.
Action
LGA Officers to proceed as directed.
Contact officer: Sally Burlington Position: Head of Programmes Phone no: 020 7664 3099 E-mail: [email protected]
Page 1 Agenda Item 2
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Adult Social Care Reform and Funding
Background
1. Local government is being asked to implement the Care Act at a time of unprecedented pressure on council budgets, an extremely challenging timetable for developing Better Care Fund plans, and new pressures which are being added through recent changes to the Better Care Fund financial arrangements and the recent Supreme Court Judgment on Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
2. The Community Wellbeing Board (CWB) discussed these issues at its last meeting in July. Whilst the LGA has supported the aims of the Care Act throughout the legislative process, there remain significant concerns that the costs of implementation may not be fully funded in 2015-16, and that options to keep costs down would mean disappointing people who are expecting extra support. Cllr Katie Hall, the outgoing chair of the Board, wrote to Norman Lamb expressing the Board’s concerns about funding for implementation of the Care Act. Lead members of the Board met Jon Rouse, Director General for Social Care, Local Government and Care Partnerships at the Department of Health on 28 August to discuss these concerns, and Norman Lamb, Minister for Care Services is attending the Board’s meeting on 9 September. The joint LGA and ADASS response to the Department of Health’s (DH) consultation on regulations and guidance also reflected these concerns and was submitted on 8 August 1.
3. The LGA is working with ADASS and DH to seek more detailed costings from councils, which should provide more detailed evidence of likely costs in mid-September. We will work closely with ADASS and DH to consider the implications of that analysis and to influence the Government response. At the same time, the LGA needs to respond to the ongoing consultation about how the grant to pay for these costs should be distributed.
Consultation on allocating new burdens funding
4. On 31 July 2014 the Department for Health issued a consultation paper on three proposed formulae for the distribution of new burdens funding for adult social care in England, arising as a result of the implementation of the Care Act, in 2015/16.
5. The quantum of funding covered by the consultation is £294.7 million, comprising three elements, each with a separate allocation formula:
5.1. £175.0 million for additional assessments for the care cost cap, comprising:
5.1.1. £145.0 million for early assessments and reviews; 5.1.2. £20.0 million for capacity building; 5.1.3. £10.0 million for an information campaign to raise awareness of the changes;
1 The joint response is available at: http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/11779/Care+Act++- +regulations+and+guidance+LGA+and+ADASS+joint+consultation+response+-+August+2014/4250bb86-779f-4306-a0be- 2f9fb99dc3d6
Page 2 Agenda Item 2
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
5.1.4. £108.5 million for deferred payments; and 5.1.5. £11.2 million for social care in prisons.
6. The first two of these elements total £283.5 million and together form the new burdens revenue grant, originally worth £285 million, which was announced in the 2015/16 illustrative local government finance settlement in December 2013.
7. Two different formulae were proposed as options for the £175 million assessments element, showing slightly different results.
8. There are very significant differences between the indicative authority-level allocations announced in December 2013, and total illustrative allocations in the consultation paper regardless of which option is used for the assessments element. Appendix A and B provide a comparison at authority level.
9. The third element only applies to the 58 local authorities which have prisons in their area. This is now to be funded through Department of Health revenue grant rather than through the Better Care Fund. Other items have been added into the Better Care Fund in its place, keeping the total earmarked for Care Act reform at £135 million.
10. The draft joint LGA and ADASS response to the consultation is provided for clearance as Appendix C . It makes the following key points:
10.1. There are large variations between the indicative allocations for councils in the December 2013 settlement and the illustrations in the consultation. These changes could have a substantial impact on councils’ abilities to plan for the changes. The government needs to make a decision and announce it as soon as possible after the consultation closes.
10.2. The formulae are geared towards estimating the relative number of self-funders that are currently prevented from accessing the care system due to the assets they hold. In doing so, the formulae appear to assume a uniform take-up rate of those services among self-funders, regardless of different socioeconomic and other characteristics. The Government should consider if that is a valid assumption to make.
10.3. The Government is considering adjusting allocations presented by the deferred payment formula according to the size of pre-existing schemes locally. To do so, it needs to receive local information from all 152 councils about their schemes. We identify potential incompleteness of information as a risk the Government needs to be mindful of if it decides to go ahead.
11. At the time of writing this report the draft response was agreed by colleagues in ADASS and we were seeking comments from member councils as well. If any changes arise as a result of these discussions, changes to the draft response will be tabled by officers at Executive.
Page 3 Agenda Item 2
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Update on wider issues
Better Care Fund
12. The Executive received a report on changes to the Better Care Fund (BCF) at its meeting in July. Following the changes to policy surrounding £1 billion of the NHS contribution to the BCF, and the corresponding requirement for local Health and Wellbeing Board areas to resubmit their plans by 19 September, there have been a number of important developments, which are set out below.
13. Support has been commissioned and deployed into each of the four NHS regions, working with 18 local areas intensively, and with other support provided as requested. A bespoke peer support offer has been developed and offered to local areas that have requested it. In addition a number of national support tools including a modelling toolkit have also been published.
14. The methodology for assurance of plans has been published. The process includes three light touch ‘checkpoints’ to assess progress in meeting the national conditions (8 August, 29 August, 16 September), followed by a national assurance process that builds on Health and Wellbeing Board and regional assessments of plans to assure Ministers and NHS England.
15. Additional policy guidance has also been published around the flexibility of the 3.5 per cent target reduction in total emergency admissions, and further guidance issued about the protection of social care and the funding for the Care Act.
16. At the same time, the joint national team, with support from consultants, have been working closely with five ‘fast track’ areas. These areas have been used to test the process and also to share their plans more widely with the system in early September.
17. Local government regional chief executive leads have been working closely with NHS England regions to help coordinate this whole process locally, and feeding back to the national team to ensure local government is strongly represented.
18. The overall feedback has been that whilst this is an intensively rigorous process and the policy changes have been actively unhelpful, most local areas are responding positively and relationships remain strong, and are therefore expecting to be able to resubmit plans by 19 September. However, the checkpoints have highlighted concerns in a handful of areas where there are concerns about the national conditions ‘protection of social care’ and ‘provider alignment’. These areas have been offered additional support.
19. At the same time, the National Audit Office (NAO) and internal NHS and Government auditors have taken an active interest in the BCF process. The LGA has made representations to these groups, and we are expecting a report to the Public Accounts Committee on 29 November which will be informed by these.
Page 4 Agenda Item 2
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards
20. The Chairman, with David Pearson (President of ADASS), wrote to Jeremy Hunt, Eric Pickles, Danny Alexander, Norman Lamb, Chris Grayling, Sir James Mumby and Kris Hopkins on 30 July asking for funding to pay for the new burdens in relation to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. We are expecting a reply in the next 2 weeks.
Integrated Personalised Commissioning
21. CWB lead members have also been influencing the development of the Integrated Personalised Commissioning (IPC) programme which Simon Stevens announced at LGA conference. At the time of writing the prospectus for that work is planned to be published on 4 September. The initiative will be funded by NHS England but is co-branded by LGA and ADASS, who are also involved in the governance arrangements and development for this multi-year initiative. It will learn from local government experience of personalisation and personal budgets, and support joint arrangements across health and social care to extend personal health and care budgets (which the LGA proposed in our Rewiring work in 2013). More details of the IPC programme will be available after 4 September.
Page 5 Page 6 Agenda Item 2a
ANNEX A: total new burdens allocations under option 1, difference from settlement
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Local Authority allocation, Allocation £ under option 1, under option 1, option 1, £ £ % Barking and Dagenham 1,084,260 669,614 - 414,646 -38% Barnet 1,718,893 1,768,361 49,468 3% Barnsley 1,470,601 1,190,318 - 280,283 -19% Bath & North East Somerset 866,581 1,089,666 223,085 26% Bedford 737,214 846,082 108,868 15% Bexley 1,102,445 1,345,201 242,756 22% Birmingham 6,650,351 4,702,176 - 1,948,175 -29% Blackburn with Darwen 907,745 644,703 - 263,042 -29% Blackpool 1,073,126 940,102 - 133,024 -12% Bolton 1,650,747 1,415,565 - 235,182 -14% Bournemouth 1,049,648 1,128,646 78,998 8% Bracknell Forest 429,680 473,892 44,212 10% Bradford 2,727,936 2,165,373 - 562,563 -21% Brent 1,594,856 1,048,424 - 546,432 -34% Brighton & Hove 1,459,034 1,197,638 - 261,396 -18% Bristol 2,408,684 2,083,858 - 324,826 -13% Buckinghamshire 1,984,691 2,756,434 771,743 39% Bury 969,844 982,965 13,121 1% Calderdale 1,093,233 995,602 - 97,631 -9% Cambridgeshire 2,759,817 3,232,162 472,345 17% Camden 1,526,842 782,287 - 744,555 -49% Central Bedfordshire 1,028,342 1,298,157 269,815 26% Cheshire East 1,722,632 2,379,953 657,321 38% Cheshire West and Chester 1,742,322 2,020,237 277,915 16% City of London 57,939 39,009 - 18,930 -33% Cornwall 3,317,144 3,774,313 457,170 14% Coventry 1,841,886 1,674,737 - 167,149 -9% Croydon 1,664,090 1,543,299 - 120,791 -7% Cumbria 2,977,326 3,449,534 472,208 16% Darlington 595,142 554,569 - 40,573 -7% Derby 1,363,926 1,247,556 - 116,370 -9% Derbyshire 4,307,426 4,673,949 366,523 9% Devon 4,245,945 5,558,268 1,312,323 31% Doncaster 1,792,982 1,535,929 - 257,053 -14% Dorset 2,298,036 3,344,125 1,046,089 46% Dudley 1,854,424 1,914,761 60,337 3% Durham 3,351,571 2,786,645 - 564,926 -17% Ealing 1,683,363 1,314,412 - 368,951 -22% East Riding of Yorkshire 1,717,087 2,105,362 388,275 23% East Sussex 3,070,460 4,061,869 991,409 32% Enfield 1,542,130 1,385,588 - 156,542 -10% Essex 7,029,399 8,554,428 1,525,029 22% Gateshead 1,345,775 1,027,888 - 317,887 -24% Gloucestershire 3,004,356 3,806,688 802,332 27% Greenwich 1,579,703 889,439 - 690,264 -44% Hackney 1,668,441 506,742 - 1,161,699 -70% Halton 758,969 617,828 - 141,141 -19% Page 7 Agenda Item 2a
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Local Authority allocation, Allocation £ under option 1, under option 1, option 1, £ £ % Hammersmith and Fulham 1,090,578 505,720 - 584,858 -54% Hampshire 5,645,965 7,825,260 2,179,295 39% Haringey 1,363,490 684,510 - 678,980 -50% Harrow 1,151,671 1,226,660 74,989 7% Hartlepool 595,084 470,049 - 125,035 -21% Havering 1,194,249 1,599,073 404,824 34% Herefordshire 1,045,729 1,245,311 199,582 19% Hertfordshire 4,909,618 5,805,667 896,049 18% Hillingdon 1,236,315 1,285,500 49,185 4% Hounslow 1,186,718 874,390 - 312,328 -26% Isle of Wight Council 910,118 1,152,143 242,025 27% Islington 1,526,993 536,558 - 990,435 -65% Kensington and Chelsea 1,029,332 608,273 - 421,059 -41% Kent 7,320,266 8,473,667 1,153,401 16% Kingston upon Hull 1,725,370 965,377 - 759,993 -44% Kingston upon Thames 680,650 790,237 109,587 16% Kirklees 2,208,609 2,012,107 - 196,502 -9% Knowsley 1,160,254 755,344 - 404,910 -35% Lambeth 1,791,838 725,624 - 1,066,214 -60% Lancashire 6,552,805 7,160,649 607,844 9% Leeds 3,931,491 3,246,826 - 684,665 -17% Leicester 1,868,814 1,178,033 - 690,781 -37% Leicestershire 2,866,919 3,872,497 1,005,578 35% Lewisham 1,624,360 890,807 - 733,553 -45% Lincolnshire 3,999,440 4,400,480 401,040 10% Liverpool 3,511,565 2,084,431 - 1,427,134 -41% Luton 935,898 762,176 - 173,722 -19% Manchester 3,165,934 1,477,157 - 1,688,777 -53% Medway 1,184,972 1,226,890 41,918 4% Merton 888,143 841,656 - 46,487 -5% Middlesbrough 900,051 638,915 - 261,136 -29% Milton Keynes 1,078,343 908,697 - 169,646 -16% Newcastle upon Tyne 1,782,237 1,208,771 - 573,466 -32% Newham 1,743,740 642,736 - 1,101,004 -63% Norfolk 4,962,180 5,704,053 741,873 15% North East Lincolnshire 925,905 900,673 - 25,232 -3% North Lincolnshire 903,591 922,462 18,871 2% North Somerset 1,097,185 1,501,782 404,597 37% North Tyneside 1,224,404 1,099,040 - 125,364 -10% North Yorkshire 2,878,026 3,751,261 873,235 30% Northamptonshire 3,226,565 3,390,877 164,312 5% Northumberland 1,806,725 1,810,146 3,421 0% Nottingham 1,840,658 1,128,220 - 712,438 -39% Nottinghamshire 4,188,396 4,642,320 453,924 11% Oldham 1,332,796 1,082,531 - 250,265 -19% Oxfordshire 2,721,221 3,402,782 681,561 25% Peterborough 942,473 825,425 - 117,048 -12% Plymouth 1,524,874 1,343,045 - 181,829 -12% Poole 757,087 1,002,903 245,816 32%
Page 8 Agenda Item 2a
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Local Authority allocation, Allocation £ under option 1, under option 1, option 1, £ £ % Portsmouth 1,057,370 953,518 - 103,852 -10% Reading 676,284 620,517 - 55,767 -8% Redbridge 1,325,222 1,271,704 - 53,518 -4% Redcar and Cleveland 855,267 798,326 - 56,941 -7% Richmond upon Thames 784,750 961,956 177,206 23% Rochdale 1,316,176 989,087 - 327,089 -25% Rotherham 1,597,528 1,305,473 - 292,055 -18% Rutland 161,168 221,449 60,281 37% Salford 1,564,731 1,043,446 - 521,285 -33% Sandwell 2,194,415 1,523,814 - 670,601 -31% Scilly 15,035 19,686 4,651 31% Sefton 1,810,801 1,939,718 128,917 7% Shropshire 1,655,165 2,034,315 379,150 23% Slough 612,100 410,895 - 201,205 -33% Solihull 1,033,548 1,356,864 323,316 31% Somerset 2,965,861 3,670,595 704,734 24% South Gloucestershire 1,110,366 1,517,666 407,300 37% South Tyneside 1,086,872 787,707 - 299,165 -28% Southampton 1,317,396 993,244 - 324,152 -25% Southend-on-Sea 978,500 1,091,177 112,677 12% Southwark 1,865,144 674,514 - 1,190,630 -64% St Helens 1,143,391 1,087,282 - 56,109 -5% Staffordshire 4,206,083 5,094,943 888,860 21% Stockport 1,523,818 1,795,927 272,109 18% Stockton-on-Tees 1,003,721 906,050 - 97,671 -10% Stoke-on-Trent 1,581,626 1,248,974 - 332,652 -21% Suffolk 3,872,912 4,635,317 762,405 20% Sunderland 1,861,736 1,395,705 - 466,031 -25% Surrey 4,743,632 6,860,077 2,116,445 45% Sutton 875,523 1,032,742 157,219 18% Swindon 913,491 927,550 14,059 2% Tameside 1,370,418 1,134,183 - 236,235 -17% Telford and the Wrekin 919,470 757,549 - 161,921 -18% Thurrock 776,868 690,514 - 86,354 -11% Torbay 983,938 1,086,642 102,704 10% Tower Hamlets 1,739,645 427,051 - 1,312,594 -75% Trafford 1,123,024 1,232,092 109,068 10% Wakefield 1,958,040 1,577,890 - 380,150 -19% Walsall 1,700,292 1,495,959 - 204,333 -12% Waltham Forest 1,292,822 865,733 - 427,089 -33% Wandsworth 1,540,729 951,076 - 589,653 -38% Warrington 978,188 1,071,265 93,077 10% Warwickshire 2,653,569 3,232,208 578,639 22% West Berkshire 594,816 758,581 163,765 28% West Sussex 3,922,849 5,584,083 1,661,234 42% Westminster 1,571,251 762,401 - 808,850 -51% Wigan 1,890,765 1,696,698 - 194,067 -10% Wiltshire 2,164,888 2,739,286 574,398 27% Windsor and Maidenhead 565,793 798,932 233,139 41%
Page 9 Agenda Item 2a
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Local Authority allocation, Allocation £ under option 1, under option 1, option 1, £ £ % Wirral 2,137,939 2,150,976 13,037 1% Wokingham 476,887 799,059 322,172 68% Wolverhampton 1,634,567 1,316,994 - 317,573 -19% Worcestershire 2,831,742 3,576,053 744,311 26% York 869,013 1,121,364 252,351 29% TOTAL 285,000,000 283,500,000 - 1,500,000 -1%
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Region allocation, Allocation £ under option 1, under option 1, option 1, £ £ % East Midlands 23,823,312 24,755,381 932,069 4% East of England 28,933,221 33,445,158 4,511,937 16% London 44,139,792 31,335,849 - 12,803,943 -29% North East 16,408,584 13,483,811 - 2,924,773 -18% North West 42,385,316 39,151,673 - 3,233,643 -8% South East 39,771,877 49,258,178 9,486,301 24% South West 28,723,120 34,594,719 5,871,599 20% West Midlands 31,802,866 31,174,658 - 628,208 -2% Yorkshire and Humberside 29,011,914 26,300,573 - 2,711,341 -9% TOTAL 285,000,000 283,500,000 - 1,500,000 -1%
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Type allocation, Allocation £ under option 1, under option 1, option 1, £ £ % English Unitary 64,839,077 64,738,013 - 101,064 0% London Borough 44,139,792 31,335,849 - 12,803,943 -29% Met District 69,875,628 56,905,892 - 12,969,736 -19% Shire County 106,145,504 130,520,246 24,374,742 23% TOTAL 285,000,000 283,500,000 - 1,500,000 -1%
Page 10 Agenda Item 2b
ANNEX B: Total new burdens allocations under option 2, difference from settlement
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Local Authority allocation, Allocation £ under option 2, under option 2, option 2, £ £ % Barking and Dagenham 1,084,260 687,725 - 396,535 -37% Barnet 1,718,893 1,888,393 169,500 10% Barnsley 1,470,601 1,108,635 - 361,966 -25% Bath & North East Somerset 866,581 1,125,350 258,769 30% Bedford 737,214 856,108 118,894 16% Bexley 1,102,445 1,334,475 232,030 21% Birmingham 6,650,351 4,642,530 - 2,007,821 -30% Blackburn with Darwen 907,745 615,009 - 292,736 -32% Blackpool 1,073,126 929,987 - 143,139 -13% Bolton 1,650,747 1,335,945 - 314,802 -19% Bournemouth 1,049,648 1,257,610 207,962 20% Bracknell Forest 429,680 473,694 44,014 10% Bradford 2,727,936 2,182,542 - 545,394 -20% Brent 1,594,856 1,012,280 - 582,576 -37% Brighton & Hove 1,459,034 1,282,018 - 177,016 -12% Bristol 2,408,684 2,124,405 - 284,279 -12% Buckinghamshire 1,984,691 2,782,237 797,546 40% Bury 969,844 934,626 - 35,218 -4% Calderdale 1,093,233 996,915 - 96,318 -9% Cambridgeshire 2,759,817 3,261,482 501,665 18% Camden 1,526,842 829,867 - 696,975 -46% Central Bedfordshire 1,028,342 1,225,416 197,074 19% Cheshire East 1,722,632 2,387,514 664,882 39% Cheshire West and Chester 1,742,322 1,988,469 246,147 14% City of London 57,939 40,369 - 17,570 -30% Cornwall 3,317,144 3,726,382 409,239 12% Coventry 1,841,886 1,636,570 - 205,316 -11% Croydon 1,664,090 1,562,112 - 101,978 -6% Cumbria 2,977,326 3,385,268 407,942 14% Darlington 595,142 576,136 - 19,006 -3% Derby 1,363,926 1,248,056 - 115,870 -8% Derbyshire 4,307,426 4,483,688 176,262 4% Devon 4,245,945 5,784,980 1,539,035 36% Doncaster 1,792,982 1,465,495 - 327,487 -18% Dorset 2,298,036 3,487,331 1,189,295 52% Dudley 1,854,424 1,781,315 - 73,109 -4% Durham 3,351,571 2,639,594 - 711,977 -21% Ealing 1,683,363 1,297,747 - 385,616 -23% East Riding of Yorkshire 1,717,087 2,072,083 354,996 21% East Sussex 3,070,460 4,381,703 1,311,243 43% Enfield 1,542,130 1,380,360 - 161,770 -10% Essex 7,029,399 8,492,109 1,462,710 21% Gateshead 1,345,775 994,968 - 350,807 -26% Gloucestershire 3,004,356 3,859,121 854,765 28% Greenwich 1,579,703 923,875 - 655,828 -42% Hackney 1,668,441 511,620 - 1,156,821 -69% Halton 758,969 571,408 - 187,561 -25%
Page 11 Agenda Item 2b
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Local Authority allocation, Allocation £ under option 2, under option 2, option 2, £ £ % Hammersmith and Fulham 1,090,578 511,473 - 579,105 -53% Hampshire 5,645,965 8,057,841 2,411,876 43% Haringey 1,363,490 653,521 - 709,969 -52% Harrow 1,151,671 1,217,819 66,148 6% Hartlepool 595,084 457,139 - 137,945 -23% Havering 1,194,249 1,589,543 395,294 33% Herefordshire 1,045,729 1,253,469 207,740 20% Hertfordshire 4,909,618 6,020,363 1,110,745 23% Hillingdon 1,236,315 1,277,641 41,326 3% Hounslow 1,186,718 855,672 - 331,046 -28% Isle of Wight Council 910,118 1,182,379 272,261 30% Islington 1,526,993 551,744 - 975,249 -64% Kensington and Chelsea 1,029,332 652,318 - 377,014 -37% Kent 7,320,266 8,582,564 1,262,298 17% Kingston upon Hull 1,725,370 978,705 - 746,665 -43% Kingston upon Thames 680,650 824,688 144,038 21% Kirklees 2,208,609 1,913,876 - 294,733 -13% Knowsley 1,160,254 709,091 - 451,163 -39% Lambeth 1,791,838 760,480 - 1,031,358 -58% Lancashire 6,552,805 6,954,800 401,995 6% Leeds 3,931,491 3,222,059 - 709,432 -18% Leicester 1,868,814 1,201,179 - 667,635 -36% Leicestershire 2,866,919 3,741,542 874,623 31% Lewisham 1,624,360 917,233 - 707,127 -44% Lincolnshire 3,999,440 4,323,476 324,036 8% Liverpool 3,511,565 2,010,558 - 1,501,007 -43% Luton 935,898 729,803 - 206,095 -22% Manchester 3,165,934 1,494,727 - 1,671,207 -53% Medway 1,184,972 1,143,834 - 41,138 -3% Merton 888,143 849,405 - 38,738 -4% Middlesbrough 900,051 622,807 - 277,244 -31% Milton Keynes 1,078,343 925,504 - 152,839 -14% Newcastle upon Tyne 1,782,237 1,251,841 - 530,396 -30% Newham 1,743,740 621,354 - 1,122,386 -64% Norfolk 4,962,180 5,729,541 767,361 15% North East Lincolnshire 925,905 874,083 - 51,822 -6% North Lincolnshire 903,591 898,851 - 4,740 -1% North Somerset 1,097,185 1,545,274 448,089 41% North Tyneside 1,224,404 1,101,322 - 123,082 -10% North Yorkshire 2,878,026 3,786,858 908,832 32% Northamptonshire 3,226,565 3,374,512 147,947 5% Northumberland 1,806,725 1,816,810 10,085 1% Nottingham 1,840,658 1,163,053 - 677,605 -37% Nottinghamshire 4,188,396 4,472,985 284,589 7% Oldham 1,332,796 1,033,989 - 298,807 -22% Oxfordshire 2,721,221 3,487,108 765,887 28% Peterborough 942,473 814,284 - 128,189 -14% Plymouth 1,524,874 1,337,609 - 187,265 -12% Poole 757,087 1,068,039 310,952 41%
Page 12 Agenda Item 2b
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Local Authority allocation, Allocation £ under option 2, under option 2, option 2, £ £ % Portsmouth 1,057,370 975,879 - 81,491 -8% Reading 676,284 644,404 - 31,880 -5% Redbridge 1,325,222 1,278,956 - 46,266 -3% Redcar and Cleveland 855,267 765,025 - 90,242 -11% Richmond upon Thames 784,750 1,023,192 238,442 30% Rochdale 1,316,176 965,746 - 350,430 -27% Rotherham 1,597,528 1,227,540 - 369,988 -23% Rutland 161,168 233,655 72,487 45% Salford 1,564,731 1,029,469 - 535,262 -34% Sandwell 2,194,415 1,478,150 - 716,265 -33% Scilly 15,035 23,219 8,184 54% Sefton 1,810,801 1,945,627 134,826 7% Shropshire 1,655,165 2,038,304 383,139 23% Slough 612,100 412,566 - 199,534 -33% Solihull 1,033,548 1,351,937 318,389 31% Somerset 2,965,861 3,793,490 827,629 28% South Gloucestershire 1,110,366 1,436,710 326,344 29% South Tyneside 1,086,872 796,891 - 289,981 -27% Southampton 1,317,396 1,038,235 - 279,161 -21% Southend-on-Sea 978,500 1,140,198 161,698 17% Southwark 1,865,144 719,622 - 1,145,522 -61% St Helens 1,143,391 980,381 - 163,010 -14% Staffordshire 4,206,083 4,827,417 621,334 15% Stockport 1,523,818 1,764,062 240,244 16% Stockton-on-Tees 1,003,721 863,380 - 140,341 -14% Stoke-on-Trent 1,581,626 1,148,473 - 433,153 -27% Suffolk 3,872,912 4,708,999 836,087 22% Sunderland 1,861,736 1,295,786 - 565,950 -30% Surrey 4,743,632 7,254,499 2,510,867 53% Sutton 875,523 1,036,803 161,280 18% Swindon 913,491 915,180 1,689 0% Tameside 1,370,418 1,072,369 - 298,049 -22% Telford and the Wrekin 919,470 697,903 - 221,567 -24% Thurrock 776,868 668,843 - 108,025 -14% Torbay 983,938 1,141,054 157,116 16% Tower Hamlets 1,739,645 449,536 - 1,290,109 -74% Trafford 1,123,024 1,236,320 113,296 10% Wakefield 1,958,040 1,506,925 - 451,115 -23% Walsall 1,700,292 1,396,997 - 303,295 -18% Waltham Forest 1,292,822 863,999 - 428,823 -33% Wandsworth 1,540,729 985,038 - 555,691 -36% Warrington 978,188 1,010,985 32,797 3% Warwickshire 2,653,569 3,195,579 542,010 20% West Berkshire 594,816 750,170 155,354 26% West Sussex 3,922,849 5,956,568 2,033,719 52% Westminster 1,571,251 807,331 - 763,920 -49% Wigan 1,890,765 1,518,135 - 372,630 -20% Wiltshire 2,164,888 2,823,448 658,560 30% Windsor and Maidenhead 565,793 832,798 267,005 47%
Page 13 Agenda Item 2b
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Local Authority allocation, Allocation £ under option 2, under option 2, option 2, £ £ % Wirral 2,137,939 2,151,535 13,596 1% Wokingham 476,887 771,291 294,404 62% Wolverhampton 1,634,567 1,312,557 - 322,010 -20% Worcestershire 2,831,742 3,558,941 727,199 26% York 869,013 1,129,722 260,709 30% TOTAL 285,000,000 283,500,000 - 1,500,000 -1%
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Region allocation, Allocation £ under option 2, under option 2, option 2, £ £ % East Midlands 23,823,312 24,242,146 418,834 2% East of England 28,933,221 33,647,146 4,713,925 16% London 44,139,792 31,836,455 - 12,303,337 -28% North East 16,408,584 13,181,699 - 3,226,885 -20% North West 42,385,316 38,026,020 - 4,359,296 -10% South East 39,771,877 50,935,292 11,163,415 28% South West 28,723,120 35,449,202 6,726,082 23% West Midlands 31,802,866 30,320,142 - 1,482,724 -5% Yorkshire and Humberside 29,011,914 25,861,898 - 3,150,016 -11% TOTAL 285,000,000 283,500,000 - 1,500,000 -1%
Difference from Difference from Consultation Settlement settlement settlement Type allocation, Allocation £ under option 2, under option 2, option 2, £ £ % English Unitary 64,839,077 64,573,503 - 265,574 0% London Borough 44,139,792 31,836,455 - 12,303,337 -28% Met District 69,875,628 55,345,040 - 14,530,588 -21% Shire County 106,145,504 131,745,002 25,599,498 24% TOTAL 285,000,000 283,500,000 - 1,500,000 -1%
Page 14
Agenda Item 2c
Consultation on funding formulae for implementation of the Care Act in 2015/16 12 th September 2014
1. This response is submitted jointly by the Local Government Association (LGA) and the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS). 2. The Local Government Association (LGA) is here to support, promote and improve local government. We will fight local government's corner and support councils through challenging times by making the case for greater devolution, helping councils tackle their challenges and assisting them to deliver better value for money services. 3. The LGA is an organisation that is run by its members. We are a political organisation because it is our elected representatives from all different political parties that direct the organisation through our boards and panels. However, we always strive to agree a common cross-party position on issues and to speak with one voice on behalf of local government. 4. The Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS) represents Directors of Adult Social Services in councils in England. As well as having statutory responsibilities for the commissioning and provision of adult social care, ADASS members often also share a number of other responsibilities for the commissioning and provision of housing, leisure, library, culture, arts, community services and a
significant proportion also hold statutory role of children’s services Submission Director. Key points – questions covered by the consultation 5. Individual authorities will have views on which combination of formulae is the most appropriate for their particular circumstances, but we believe that whatever decisions the government makes, it should:
a. Have due regard to the impact on overall council planning, as the
proposed formulae result in funding allocations vastly different from those indicated in December 2013 as part of the local government finance settlement; b. Consider whether the allocation mechanism makes the best
possible effort to address the potential of different take-up of services by self-funders in localities with different socioeconomic and other characteristics. c. Consider the robustness and completeness of deferred payments data with regard to the potential adjustments. 6. Detailed responses to individual questions are provided as an Annex. 7. We would be happy to provide further information on the comments provided in this consultation response. ion centre 020ion centre 7664 3131 www.local.gov.uk
[email protected] il LocalLondon Square, House, Government Smith 3HZ SW1P Ema 020Tel7664 020 30007664 Fax 3030 Informat Page 15
Agenda Item 2c Other points – not covered by the consultation 8. The Care Act 2014 has kick-started implementation of one of the most wide-ranging reforms of how social care is provided, with a number of new burdens falling on local government. 9. The government has rightly recognised that the responsibilities arising from the Care Act place additional costs on local government and has announced funding for the reforms that are set to be implemented from April 2015: a. £108.5m to finance the universal deferred payment scheme; b. £175m for costs related to additional assessments in preparation for the cost cap, and associated activity such as provision of information; c. £11.2m for provision of social care in prisons; d. £185m earmarked in the Better Care Fund for other reforms arising as a result of the Care Act in 2015. £50m of this is capital funding. e. Funding for the care cost cap and extension of the means test threshold, due to be implemented from April 2016, has not been announced yet. 10. LGA and ADASS have consistently challenged the government on the adequacy of the Care Act funding. The Government has acknowledged that information to base estimates of Care Act costs is difficult to obtain, especially at a national level. Funding for additional assessments has been identified as one of the major risks to successful implementation of reforms in 2015/16 and this also must be seen in the context of wider concerns about the totality of local government funding and the pressures upon day to day budgets. 11. To the Department’s credit it has acted on the sector’s concerns about the adequacy of Care Act funding in 2015/16. Both the LGA and ADASS are committed to working with the Department to better understand the likely Care Act costs in 2015/16. If the results from that joint research suggest a potential gap in what the reforms will cost and what money has been made available then we believe there are broadly three options to pursue. a. Delay some or all of the 2015/16 reforms. b. Amend the scope of some of the 2015/16 reforms. c. Re-open the 2015/16 Spending Round envelope. 12. We are concerned that the government is not prepared to reopen the overall settlement and would rather consider scaling back its ambition. Delaying or significantly altering the scope of the reforms would rightly cause disappointment amongst citizens who need support, and their carers. We therefore urge the Government to revisit the 2015/16 funding envelope for implementing the Care Act reforms if the latest joint research provides further evidence of inadequate funding. The research could also provide a further test of whether the formulae hold sufficient predictive power when it comes to costs that councils estimate locally.
Page 16
Agenda Item 2c 13. There are other funding streams for Care Act reforms in the Better Care Fund, worth £135m in total. £28.3m of this sum is intended to cover the costs of harmonisation of care eligibility criteria. So far the government has not signalled whether the funding is intended exclusively for councils which use more restrictive criteria, or for all councils irrespective of past policy decisions. We call for the government to immediately make social care authorities aware of what its intention is. This has to happen before local Better Care Fund plans are signed off. LGA and ADASS September 2014
Page 17
Agenda Item 2c Annex
The detailed responses to the questions in the consultation are:
CAA1: Do you prefer: CAA Option 1: the extrapolation approach or CAA Option 2: the epidemiology approach?
CAA2: Why do you prefer the option selected above? Do you have any comments about the options or alternative suggestions for allocating the funding?
DPA1: Do you agree with the Department’s proposal to allocate funding for the universal deferred payment scheme using this DPA RNF formula?
DPA2: Do you have any comments about our proposal or alternative suggestions for allocating the funding?
Impact on planning
These activity-specific relative needs formulae are a result of work commissioned by the Department of Health and undertaken jointly by the Personal Social Services Research Unit (PSSRU) and LG Futures.
The two organisations provided their expertise from past reviews of adult social care RNFs, and the LGA, ADASS, CIPFA and other bodies were engaged throughout the development process as part of a Project Advisory Panel.
Currently, the formulae are undergoing an independent peer review which should make the process with which the formulae have been designed more robust.
However, In December 2013, as part of the illustrative 2015/16 local government finance settlement, the government announced indicative allocations and councils are likely to have started planning their activity in 2015/16 based on those indications. The joint programme office stocktake of implementation progress includes a question about effects of the consultation on planning for further reference. We note that any combination of options of formulae presented in the paper result in large variations between the indicative allocations in the December 2013 settlement and exemplified allocations in the consultation document. This ranges from growth of up to 67% to reductions of up to 75%. We recognise that this is likely to be, at least in part, a result of these funding streams being based on activity-related formulae which can provide different results from the overarching RNFs. We also accept that these formulae concern funding that has never been distributed before. However, when making its decision the government should note the impact on councils that have already started preparing for the next financial year. At the worst case this may mean that a council could have started planning on the assumption that it would receive 4 times more funding than it is now potentially set to receive.
Page 18
Agenda Item 2c Whichever allocation mechanism the government decides to use, it should communicate the results to councils as soon as possible. An announcement in December would leave less than 2 months for councils to plan and set their budgets. As a result, we would suggest that the final allocations for new burdens funding be announced prior to the rest of the local government finance settlement. Even if the government was minded to revisit the total quantum of funding at the time of the settlement, this early announcement would serve as a clear indication of the minimum amount of funding to be received by individual councils in 2015/16.
Other points The formulae proposed in the consultation paper are activity based and attempt to estimate the likely demand for those activities. They estimate, in relative terms: - The number of people currently funding their own social care as they are believed to be the main driving factor behind the demand for additional assessments in 2015/16; and - The number of people in need of social care who have housing assets as a driving factor behind the demand for deferred payments.
As a result, they focus on which areas are predicted to have the biggest concentration of people in need of care who are excluded from accessing it by the means test. In doing so, the formulae appear to assume a uniform take-up rate of those services among self-funders, regardless of different socioeconomic and other characteristics. The government should consider if that is a valid assumption to make.
DPA3: What was the cost of deferred payments in your local authority?
This question is aimed at individual local authorities and not the LGA.
DPA4: Which option do you prefer, NDPA Option 1 (national netting off adjustment) or NDPA Option 2 (the local netting off adjustment)?
DPA5: Do you have any comments about the options, or alternative suggestions for netting off this funding?
The funding formula for deferred payments developed by PSSRU and LG Futures does not take into account the extent of current locally operated schemes, but estimates the relative size of total potential demand for deferred payments instead. The consultation document suggests the government is considering adjusting the allocations resulting from the formula to reflect the pre-existing extent of deferred payment schemes locally.
The likely result of this adjustment is that areas which already have extensive deferred payment schemes would receive less funding than that stipulated by the formula, while areas with small pre-existing schemes would receive more. Exemplifications are not available due to a lack of
Page 19
Agenda Item 2c data on the size of local schemes – the government is looking to use this consultation to collect the data through question DPA3.
The government should consider that there is a potential trade-off between aligning the funding with unaddressed demand and using data that may be imperfect, incomplete or difficult to update.
The consultation is being used as a means to collect data required for this localised adjustment to work appropriately. If it decides to go ahead with the adjustment, the government should ensure that this results in a complete and robust dataset.
Finally, if the government goes ahead with the adjustment it must consider the options for updating this mechanism for subsequent years should grant funding continue in some shape or form in 2016/17.
PRIS1: Do you agree with the Department’s proposal to allocate funding for social care in prisons using this formula?
PRIS2: Do you have any comments about our proposal or alternative suggestions for allocating the funding?
This proposal affects a limited number of local authorities and we would draw attention to their individual responses as a result.
Page 20 Agenda Item 3
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Local Growth Deals
Purpose of report
For discussion.
Summary
In July, the Government announced that Local Growth Deals had been agreed with all 39 Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). This report provides an update on new analysis that the LGA published ahead of the announcement and a review of the key features of the Growth Deals. It also sets out some brief reflections for members to debate on the path that Growth Deals have charted towards the scale of devolution we are ultimately seeking and how the LGA can keep up the pressure.
This report was considered by the last meeting of the Economy and Transport Board on 30 July and has been referred to the Executive for its consideration.
Recommendation
That the Executive discuss the issues raised and endorses the Environment, Economy, Housing and Transport Board to take this work forward.
Action
The Environment, Economy, Housing and Transport Board to progress the actions agreed by the Executive.
Contact officer: Piali Das Gupta Position: Senior Adviser Phone no: 020 7664 3041 E-mail: [email protected]
Page 21
Agenda Item 3
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Local Growth Deals
Background
1. Last year, the Government responded to the Heseltine Review and the LGA’s intensive lobbying by committing to negotiate Growth Deals with every Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP). The June Spending Round subsequently set out that a £2 billion Local Growth Fund (LGF) would be used to fund the Growth Deals annually from 2015/16, with allocations determined partly on a competitive basis on the strength of LEPs’ Strategic Economic Plans (SEPs). The outcomes of the Local Growth Deal negotiations were announced on July 7, including the LGF allocation to each LEP. 1
2. The LGA got out ahead of the Local Growth Deals announcement by publishing new research on the limitations of the current system for funding growth, following the steer from the Economy and Transport (E&T) Board that the LGA should challenge the level of devolution that has been delivered. The next section summarises the key findings of our analysis, which is followed by a review of the key features in the Local Growth Deals. The final section takes stock of what Growth Deals signal in terms of progress towards ambitious devolution, with brief reflections for members to debate on how the LGA can keep up the pressure.
New analysis of the current funding system
3. At the start of the year, members of the E&T Board sought to revive the Heseltine debate by demonstrating how heavily centralised and bureaucratic the system remains, illustrating that it generates unnecessary costs and discourages investors. To that end, we worked with Shared Intelligence to produce new analysis on the fragmentation of funding and Localis on the costs of bidding. Both of these pieces show that our current system holds back local growth.
4. Drawing on a report by Shared Intelligence on the number of Government funding streams for local growth and regeneration, our analysis shows that the funding landscape is even more fragmented and centralised than Lord Heseltine uncovered in 2012. We found that:
4.1. There were over 124 funding streams for local growth and regeneration across about 20 Government Departments and agencies in 2013-14 alone. Appendix A is an infographic we have designed to show this fragmentation at a glance.
4.2. Together, these funding streams amounted to more than £22 billion in one year. The Local Growth Fund, at £2 billion per year, is equivalent to less than 10 per cent of current central government spending on local growth.
4.3. Over 75 per cent of total funding for local growth (£17+ billion) could not be accessed directly by local authorities or LEPs, nor do they appear to have any say
1 See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/327542/LGF-funding-allocations.pdf for funding allocations and https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/local-growth-deals for the details of each Growth Deal.
Page 22
Agenda Item 3
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
over which projects would be funded to ensure that they support the priorities of local and sub-regional economies.
4.4. About half of the funding streams were allocated through competitive bidding processes, which, taken with the research outlined in paragraph 5, implies that local partners (including councils, businesses and charities) must be having to spend an enormous amount just to bid for resources.
5. Our second piece of analysis with Localis is the first quantitative data on the costs of growth fund bidding. This will be particularly useful to counter the prevailing view within central government that competition is inherently the most effective way to allocate funding because competitive tension incentivises bidders to raise their game, whilst the process enables funders to target resources at the best projects. Using survey data on the costs for councils in competing for funding from specific funding streams, our analysis sheds light on the adverse effects of competitive processes. Our findings include:
5.1. The average cost of putting together funding bids for local authorities alone was about £30,000 per bid. This figure does not take into account the costs for other public or private sector partners, or for departments in judging the bids.
5.2. To illustrate what this means, the overall cost to the public sector of bidding for the Local Pinch Point fund alone may have been in the order of £6 million, based on the average cost of preparing a bid and the number of bids submitted. This equates to about 7 per cent of the annual value of that fund.
5.3. At a minimum, local authorities found that they had to devote an estimated 33 days in officer time per bid.
5.4. Only a small minority of applicants are receiving formal grant offers within six months. Most are waiting up to a year and many are waiting even longer.
5.5. Three-quarters of respondents said that the system creates uncertainty for delivery partners.
6. Following the Board’s steer, our press release on this new analysis took a challenging stance about the degree to which the government has delivered on the recommendations of the Heseltine Review (see Appendix B .) Members will observe that our analysis has been endorsed by the business sector, with the Federation of Small Businesses and the LEP Network both providing supportive lines for our release. The story was picked up by the Mail Online, Press Association and Municipal Journal, whilst our analysis was also cited by Clive Betts MP, Chairman of the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) Select Committee, during a recent meeting of the All Party Urban Development Group.
Analysis of the Growth Deals
7. Any analysis of the Growth Deals based on currently-available information will invariably be imprecise because the figures presented by government contain a mixture of old and new announcements, as well as confirmed and provisional allocations. For instance, the Government headline was that £6 billion of local projects had been agreed through the first wave of Growth Deals, which is meant to include full allocation of the first year of the £2 billion Local Growth Fund in 2015-16, plus provisional funding allocations to some
Page 23
Agenda Item 3
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
LEPs in subsequent years. However, the fine print of the government announcement also revealed that £267 million of European Social Fund skills match funding and Housing Revenue Account (HRA) borrowing next year is still to be assigned.
8. From our rough calculations, we believe that less than a third of the £300 million additional HRA headroom has been allocated so far, although our understanding is that this element was oversubscribed on the basis of expressions of interest from councils. At its last meeting, Environment & Housing Board members noted strong concerns from the sector about the tight timescales to submit HRA bids and the strings attached in the bidding criteria, which will have had an impact on funding allocations. LGA officers have followed up with DCLG officials about next steps and were advised that they were impressed by the quality of the expressions of interest that they received. DCLG are keen to follow up with individual councils and may open a second bidding round for HRA borrowing later this year.
9. Our analysis of the Growth Deals focuses on how genuinely devolutionary they can be considered, looking particularly at the degree to which funding has been allocated without strings attached, gives certainty to local partners over a longer-term funding horizon, provides other freedoms and flexibilities and responds to the key themes emerging from the SEPs. On the point about strings attached, we found that the majority of LEPs remain subject to central controls, albeit to different degrees:
9.1. 20 LEPs have been told that their funding must be used to deliver the projects highlighted in the Deal, although they have some flexibility over the management of these projects and will be given their funding annually in advance. Any significant changes to the projects will need to be discussed with the Government in advance.
9.2. 15 LEPs have been advised that funds will be disbursed to them quarterly to ensure that they are delivering all the projects in their Deal and will have to agree any changes to projects with Government each quarter.
10. However, there are some encouraging signs that departmental strings are starting to be loosened. If we separate out HRA borrowing (which as councils’ money should not be considered “devolved” funding), about 70 per cent of the LGF is sourced from transport funds. However, more non-transport schemes have been supported than we would have expected prior to the Growth Deals process, which shows that the Government is starting to listen to local partners about their priorities. The consultancy firm Regeneris looked into the nature of the projects that have been funded and found about a hundred schemes in areas like innovation, regeneration, flood defences, digital connectivity and energy generation that are being supported. 2
11. Progress is also starting to be made with respect to longer-term funding certainty for LEPs. All but 6 LEPs have been given provisional allocations of funding past 2015-16. Regeneration expert, David Marlow, has conducted analysis of the sums that shows that beyond the first year, £4.6 billion is allocated for 2016-21, of which £1.4 billion is ‘provisional’ and some of the rest has been previously committed. He cautions, however, that some LEPs have very high levels of provisional allocations, with over 50 per cent of their 2016-21 awards needing further discussion before they can be firmed up. David Marlow’s calculation is that the new “definite” LGF allocations amount to 55 per cent of the Government’s headline figure, which still leaves LEPs a lot to play for. Overall, it is
2 http://regeneris.co.uk/latest/blog/entry/local-growth-fund-a-few-stones-turned-over Page 24
Agenda Item 3
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
positive that the Government has taken on board the LGA’s strong message that we need to see a shift from one-time project funding to supporting a longer pipeline of local projects, which is vital to inspire investor confidence and the delivery of long-term economic strategies. Nevertheless, the experience of a number of City Deals whose terms were altered by departments after agreements had been signed serves as a cautionary example here, so we will be keeping an eye on the longer-term funding commitments.
12. Given the feedback we had from councils that government departments were not particularly open to discussing freedoms and flexibilities, it is not surprising that the Growth Deals are pretty thin in this regard overall, although a number have promising elements:
12.1. The London Deal provides a number of freedoms and flexibilities including trialling new approaches to incentivising businesses to take on apprentices; a payment by results pilot for learners aged 19 years and above and data sharing between central and local government.
12.2. Several areas including Greater Manchester, Lancashire and the North East will be trialling public service reform, e.g. with the establishment of mental health and employment trailblazers involving a range of local partners including councils, Jobcentre Plus, Clinical Commissioning Groups and Health and Wellbeing Boards.
12.3. The Cumbria Deal includes a commitment for Government to look at how policy can better take into account hub towns that serve a rural hinterland.
12.4. The Buckingham Thames Valley Deal commits the local DWP to exploring options for using existing flexibilities within the system to continue paying JSA during extended training / work experience.
13. Finally, we considered the degree to which the Growth Deals have delivered against the common asks emerging from the SEPs, which can broadly be characterised as proposals for greater customisation of programmes related to skills/employment, trade and business support, as well as more strategic use and disposal of public sector land and assets to support local priorities. In this regard, as well as the total amount of funding devolved, it has to be said that the exercise has fallen short. It is disappointing that most of the Deals contained stock commitments from government agencies that lack teeth and specificity and are so high-level that it is difficult to see what will change in practice:
13.1. UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) will commit to effectively communicating its strategic priorities to LEPs and where possible help them access relevant opportunities.
13.2. The Highways Agency will engage the Local Enterprise Partnership in better understanding the challenges and opportunities associated with the network and to develop evidence based long-term plans to bring about much needed local economic growth and development, and commits to providing each Local Enterprise Partnership with a named contact.
13.3. The Homes and Communities Agency is supportive of closer working with the LEP to identify the potential for collaboration within the existing programmes.
Page 25
Agenda Item 3
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
13.4. The Skills Funding Agency (SFA) will involve LEPs in the procurement of new provision; require providers through their funding agreements to explain to LEPs details of their provision and planning; and publish information during summer 2014 on how LEPs can influence the use of all skills budgets in their localities, and the steps they can take if they are dissatisfied with the pattern of delivery.
14. Insofar as these commitments represent modest improvements on the status quo, they may give us something to build on. The final section invites members to consider where the LGA should next take the debate.
Future considerations
15. The LGA’s publication at conference, Investing in our future: the first 100 days of the next government 3, sets out solutions to the most difficult problems that will be in the inboxes of future Ministers and doorstep issues for all politicians, including:
15.1. Helping everyone find homes at an affordable price;
15.2. Helping everyone find a job by improving their skills and employment prospects;
15.3. Making sure everyone has a share in rising national prosperity; and
15.4. Offering an affordable long-term solution to fixing the nation’s roads.
16. Our proposals are fully-costed and show that we can tackle these challenges without increasing public spending, and, in fact, could save the public purse £11 billion, the equivalent of £200 for every man, woman and child in England and Wales.
17. The next stage of our campaign will be to promote our proposals and deepen the evidence base for them, from party conferences in the autumn through to the next Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). Recognising that the public policy arena is already crowded with voices seeking to influence manifestos and the next government, we are seeking to building alliances with external stakeholders such as the business sector, so that we are uniting behind common proposals and speaking with one voice as far as possible. Our work on Growth Deals already has the support of business (see paragraph 6).
18. Members are invited to consider the lessons from Growth Deals that the new Environment, Economy, Housing and Transport Board should feed into future lobbying and policy work. Notwithstanding the striking disparity between the scale of devolution between the various Deals, many of the principles we have promoted are starting to gain traction more widely:
18.1. The value of a single investment fund to deliver local infrastructure;
18.2. The creation of growth hubs to tailor support to the needs of local businesses;
18.3. More effective use of all public sector land and assets in an area; and
3 http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/6341755/LGA+Campaign+2014+-+100+Days/8255560f-7c96-432f- bbfe-514d3734a204 Page 26
Agenda Item 3
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
18.4. Recognition that the proceeds of local growth should be returned to a local area.
19. One idea may be to revive the notion of an optional core package of flexibilities, drawing together the successful features of the individual (City and Growth) Deals.
20. LGA officers are meeting directors from the Departments for Business, Innovation and Skills, Communities and Local Government and the Cabinet Office in October to review the lessons from the first round of Growth Deals. The views for the E&T Board and the Executive will be relayed to officials at that meeting.
21. Executive members are invited to give a steer to new Environment, Economy, Housing and Transport Board the legacy from the first Growth Deals and how we strengthen local economic levers in England.
Page 27
Page 28 FRAGMENTATION OF FUNDING FOR LOCAL GROWTH
Broadband mobile infrastructure Better Bus Areas AND REGENERATION Broadband delivery 0.038 0.018 Maintenance UK – roll out in rural areas 0.475 0.133 Accelerating Innovation Broadband super in Rail Rural Community Broad- connected cities 0.003 Highway’s Agency pinch band Fund 0.038 point programme 0.005 0.123 Rail Industry R&D Funding Smart Ticketing (Future Railways) Major schemes programme 0.039 0.009 0.335
Farm and Forestry School sixth forms Apprenticeship grant for Local sustainable transport Improvement Scheme 2.307 employers of 16-24 year olds fund Integrated block transport 0.007 0.013 Further Education 0.160 0.320 4.228 Adult Skills BudgetBudget (incl(includesudes 19+ apprenticeships) Growing Places Fund 2.468 EuropeanEuropean Social Fund Maintenance 0.171 0.183 Rural Economy Grant 0.750 Scheme Community Learning Local Infrastructure 0.020 0.211 Green Deal 24+ advancedadvanced Local pinch point fund 0.061 learlearnlearninging loans Paths for Communities Total £4.52bn 0.085 0.129 Fund 0.001 Learner Support DECC Innovation Programme 0.177 Major schemes programme Skills and Knowledge 0.081 0.926 Transfer Programme 0.007
Waste PFI credits Flood defences National Careers Service 0.085 0.574 0.088 Linking places fund 0.015 Coastal Communities Fund 0.029 Skills Employer ownership 0.046 Total £11.36bn Independent living fund Work Programme 0.300 0.703
Page 29 Financial Assistance Skills Infrastructure Total Youth Contract for disen- Scheme 0.055 gaged 17 and 17 year olds 0.093 0.042
Work Choice Other Employment Offender Learning and 0.065 Programmes funding 0.072 Skills Service 0.130 Disability Programmes Troubled Families Youth Contract Wage 0.200 0.136 Subsidies 0.180 National Citizen Service Apprenticeshipsships (16-18 £22.83bn 0.104 year olds) and traineeships Flexible Support Fund 0.826 0.096
Growth and innovation fund Employer Investment Funds Capital Grants Agenda Item3a 0.018 0.029 Unionlearn 0.450 0.019 Housing Employment Support Total £1.59bn Innovation and Commercialisation Total £0.68bn Total £2.56bn Community right to build BSI Targeted Funding 0.008 Local Infrastructure Fund 0.267 Technology Strategy Board 0.005 Beds in Sheds 0.004 thematic funding Growth voucher 0.440 0.030 Affordable Homes Empty Homes (clusters and i4i challenge awards Health Innovation Programme New homes bonus 0.005 Research Partnership community groups) Challenge Fund 0.923 0.038 0.750 Investment Fund 0.005 0.120 i4i product Synthetic biology UK Research Partnership Waste and Resources HCA - Kickstart Decent Homes (LA) Community right to build development awards start up fund Investment Fund Action Programme 0.020 0.217 Preventing Homelessness 0.008 0.005 0.003 0.070 0.026 0.018 Decent Homes (housing associations) Regional Growth Fund Care & Support Specialised 0.104 National Empty Homes Business Support Total £1.71bn 0.600 Housing Loans Fund 0.032 0.003 Custom Build 0.005 Build to rent Enterprise Capital Funds 0.175 National Call Centre Programme Manufacturing Advisory Promotional expenditure Service 0.003 European Regional High Value Opportunities 0.050 0.042 0.198 Deveopment Funding Programme International Trade Advice Tradeshow Access 0.501 0.011 0.021 Programme Growth Accelerator 0.013 0.050 Designing Demand Business is Great Creative England 0.001 0.030 Marketing & Publicity Passport to Export 0.010 0.005 0.001 Business Angel Co-investment fund Start Up Loans Business Specialists Rural Growth Networks Local Enterprise 0.050 0.043 Sector-specific support 0.009 0.008 Partnerships The Sector Mentoring 0.009 New Enterprise Allowance 0.015 Challenge Fund 0.011 0.001 L14-261 Page 30 Agenda Item 3b
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
ANNEX B: Press release on new LGA analysis
COSTLY GOVERNMENT BUREACRACY IS HOLDING BACK GROWTH, COUNCILS AND BUSINESSES WARN
Businesses and councils are being hamstrung in their efforts to create jobs, build homes and invest in new infrastructure because of costly government-imposed bureaucracy and significant delays.
New research, published today by the Local Government Association, reveals for the first time the true cost to councils and businesses of negotiating the maze of Whitehall bureaucracy when applying for growth funding. It shows the public purse is having to spend tens of millions on bidding for its own money.
Local authorities and business today issue a joint call for government to scrap an inefficient and outdated system that channels funding for local growth through more than 100 separate pots and instead devolve money to local councils and businesses directly through a single investment fund.
They are warning that the current system is hurting the economy by creating significant delays in delivering projects and generating confusion and frustration for businesses
In 2012 Lord Heseltine recommended that government stops allocating funds in “penny packets”, with departments distributing funding to local areas according to their own particular objectives, timetable and requirements. The Government subsequently agreed that funding for local growth should be brought together into a single pot without internal ring fences.
However, new LGA-commissioned research published today shows that government funding for growth is becoming even more fragmented with the number of funding streams now having doubled since Lord Heseltine’s report.
The research shows that:
• There were 124 funding schemes for local growth and regeneration across 20 departments and agencies, amounting to over £22 billion in 2013-14. About half of these required local authorities, businesses and charities to bid for money.
• The average cost of putting together funding bids for local authorities alone was about £30,000. It also cost local authorities an estimated 33 days in officer time, per bid.
• To illustrate what this means, the overall cost to the public sector of bidding for the Local Pinch Point fund alone may have been in the order of £6 million, based on the average cost of preparing a bid and the number of bids submitted. This equates to about 7 per cent of the annual value of that fund.
• Only a small minority of applicants are receiving formal grant offers within six months. Most are waiting up to a year and many are waiting even longer.
Cllr Peter Box, Chair of the LGA’s Economy and Transport Board, said:
Page 31
Agenda Item 3b
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
“Millions of pounds and hundreds of days of officer time are tied up just trying to access funding
“This is proving completely counterproductive to our efforts to create jobs, build homes and develop the infrastructure we need to get our economy growing.
“The complex maze of bureaucracy Whitehall is clinging on to appears to have been designed to create work for civil servants rather than jobs for the people in the rest of the country.
“It is farcical that government persists with a system which requires millions of pounds of public money to be spent on bidding for funds from the public purse, whilst creating uncertainty for businesses and investors. Councils and businesses want to spend this money on improving the economy, not reams of costly bureaucracy.
“Local government has great ambition to get on with the job of building homes, creating jobs, supporting businesses and investing in new infrastructure, but has been hamstrung by funding cuts and by a convoluted system not fit for purpose.
“Local economies are complex and national funding streams are not as coordinated, flexible and responsive as we need them to be in order to get projects off the ground in good time.”
Last June, the Government established the £2 billion Local Growth Fund to help solve the problem of too many funding streams. However the fund pulls together just six of the 124 funding streams identified by the LGA research and it amounts to less than 10 per cent of what the Government currently spends on local growth and regeneration.
These findings are being published as local civic and business leaders anxiously await news about how much funding they will receive to promote local economic growth.
John Allan, National Chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses, said:
“This research clearly shows the problems that result from having such a fragmented system for promoting regional economic development.
“Having so many different funding streams each with their own timetables and objectives makes it very difficult to produce programmes that impact meaningfully on businesses.
“It also wastes resources on bidding processes that could be better used elsewhere. What is required is a far more co-ordinated approach focused on fewer schemes that actually work over the longer term.”
Alex Pratt, Chairman of the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Network, said: “The research findings illustrate the unhealthy extent to which the over-centralisation and fragmentation of strategic influence over the factors of production has led to damaging instability, inefficiency, and delays in realising economic opportunities.
“Economic and business development require long term consistent approaches that fully reflect the needs on the ground and against which businesses can plan with certainty and not the haphazard, last minute, bureaucratic surprises often characterised by national silo responsibilities.” ENDS
Page 32
Agenda Item 4
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
LGA Nominations to EU Committee of the Regions
Purpose
For decision.
Summary
Based on proposals from LGA political groups, this report recommends the nominations of 15 full and 15 alternate members to the Committee of the Regions for the 2015-20 mandate.
Recommendation
Members are recommended to approve the list of nominations in Appendix B.
Action
Officers to submit the agreed list to the Department for Communities and Local Government.
Contact officer: Ian Hughes Position: Programme Manager Phone no: 020 7664 3101 Email: [email protected]
Page 33
Agenda Item 4
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
LGA Nominations to EU Committee of the Regions
Background
1. The Committee of Regions (CoR) is the local and regional assembly for the EU. It is consulted on all proposals for new EU legislation that will ultimately be delivered by local government, covering areas such as: regional and urban regeneration; transport; public services and procurement; employment and social policy; environmental policy including waste management; air quality targets and energy efficiency; civil protection; public health; licensing and trading standards; education and training; culture and heritage; migration; citizenship and fundamental rights. It has a five-year term from January 2015 to December 2019.
2. The CoR comprises 350 members in total, plus the same number of “alternates” (substitute members). The UK Delegation has 24 full members and 24 alternates; the LGA provides 15 out of 24 members in both categories. Separately, the Greater London Authority (GLA) has nominated one member (Roger Evans, Conservative) and one alternate (Jennette Arnold, Labour).
Nomination process
3. English appointments to CoR are made by Central Government, based on an LGA proposal. Our proposal is required to meet a number of selection rules including:
3.1. Political balance (based on the LGA template); 3.2. Geographical spread (for reference the LGA proposal is measured against “old” regions in the appendix); 3.3. Type of councils; 3.4. Gender and ethnic balance; 3.5. Taking account of age and experience of disability; and 3.6. Ensuring a balance of new and returning members.
4. In July-August, the LGA political groups were invited to select members according to the following template and meeting the above criteria:
4.1. Labour: 6 full members, 6 alternates. 4.2. Conservatives: 6 full members, 6 alternates. 4.3. Liberal Democrats: 2 full members, 1 alternate. 4.4. Independents: 1 full member, 2 alternates.
5. The full list of members is attached at Appendix B to this report, together with a table showing how the Government’s selection guidelines have been met. In submitting its proposal, the LGA has been asked to ensure, insofar as is reasonably practicable, to satisfy themselves that their suggested English representation contains no-one whose circumstances or background could risk damaging the reputation of the UK delegation or public confidence in those representing the UK in a European institution. Page 34
Agenda Item 4
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
6. Our proposal is subject to ministerial approval. Once the LGA Executive has agreed a final list, our proposal, together with the GLA nominations, will be submitted to the Decrement for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). After DCLG ministerial scrutiny, an agreed English list will be submitted to the Foreign Office for further scrutiny by end-September 2014.
Next steps
7. New members will take their seats in January 2015 for a five year term. The LGA will convene a meeting of the new UK delegation in January to elect UK office holders. Significantly, one of the first policy statements that the new delegation will consider is the 2015 legislative programme of the European Commission which is expected to contain numerous proposals which will impact on councils (including a revision of regulations on waste, air pollution and environmental standards).
8. In order to coordinate work between the LGA leadership and the new COR delegation, the Chairman will convene six-monthly meetings with the leadership of this and other European delegations to ensure a clear link to the work of the Association. This was agreed by the Leadership Board in July.
Financial Implications
9. All costs related to member participation are covered by the CoR itself.
Recommendation
10. Members are asked to agree the list of nominations and instruct officers to submit these to DCLG.
Page 35
Agenda Item 4
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
APPENDIX A: OVERVIEW OF LGA NOMINATIONS (TO BE UPDATED FOR LABOUR NOM: 1 ALT)
FULL ALT TOT
REGION North East 2 1 3 North West 3 3 6 Yorkshire & Humberside 3 1 4 West Midlands 1 1 2 East Midlands - 1 1 Eastern 1 2 3 South West 2 1 3 South East 2 2 4 London 1 3 4 TOTAL 15 15 30
GENDER BALANCE Male 9 7 16 Female 6 7 13 TOTAL 15 14 29 Labour nom outstanding +1 +1
ETHNIC BALANCE B&ME - 4 4 TOTAL - 4 4
CONTINUITY/RENEWAL New members 6 6 12 Returning 9 8 17 TOTAL 15 14 29 Labour nom outstanding +1 +1
Page 36
Agenda Item 4
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
ANNEX B: FULL NOMINATIONS BY LGA POLITICAL GROUP
STATUS NAME AUTHORITY REGION M/F NEW
LABOUR LIST (6 full, 6 alternates) FULL Stephen Alambritis LB Merton (London) M NEW FULL Sir Albert Bore Birmingham (WM) M returning FULL Judith Hughes Kirklees (Y&H) F NEW FULL Kevin Peel Manchester (NW) M NEW FULL Paul Watson Sunderland (NE) M returning FULL Emily Westley Hastings (SE) F NEW ALT Sanchia Alasia LB Barking (London) F NEW ALT Sherma Batson Stevenage (Eastern) F returning ALT Dr Zahid Chauhan Oldham) (NW) M NEW ALT Imran Hussain Bradford (Y&H) M returning ALT Bob Price Oxford (SE) M NEW ALT VACANCY
CONSERVATIVE LIST (6 full, 6 alternates) FULL Joe Cooney Pendle (NW) M NEW FULL Robert Gordon Herts CC (Eastern) M NEW FULL Gordon Keymer Tandridge (SE) M returning FULL Dee Sharpe East Riding (Y&H) F returning FULL Harvey Siggs Mendip (SW) M returning FULL Judith Wallace North Tyneside (NE) F NEW ALT Paul Findlow Cheshire East (NW) M NEW ALT Suzanne Grocott LB Merton (London) F NEW ALT Linda Robinson Wychavon DC (WM) F NEW ALT David Shakespeare Wycombe DC (SE) M returning ALT Kay Twitchen Essex CC (Eastern) F returning ALT Martin Veal Bath & NE Somt (SW) M NEW
INDEPENDENT LIST (1 full, 2 alternates) FULL Andrew Cooper Kirklees (Y&H) M NEW (Green Party) ALT Gillian Ford LB Havering (London) F returning (Independent) ALT Geoff Knight Lancaster (NW) M NEW (Independent)
LIBERAL DEMOCRAT LIST (2 full, 1 alternate) FULL Maggie Lishman Burnley (NW) F returning FULL Jill Shortland Somerset (SW) F returning ALT Doreen Huddart Newcastle (NE) F returning
GLA NOMINATIONS (for info) FULL Roger Evans AM GLA (Cons) (London) M returning ALT Jennette Arnold AM GLA (Lab) (London) F returning
Page 37
Page 38 Agenda Item 5
LG A Executive 11 September 2014
Membership, Terms of Reference and Appointments to the LGA’s Governance Structures for 2014/2015
Purpose of report
To ask the LGA Executive to note its Membership and Terms of Reference for 2014/2015.
Summary
The Executive’s Membership (Appendix A ) and Terms of Reference (Appendix B ) are attached to this report for noting.
For information a list of appointments to the LGA’s Board for 2014/15 as set out at Appendix C.
Recommendations
That the LGA Executive notes: (a) its Membership for 2014/2015; (b) its Terms of Reference; and (c) the appointments to the LGA’s governance structures for 2014/2015.
Action
No further action necessary.
Contact officer: Cathy Boyle Position: Manager, Member Services Phone no: 020 7664 3205 E-mail: [email protected]
Page 39 Page 40 Agenda Item 5a
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
LGA Executive – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor and Role Authority / Representing
Labour ( 10 ) Cllr David Sparks OBE (Chair) Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Jim McMahon (Vice-Chair) Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Sharon Taylor OBE (Deputy Stevenage Borough Council Chair) Mayor Sir Steve Bullock (Deputy Lewisham London Borough Council Chair) Cllr Keith Wakefield (Deputy Leeds City Council Chair) Sir Richard Leese CBE (Board Manchester City Council and City Regions Chair) Board Cllr Claire Kober (Board Chair) Haringey LB and Resources Board Cllr Ann Lucas OBE (Board Coventry City Council and Safer and Stronger Chair) Communities Board Cllr Peter Box CBE (Board Wakefield Metropolitan District Council and Chair) Economy, Environment, Housing and Transport Vacancy (Balancing Member) Labour
Conservative ( 8) Cllr Gary Porter (Vice-Chair) South Holland District Council Cllr Mike Jones (Deputy Chair) Cheshire West and Chester Council Cllr Philippa Roe (Deputy Chair) Westminster City Council Cllr David Hodge 1 (Deputy Chair) Surrey County Council and People and Placed Board Cllr Neil Clarke MBE (Deputy Rushcliffe Borough Council Chair) Cllr David Simmonds (Board Hillingdon London Borough Council and Chair) Children and Young People Board Cllr Mrs Izzi Seccombe (Board Warwickshire County Council and Community Chair) Wellbeing Board Cllr Peter Fleming (Board Chair) Sevenoaks District Council and Improvement and Innovation Board
Liberal Democrat ( 4) Cllr Gerald Vernon-Jackson Portsmouth City Council (Vice-Chair) Mayor Dorothy Thornhill MBE Watford Borough Council (Deputy Chair) Cllr Chris White (Balancing Hertfordshire County Council Member) Cllr Jeremy Hilton (Balancing Gloucestershire County Council Member)
1 Double hatted: Two voted by virtue of his two roles: (a) Deputy Chair of the Association; and (b) Board Chair
Page 41 Agenda Item 5a
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Independent ( 4) Cllr Marianne Overton MBE Lincolnshire County Council (Vice-Chair) Cllr Ian Stephens (Board Chair) Isle of Wight Council and Culture, Tourism and Sport Board Cllr Peter Reeve (Balancing Cambridgeshire County Council Member) Cllr Robert Dutton OBE Wrexham County Borough Council (Balancing Member)
Regional Representatives ( 10 ) Cllr John Hart CON South West Councils (Devon County Council) Cllr Tony Jackson CON East of England LGA (East Herts DC) Cllr Gordon Keymer CBE CON South East England Councils (Tandridge DC) Mayor Jules Pipe LAB London Councils (Hackney London Borough Council) Cllr Martin Hill OBE CON East Midlands Councils (Lincolnshire County Council) Cllr Roger Lawrence LAB West Midlands LGA (Wolverhampton City) Cllr Stephen Parnaby OBE CON Local Government Yorkshire and Humber (East Riding of Yorkshire Council) Cllr Paul Watson LAB Association of North East Councils (Sunderland City Council) Cllr Barrie Grunewald LAB North West Regional Leader's Board (St Helens MBC) Vacancy WLGA
Non-voting Members of LGA Executive
Councillor Representing Alderman Sir David Wootton INDE Local Partnerships (City of London) Cllr Mark Hawthorne MBE CON County Councils Network SIG (Gloucestershire County Council) Cllr Gillian Brown CON District Councils Network (Arun District Council) Sir Stephen Houghton CBE LAB SIGOMA (Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council)
Page 42 Agenda Item 5b
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
LGA Executive: Terms of Reference
Provides strategic direction to the work of the Local Government Association and a mechanism to listen and influence national government legislation and public opinion. It supports councils and councillors to serve their communities in the best ways possible and is responsible for:
1. Ensuring that the LGA is focused on serving councils and councillors across England and Wales
2. Maintaining strong links with the sector, including through the sub-national groupings of councils, to ensure LGA priorities are based on the views of members and member councils.
3. Agreeing the LGA’s vision and priorities through the LGA business plan, taking advice from the LGA Leadership Board.
4. Determining LGA policy for cross-cutting policy issues, including the localism agenda .
5. Holding the Boards to account and providing a steer on complex policy issues.
6. Setting the annual LGA budget and subscriptions, taking advice from the Leadership Board.
7. Appointing members to relevant European and International Bodies in accordance with the LGA’s Political Conventions.
8. Co-ordinating growth and transport policy on the advice of City Regions, People & Places and Environment, Economy, Housing and Transport Boards.
9. Determining finance and workforce policy on the advice of the Resources Board.
9. Maintaining corporate oversight of equalities issues across the LGA.
The Executive can allocate responsibility to one or more of its members for particular areas within its remit and/or establish member task groups.
It can invite Chairs of Special Interest Groups (SIGs) to attend meetings.
1 September 2014
Page 43 Page 44 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
LGA Leadership Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 5) Cllr David Sparks OBE (Chair) Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Jim McMahon (Vice-Chair) Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Sharon Taylor OBE (Deputy Stevenage Borough Council Chair) Mayor Sir Steve Bullock (Deputy Lewisham London Borough Council Chair) Cllr Keith Wakefield (Deputy Leeds City Council Chair)
Conservative ( 5) Cllr Gary Porter (Vice-Chair) South Holland District Council Cllr Mike Jones (Deputy Chair) Cheshire West and Chester Council Cllr Philippa Roe (Deputy Chair) Westminster City Council Cllr David Hodge (Deputy Chair) Surrey County Council Cllr Neil Clarke MBE (Deputy Rushcliffe Borough Council Chair)
Liberal Democrat ( 2) Cllr Gerald Vernon-Jackson Portsmouth City Council (Vice-Chair) Mayor Dorothy Thornhill MBE Watford Borough Council (Deputy Chair)
Independent ( 1) Cllr Marianne Overton MBE Lincolnshire County Council (Vice-Chair)
Page 45 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Community Wellbeing Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 7) Cllr Lib Peck Lambeth London Borough Council Cllr Barbara Cannon Allerdale Borough Council Cllr Fay Howard Swindon Borough Council Cllr Linda Thomas (Vice-Chair) Bolton Council Cllr Iain Malcolm South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Sandra Samuels Wolverhampton City Council Cllr Lynn Travis Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council
Substitutes Cllr Maureen Cummings Wakefield Metropolitan District Council Cllr Jonathan McShane Hackney London Borough Council
Conservative ( 7) Cllr Elaine Atkinson Borough of Poole Cllr Andrew Gravells Gloucestershire County Council Cllr Louise Goldsmith West Sussex County Council Cllr Colin Noble Suffolk County Council Cllr Vic Pritchard Bath & North East Somerset Council Cllr Izzi Seccombe (Chair) Warwickshire County Council Cllr Kenneth Taylor OBE Coventry City Council
Substitutes Cllr Claire-Louise Leyland Camden Council Cllr Liz Mallinson Cumbria County Council Cllr Bill Bentley East Sussex County Council Cllr Colette Wyatt-Lowe Hertfordshire County Council
Liberal Democrat ( 2) Cllr Katie Hall (Deputy Chair) Bath & North East Somerset Council Cllr Jason Zadrozny Ashfield District Council
Substitutes Cllr Doreen Huddart Newcastle upon Tyne City Council
Independent ( 2) Cllr Gillian Ford (Deputy Chair) Havering London Borough Council Cllr Mark Ereira Suffolk County Council
Substitutes Cllr Adrian Naylor Bradford Metropolitan District Council Cllr Helen Grant North Yorkshire County Council
Page 46 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Culture, Tourism & Sport Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 7) Cllr Alyson Barnes Rossendale Borough Council Cllr Muhammed Butt Brent Council Cllr Barrie Grunewald St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Simon Henig (Vice-Chair) Durham County Council Cllr Caitlin Bisknell High Peak Borough Council Cllr David Phillips Swansea City and County Council Cllr Terry O'Neill Warrington Council
Substitutes Cllr Sonja Crisp City of York Council
Conservative ( 7) Cllr Doreen Stephenson East Lindsey District Council Sir William Lawrence Bt Stratford-on-Avon District Council Cllr Peter Golds Tower Hamlets Council Cllr Tom Fitzpatrick North Norfolk District Council Cllr David Burbage MBE (Deputy Windsor & Maidenhead Royal Borough Chair) Cllr Blake Pain Harborough District Council Cllr Greg Smith Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council
Substitutes Cllr Colin Organ Gloucester City Council Cllr Paul Yallop Worthing Borough Council Cllr David Hall Somerset County Council Cllr Barry Lewis North East Derbyshire District Council
Liberal Democrat ( 2) Cllr Flick Rea MBE (Deputy Camden Council Chair) Cllr Mike Bell North Somerset Council
Substitutes Cllr Stewart Golton Leeds City Council
Independent ( 2) Cllr Amanda Martin Council of the Isles of Scilly Cllr Ian Stephens (Chair) Isle of Wight Council
Substitutes Cllr Apu Bagchi Bedford Borough Council Cllr Robert Dutton OBE Wrexham County Borough Council Cllr Adrian Naylor Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Page 47 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Improvement & Innovation Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 7) Cllr Claudia Webbe Islington Council Cllr Judi Billing (Deputy Chair) North Hertfordshire District Council Cllr Phil Davies Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Darren Cooper Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Bob Price Oxford City Council Cllr Kate Hollern Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council Cllr Imran Hussain Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Substitutes Cllr Sean Fielding Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Sue Whitaker Norfolk County Council Cllr Sue Woodward Staffordshire County Council
Conservative ( 7) Cllr Keith Glazier East Sussex County Council Cllr Roy Perry Hampshire County Council Cllr Peter Fleming (Chairman) Sevenoaks District Council Cllr Teresa O'Neill Bexley Council Cllr Richard Stay Central Bedfordshire Council Cllr Glen Miller Bradford Metropolitan District Council Cllr Tony Jackson East Herts Council
Substitutes Cllr David Finch Essex County Council Cllr Dominic Gilham Hillingdon London Borough Council Cllr Janet Blake Aylesbury Vale District Council Cllr Barry Wood Cherwell District Council
Liberal Democrat ( 2) Cllr Jill Shortland OBE (Vice- Somerset County Council Chair) Cllr Theresa Higgins Essex County Council
Independent ( 2) Cllr Shirley Flint (Deputy Chair) North Kesteven District Council Cllr John Blackie North Yorkshire County Council
Substitutes Cllr Adrian Naylor Bradford Metropolitan District Council Cllr Michael Haines Teignbridge District Council Cllr Laura Conway North Kesteven District Council
Page 48 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Children & Young People Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 7) Cllr Nick Forbes (Vice-Chair) Newcastle upon Tyne City Council Cllr John Merry CBE Salford City Council Cllr Richard Watts Islington Council Cllr Dora Dixon-Fyle MBE Southwark Council Cllr Bob Cook Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council Cllr John Kent Thurrock Council Vacancy TBC
Substitutes Cllr Anne Burns Cumbria County Council Cllr Tim Cheetham Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council
Conservative ( 7) Cllr David Simmonds (Chairman) Hillingdon London Borough Council Cllr Ivan Ould Leicestershire County Council Cllr Tony Hall Cllr Jane Scott OBE Wiltshire Council Cllr Paul McLain Gloucestershire County Council Cllr Liz Hacket Pain Monmouthshire County Council Cllr Patricia Bradwell Lincolnshire County Council
Substitutes Cllr Ian Parry Staffordshire County Council Cllr Phillip Bicknell Windsor & Maidenhead Royal Borough Cllr Peter Evans West Sussex County Council Cllr Thomas Garrod Norfolk County Council
Liberal Democrat ( 2) Cllr David Bellotti Bath & North East Somerset Council Cllr Liz Green (Deputy Chair) Kingston upon Thames Royal Borough Council
Substitutes Cllr Peter Downes Cambridgeshire County Council
Independent ( 2) Cllr Helen Powell (Deputy Chair) Lincolnshire County Council Cllr Paul Cullen Richmondshire District Council
Substitutes Cllr Anne Hawkesworth Bradford Metropolitan District Council Cllr Adrian Naylor Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Page 49 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Safer & Stronger Communities Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 7) Cllr Ann Lucas OBE (Chair) Coventry City Council Cllr Sophie Linden Hackney London Borough Council Cllr Mike Connolly Bury Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Janet Daby Lewisham London Borough Council Cllr Kate Haigh Gloucester City Council Cllr Tony Page Reading Borough Council Cllr Michael Payne Gedling Borough Council
Substitutes Cllr Mohammad Nazir Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Richard Chattaway Warwickshire County Council
Conservative ( 7) Cllr Joanna Spicer MBE (Vice- Suffolk County Council Chair) Cllr Nick Daubney King's Lynn & West Norfolk Borough Council Cllr Joanna Gardner Kensington and Chelsea Royal Borough Council Cllr Morris Bright Hertsmere Borough Council Cllr Thomas Fox Scarborough Borough Council Cllr Ian Gillies City of York Council Cllr Nick Worth South Holland District Council
Substitutes Cllr Chris Pillai Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Jo Beavis Braintree District Council Cllr Yasmeen Maqbool Peterborough City Council Cllr Jeffery Milburn South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council
Liberal Democrat ( 7) Cllr Lisa Brett (Deputy Chair) Bath & North East Somerset Council Cllr Anita Lower Newcastle upon Tyne City Council
Substitutes Cllr Adrian Collett Hampshire County Council
Independent ( 2) Cllr Philip Evans JP (Deputy Conwy County Borough Council Chair) Cllr Colin Mann Caerphilly County Borough Council
Substitutes Cllr Adrian Naylor Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Page 50 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Resources Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 7) Cllr Claire Kober (Chair) Haringey Council Cllr Sue Murphy Manchester City Council Cllr Aaron Shotton Flintshire County Council Cllr Sharon Taylor OBE Stevenage Borough Council Cllr Chris Shaw North East Lincolnshire Council Cllr Sian Timoney Luton Borough Council Cllr Tom Beattie Corby Borough Council
Substitutes Cllr Norman Keats Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Michael Mordey Sunderland City Council
Conservative ( 7) Cllr Roger Phillips (Vice-Chair) Herefordshire Council Cllr James Jamieson Central Bedfordshire Council Cllr John Osman Somerset County Council Cllr Nigel Ashton North Somerset Council Cllr Melvyn Caplan Westminster City Council Cllr Adrian Hardman Worcestershire County Council Cllr John Fuller South Norfolk District Council
Substitutes Cllr Rodney Rose Oxfordshire County Council Cllr Johanna Churchill Lincolnshire County Council Cllr Rory Love Shepway District Council Cllr Robert Saunders East Hampshire District Council
Liberal Democrat ( 2) Cllr Claire Hudson (Deputy Mendip District Council Chair) Cllr Barbara Janke Bristol City Council
Independent ( 2) Cllr Clarence Barrett (Deputy Havering London Borough Council Chair) Cllr Linda van den Hende Havering London Borough Council
Substitutes Cllr Robert Dutton OBE Wrexham County Borough Council Cllr Adrian Naylor Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Page 51 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
City Regions Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 14 ) Sir Richard Leese CBE (Chair) Manchester City Council Cllr Paul Watson (Vice-Chair) Sunderland City Council Cllr Peter Rankin Preston City Council Cllr James Alexander City of York Council Cllr Ranjit Banwait Derby City Council Mayor Jules Pipe Hackney London Borough Council Cllr Helen Holland Bristol City Council Cllr Tudor Evans Plymouth City Council Mayor Joe Anderson OBE Liverpool City Council Cllr Jon Collins Nottingham City Council Cllr Roger Lawrence Wolverhampton City Council Cllr Sir Albert Bore Birmingham City Council Cllr Keith Wakefield Leeds City Council Cllr Nick Forbes Newcastle upon Tyne City Council
Conservative ( 5) Cllr Marco Cereste (Vice-Chair) Peterborough City Council Cllr Sean Anstee Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Barry Anderson Leeds City Council Cllr Ravi Govindia Wandsworth London Borough Council Cllr Robert Alden Birmingham City Council
Liberal Democrat ( 2) Cllr Abigail Bell (Deputy Chair) Hull City Council Cllr Sian Reid Cambridge City Council
Independent ( 1) Mayor George Ferguson CBE (Deputy Bristol City Council Chair)
Substitutes Cllr Adrian Naylor Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Page 52 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
People and Places Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 5) Cllr Anne Western (Deputy Derbyshire County Council Chair) Cllr Jennifer Mein Lancashire County Council Cllr Alan Rhodes Nottinghamshire County Council Cllr Eion Watts Bolsover District Council Cllr Vince Maple Medway Council
Substitutes Cllr Colin Lloyd Crawley Borough Council Cllr Leigh Redman Somerset County Council
Conservative ( 12 ) Cllr Paul Carter CBE Kent County Council Cllr Philip Atkins Staffordshire County Council Cllr Andrew Bowles Swale Borough Council Cllr Paul Diviani East Devon District Council Cllr Mark Hawthorne MBE Gloucestershire County Council Cllr Michael Jones Cheshire East Council Cllr Kenneth Meeson Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr David Hodge (Chair) Surrey County Council Cllr Gillian Brown Arun District Council Cllr Christopher Knowles-Fitton Craven District Council Cllr Neil Clarke MBE (Vice-Chair) Rushcliffe Borough Council Cllr Roger Begy OBE Rutland County Council
Liberal Democrat ( 5) Cllr Heather Kidd (Deputy Chair) Shropshire Council Cllr Stan Collins South Lakeland District Council Vacancy Liberal Democrats
Independent ( 3) Cllr Diane James Waverley Borough Council Cllr Angela Lawrence Vale of White Horse District Council Cllr John Pollard (Deputy Chair) Cornwall Council
Substitutes Cllr Chris Townsend Mole Valley District Council
Page 53 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Economy, Environment, Housing & Transport Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 7) Cllr Brenda Arthur Norwich City Council Cllr Peter Box CBE (Chair) Wakefield Metropolitan District Council Cllr / Dr Joan Dixon Derbyshire County Council Cllr James Lewis Leeds City Council Cllr Timothy Moore Liverpool City Council Cllr Tony Newman Croydon Council Cllr Ed Turner Oxford City Council
Substitutes Cllr Gillian Campbell Blackpool Council Cllr Shaun Davies Telford and Wrekin Council
Conservative ( 7) Cllr Mike Jones (Vice-Chair) Cheshire West and Chester Council Cllr Deborah Croney North Dorset District Council Cllr Jim Harker OBE Northamptonshire County Council Mr Steve Count Cambridgeshire County Council Cllr Ann Steward Breckland Council Cllr Martin Tett Buckinghamshire County Council Cllr Geoffrey Theobald OBE Brighton & Hove City Council
Substitutes Cllr Peter Britcliffe Hyndburn Borough Council Cllr Jason Ablewhite Huntingdonshire District Council Cllr David Westley West Lancashire Borough Council Cllr Philip Ham Mendip District Council
Liberal Democrat ( 7) Cllr Keith House (Deputy Chair) Hampshire County Council Vacancy Liberal Democrats
Independent ( 2) Cllr Julian German Cornwall Council Cllr John Northcott (Deputy Mole Valley District Council Chair)
Page 54 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Fire Services Management Committee – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 6) Cllr David Acton (Deputy Chair) Greater Manchester FRA Cllr Michele Hodgson County Durham & Darlington FRA Ms Fiona Twycross London FEPA Cllr John Joyce Cheshire FA Cllr John Edwards West Midlands FRA Cllr Darrell Pulk Nottinghamshire and City of Nottingham FA
Substitutes Cllr Les Byrom CBE Merseyside FRA Cllr Thomas Wright Tyne and Wear FRA
Conservative ( 5) Cllr Kay Hammond (Deputy Chair) Surrey County Council Cllr Maurice Heaster OBE London FEPA Cllr John Bell Greater Manchester FRA Cllr Simon Spencer Derbyshire FA Cllr Rebecca Knox Dorset FA
Substitutes Cllr Mark Healey Devon and Somerset FA Cllr Jean Rigby Lancashire FA Mr James Cleverly London FEPA
Liberal Democrat ( 2) Cllr Jeremy Hilton (Chair) Gloucestershire County Council Cllr Roger Price Hampshire FA
Independent ( 1) Cllr Philip Howson (Vice-Chair) East Sussex FA
Page 55 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Audit Committee – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 1) Cllr Ian Swithenbank CBE Northumberland Council (Chair)
Conservative ( 1) Cllr Jonathan Owen (Vice East Riding of Yorkshire Council Chairman)
Liberal Democrat ( 1) Cllr David Neighbour (Deputy Hart District Council Chair)
Independent ( 1) Alderman Ian Luder (Deputy City of London Corporation Chair)
Page 56 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
IDeA Company Board – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Conservative ( 2) Peter Fleming (Chairman) Sevenoaks District Council Gary Porter South Holland District Council
Labour ( 2) David Sparks Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Jim McMahon Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council
Liberal Democrat ( 1) Gerald Vernon-Jackson Portsmouth City Council
Independent ( 1) Marianne Overton Lincolnshire County Council
Independent Directors (2) Philip Sellwood Energy Saving Trust Richard Priestman Lombard
Page 57 Agenda Item 5c
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Local Government Association (Properties) Ltd – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 1) Ian Swithenbank (Chair) Northumberland Council
Conservative ( 1) Ken Thornber Hampshire County Council
Liberal Democrat ( 1) David Neighbour Hart District Council
Independent ( 1) Jim Thornton East Herts Council
Company Secretary Carolyn Downs LGA Chief Executive
Local Government Management Board (LGMB) – Membership 2014/2015
Councillor Authority
Labour ( 1) Ian Swithenbank (Chair) Northumberland Council
Conservative ( 1) Ken Thornber Hampshire County Council
Liberal Democrat ( 1) David Neighbour Hart District Council
Independent ( 1) Jim Thornton East Herts Council
Company Secretary Carolyn Downs Chief Executive
Page 58
Agenda Item 7
LGA Executive
11 September 2014
Note of last LGA Executive meeting
Title: LGA Executive
Date: Thursday 17 July 2014
Venue: Westminster Suite, 8th Floor, Local Government House, Smith Square, London, SW1P 3HZ
Attendance An attendance list is attached as Appendix A to this note.
Item Decisions and actions Action
1 Ope ning Remarks
The Chairman opened the meeting by welcoming the newly appointed Deputy-Chairs of the Association to the Executive .
2 Declarations of Interest
No declarations of interest were made.
3 Better Care Fund
Carolyn Downs (Chief Executive) introduced the report which updated on a number of changes to the £1 billion pay for performance component of the Better Care Fund (BCF) and on the timescale for revised Health and Wellbeing Plans to be signed off. In doing so, she highlighted that the LGA had robustly opposed the revisions to the BCF and she encouraged all Health and Wellbeing Boards to put on record the potential detrimental impact the changes would have on Adult Social Care (ASC) services.
Members were united in their opposition to the changes to the BCF and emphasised the need to maintain pressure on Government so that the original shared ambition for health and social care integration is not undermined by further changes. Specific concerns included: the ability of local authorities to adequately fund ASC; the admissions criteria and the length of time it would take to evidence reductions in admissions; the short timeframe for HWBs to agree revised BCF Plans; and the balance between maximising the opportunities presented by integration and the risks it presented. Members also discussed the situation regarding integration and funding of health and ASC in Wales.
Page 59
Agenda Item 7 LGA Executive
11 September 2014
Decisions
The LGA Executive:
i. noted the update on the Better Care Fund; and
ii. asked that their views inform the continuing dialogue on the Better Care Fund between the LGA and the Department for Health.
4 Municipal Bonds Agency
Michael Lockwood (Interim Director of Local Government Finance and Policy) introduced the report which updated Members on the progress made thus far in securing investment in the Municipal Bonds Project from a diverse range of 35 councils. Based on this success, Executive’s agreement was sought to proceed with the project and to commit the LGA’s full investment.
In the discussion that followed, the Executive confirmed their support for proceeding with the project as set out. Cllr David Phillips asked for support from officers in exploring the possibility of Welsh involvement in the project.
Decisions
The LGA Executive:
i. agreed that the Municipal Bonds Agency project should continue into full mobilisation; and
ii. approved the full commitment of the LGA’s intended investment; including a budgeted £100,000 of initial start-up costs, taking the LGA’s total equity stake in the Agency to £500,000.
5 LGA Boards Annual Review of the Year
The Chair briefly introduced the report which set out the principle achievements from the 11 Boards over the past 12 months, as well some key issues going forward.
Cllr McMahon (Workforce Board Chair) drew particular attention to the recent national strike action and the potential for future localised and targeting action. Cllr Fleming (Improvement and Innovation Board Chairman) expressed his gratitude to those councils that had taken part in the Innovation Zone at the 2014 LGA Annual Conference.
Decision
The Executive noted the achievements of the Boards in the 2013/14 meeting year. Page 60
Agenda Item 7 LGA Executive
11 September 2014
6 Note of the last Leadership Board meeting on 16 July - Tabled
Decision
The Executive noted the minutes of the Leadership Board held on Wednesday 16 July.
Exclusion of Press and Public
The press and public were excluded for the remainder of the meeting for the consideration of the following confidential items.
7 Note of last LGA Executive meeting on 12 June
Decision
The Executive agreed the minutes of the previous Executive meeting held on 12 June.
8 The Council Role in Education
Cllr David Simmonds (Children and Young People Chairman) introduced the report, which summarised the current complex picture of local accountability for schools and set out a number of ambitious proposals to clarify and strengthen the role of councils in this area. He invited Members’ comments on the proposals and on whether the LGA should establish a campaign to reform accountability in the schools system.
In the discussion that followed, Members made a number of comments, including:
• The Executive welcomed the publication and supported the development of a campaign to simplify and strengthen local accountability for schools. It was suggested that links should be made with a similar piece of work being undertaken by the County Councils Network (CCN).
• Members expressed concerns regarding the accountability of schools within the current system. These included an inequitable distribution of funding and a lack of clarity and undue bureaucracy from Government regarding councils’ ability to intervene in under- performing schools. It was suggested that research could be undertaken to learn lessons from instances where local authorities had intervened, as well as those cases where there had been obstacles to intervention.
Page 61
Agenda Item 7 LGA Executive
11 September 2014
• There were a number of queries over how the proposals would work in practice and the potential for contradiction between them. Specific reference was made to: balancing financial constraints with further investment in School Governors; the viability of recruiting to a Governor ‘whistle blower’ post; and the role of an Education Trust alongside an enhanced role for local authorities in school accountability.
• In addition to the issues highlighted in the report, Members discussed the current situation in Wales and suggested that the LGA’s proposals should have a greater focus on school transport and include the requirement for all schools, including academies, to submit data to their local authority.
Decisions
The LGA Executive:
i. endorsed the proposals in the report and agreed that the LGA should stimulate a debate around reforming accountability in the schools system, with a clearer and stronger role for councils in relation to all schools; and
ii. asked that their comments inform the development of this work.
Page 62
Agenda Item 7 LGA Executive
11 September 2014
Appendix A -Attendance
Cllr and Position/Role Authority/Representing
Cllr David Sparks OBE (Chairman) Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Jim McMahon (Vice Chairman) Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Cllr Sharon Taylor OBE (Deputy Chairman) Stevenage Borough Council Mayor Sir Steve Bullock (Deputy Chairman) Lewisham London Borough Council Cllr Gary Porter (Vice Chairman) South Holland District Council Cllr David Hodge (Deputy Chairman) Surrey County Council Cllr Neil Clarke MBE (Deputy Chairman) Rushcliffe Borough Council / District Councils Network SIG Mayor Dorothy Thornhill MBE (Deputy Watford Borough Council Chairman) Cllr Marianne Overton MBE (Vice Chairman) Lincolnshire County Council
Cllr Peter Box CBE Wakefield Metropolitan District Council Sir Richard Leese CBE People & Places Board / North West Regional Leaders’ Board representative Cllr David Simmonds Hillingdon London Borough Council Cllr Peter Fleming Sevenoaks District Council Cllr Mike Jones Cheshire West and Chester Council Cllr Flick Rea MBE Camden Council Cllr Clarence Barrett Havering London Borough Council Cllr Tony Jackson East of England LGA (East Herts DC) Cllr Gordon Keymer CBE South East England Councils (Tandridge DC) Cllr Mrs Izzi Seccombe Centre for Local Government West Midlands (Warwickshire County Council) Cllr Martin Hill OBE East Midlands Councils (Lincolnshire County Council) Cllr John Hart South West Councils (Devon County Council) Mayor Jules Pipe London Councils (Hackney London Borough Council) Cllr Paul Watson Association of North East Councils (Sunderland City Council) Cllr David Phillips Welsh LGA (Swansea City and County Council) Sir Stephen Houghton CBE Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities (Barnsley Council) Cllr Mark Hawthorne MBE County Councils Network SIG (Gloucestershire County Council)
Apologies: Cllr Mrs Ann Lucas OBE Coventry City Council Cllr Philippa Roe Westminster City Council Cllr Gerald Vernon-Jackson Portsmouth City Council Cllr Katie Hall Bath & North East Somerset Council Cllr Peter Reeve Cambridgeshire County Council
Page 63 Page 64 Agenda Item 8
LGA Executive 11 September 2014
LGA Executive Meeting Dates 2014/15
Purpose of report
For information.
Summary
The dates for the LGA Executive meetings for 2014/15 are attached as Appendix A .
Recommendation
That the LGA Executive note the dates for 2014/2015.
Action
No further action necessary.
Contact officer: Frances Marshall Position: Assistant Member Services Manager Phone no: 020 7664 3220 E-mail: [email protected]
Page 65 Page 66 LGA Executive 11 September 2014
Appendix A Dates of Meetings: LGA Councillors’ Forum and LGA Executive – 2014/2015
Structure DAY (201 4) DATE Time Venue Councillors’ Forum/LGA Executive Thursday 11 September 2014 12.30pm/1.45pm Westminster Suite
Councillors’ Forum/LGA Executive Thursday 23 October 2014 12.30pm/1.45pm Westminster Suite
LGA Executive Thursday 11 December 2014 1.30pm Westminster Suite
Councillors Forum will not meet in December Page 67 DAY (2015 ) Councillors’ Forum/LGA Executive Thursday 22 January 2015 12.30pm/1.45pm Westminster Suite
Councillors’ Forum/LGA Executive Thursday 5 March 2015 12.30pm/1.45pm Westminster Suite
The LGA Executive and the Councillors’ Forum will not meet in April because of the local elections in early May Agenda Item8
Councillors’ Forum/LGA Executive Thursday 11 June 2015 12.30pm/1.45pm Westminster Suite
Councillors’ Forum/LGA Executive Thursday 16 July 2015 12.30pm/1.45pm Westminster Suite
LGA location map
Local Government Association Bus routes – Millbank Local Government House 87 Wandsworth - Aldwych Smith Square London SW1P 3HZ 3 Crystal Palace - Brixton - Oxford Circus Tel: 020 7664 3131 Fax: 020 7664 3030 For further information, visit the Email: [email protected] Transport for London website Website: www.local.gov.uk at
Public transport Cycling facilities 10 The nearest Barclays cycle hire uary minute Local Government House is well Broad Sanctuary walking Page 68 served by public transport. The racks are in Smith Square. Cycle Broadway distance nearest mainline stations are: racks are also available at Broadway
Victoria and Waterloo: the local Local Government House. Greateat CCollege St Strutton Ground ge S rutton Ground Please telephone the LGA tto underground stations are 5 minute St James’s Park (Circle and on 020 7664 3131. walking distance District Lines), Westminster Horseferry (Circle, District and Jubilee Lines), Central London Congestion and Pimlico (Victoria Line) - all Charging Zone Road about 10 minutes walk away. Local Government House is located within the congestion Buses 3 and 87 travel along charging zone. Millbank, and the 507 between
Millbank Victoria and Waterloo stops in For further details, please call Horseferry Road close to Dean 0845 900 1234 or visit the website Bradley Street. at www.cclondon.com
Bus routes – Horseferry Road Car parks 507 Waterloo - Victoria Abingdon Street Car Park (off C10 Canada Water - Pimlico - Great College Street)
Victoria Local Government 88 Camden Town - Whitehall Horseferry Road Car Park House - Westminster - Pimlico - Horseferry Road/Arneway Clapham Common Street. Visit the website at