Communities and Local Government Committee House of Commons London SW1P 3JA Tel 020 7219 4972 Fax 020 7219 6101 Email [email protected] Website www.parliament.uk
Memoranda received up to 6 November 2012:
Councillors and the Community
No Organisation
CC 00 DCLG CC00a DCLG CC 01 Scott Nicholson CC 02 Robert Howard CC 03 Age UK CC 04 Robert Knowles CC 05 Professor Colin Copus, De Montfort University CC 05a Professor Colin Copus, De Montfort University and Dr Melvin Wingfield CC 06 Dame Jane Roberts CC 07 West Midland Councils CC 08 Buckinghamshire County Council CC 09 OPM CC 10 Sunderland City Council CC 11 LGA CC 12 Hertfordshire County Council CC 13 Liz Richardson, University of Manchester CC 14 CfPS CC 15 Staffordshire County Council CC 16 Dr Mark Ewbank CC 17 District Councils' Network CC 18 Wiltshire Council CC 19 Localis CC 20 Friends, Families and Travellers CC 21 Robin Potter CC 22 Community Council of Staffordshire CC 23 Jenny Lewrence CC 24 Centre for Women & Democracy CC 25 Paul Wheeler, Director of Political Skills Forum CC 25a Paul Wheeler, Director of Political Skills Forum CC 26 Alfred Murphy CC 27 The Elections Centre, Plymouth University CC 28 L E Horne CC 29 Bharti Boyle CC 30 Cllr Norman Plumpton Walsh CC 31 George McManus CC 32 Edward Houlton CC 33 Nigel Carter CC 34 Cllr Mike Jordan CC 35 Robina Iqbal CC 36 Cllr Richard Kemp CC 37 Leeds City Council/the Commission on the Future of Local Government CC 38 Timothy J.Oates CC 39 Desmond Jaddoo CC 40 Janet Atkinson CC 41 Simon Killane CC 42 Cllr Rowan J Draper CC 43 Workers’ Educational Association, York Participate Pilot CC 44 Alycia James CC 45 Netmums CC 46 Participants in seminar at the Local Government Association CC 47 Warren W Hateley CC 48 Councillor Iain Malcolm CC 49 Somerset County Council CC 50 Councillor Lynda Jones CC 50a Councillor Lynda Jones CC 51 Christopher Padley CC 52 David Hill CC 53 Suzanne Fletcher CC 54 ASDO CC 55 Rebecca Lane CC 56 Jack Hopkins CC 57 Ray Spalding CC 58 Cllr Marianne Overton CC 59 NAVCA
Written evidence from the Department for Communities and Local Government (CC 00)
Your Committee has called for evidence to support its enquiry into the role councillors play in their communities.
Our country has a long and strong tradition of people serving their community as elected councillors. This ranges from parish councillors in our smallest villages to city councillors who are at the heart of the proud civic traditions of the country's great cities. In every case councillors being the democratic elected representatives of their communities, are uniquely placed to contribute to their communities' wellbeing.
In short, being a councillor is an embodiment of community service and volunteering, which must be the backdrop to any consideration of councillors’ allowances. Councillors are fundamentally volunteers; they should not become de facto salaried staff. We do not agree with the proposals on allowances made by the Councillors Commission under the last Administration.
As a former councillor myself, I've seen first hand the role councillors play in the community. It takes a particular sort of person to become a councillor. You don't go into it for the fame or the fortune but because you care about the area you live in and believe it is possible to make things better for the people you represent.
Being a councillor isn't for the fainthearted. You have to put in the hours, do the hard graft for your community. But it also brings its own reward. Every councillor I know has a story to tell about, this person helped back onto their feet or, that community that is beginning to thrive. Councillors I know still subscribe to a notion – as relevant today as ever - that politics can make a difference. And because they have that belief, that passion, that “can do” attitude, they do make a difference.
No-one knows their neighbourhoods better, no-one has a better grasp of the issues on the doorstep and no-one is in a better position to do something about it. Our reforms are designed to give the community spirited among us the best possible chance of improving their areas.
With our commitment to localism, we are clear that it is communities themselves, particularly the many voluntary organisations within them, including political parties, who are necessarily at the forefront of encouraging and supporting people to put themselves forward as candidates for election. Equally, it is to their communities and councils that elected councillors rightly look for support. In addition, the local government sector, through for example the Local Government Association (LGA), has a part to play in helping elected members to develop their expertise and capacity to fulfil their role.
It is through its decisions and the legislation that Parliament enacts, that Government creates opportunities for councillors and the communities they represent to become more empowered, enabling local people materially to shape their own day to day lives – localism in action. Particular measures which we are taking that create such opportunities and hence impact on the role of councillors include:
• the introduction of neighbourhood planning, enabling communities to come together to shape the development and growth of their local area through the production of a neighbourhood development plan or neighbourhood development order; • the re-introduction of the committee system through the Localism Act which allows councils to return to this form of governance if they wish; a system which allows for greater engagement of all councillors in decision-making, rather than restricting major decision-making to ‘frontbench’ councillors. • the right to build, which gives local communities new powers to create the buildings they want without using the normal planning application process; • the community right to challenge – under which community groups, in which local councillors can play a part, will be able to bid to run local authority services; • the community right to bid, which will give communities a right to nominate a building or other land which is of importance to their community’s social well- being or social interests (which include cultural, sporting or recreational interests), for listing as an asset of community value; when a listed asset is to be sold, local community groups will have a fairer chance to make a bid to buy it on the open market; • the abolition of the Standards Board regime that potentially weakened the effectiveness of local councillors by giving rise to so many petty, vexatious allegations; • legislating on predetermination to allow councillors to speak out more freely for their communities on important issues such as planning proposals affecting the locality; and • issuing a Code of Recommended Practice for Local Authorities on Data Transparency that has led to councils throwing open its doors to the public, increasing the accountability, and hence effectiveness, of local councillors.
Following the Open Public Services White Paper, we will be consulting on how to make it easier to set up town and parish councils and we are working with the LGA and the National Association of Local Councils on how such councils can become more involved in service delivery – all such steps increasing the roles of councillors at the most local level.
Through our commitment to localism and the range of measures we are undertaking, the Government is significantly expanding the opportunities for local councillors to serve their communities and help local people take control their lives and localities.
I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Councillors - of all political parties and none – who are taking on responsibility, making a difference, helping their local residents, every day of the week in Councils right across the country.
May 2012 Supplementary written evidence from the Department for Communities and Local Government (CC 00a) Thank you for the opportunity you afforded me of appearing before your committee to discuss the importance of the role of councillors in the community. During our discussions, I undertook to consider and write to you on three points:
• the possibility of councils appointing an independent body to make decisions (as opposed to giving advice) about councillors' allowances; • whether councillors in employment should have the option of receiving loss of earnings compensation; • the possibility of legislation to prevent employers discriminating against councillors.
Decisions by independent body on allowances The essential elements of any arrangements for setting the remuneration, be it allowances, pay, or pensions, for elected representatives, are an element of objective independence and clear accountability for the decision taken. In this way, those whom through their taxes fund the elected representatives and are served by them can have confidence that their representatives' remuneration is fair and appropriate As we discussed, under the current arrangements for councillors, independence is provided by the independent remuneration panels to whose recommendations regard must be had. Accountability is ensured by all decisions on allowances being required to be taken in the open by the full council whose members must face their electorate through the ballot box. You asked me whether an authority should be able to put in place an independent body not only to advise on but to decide councillor allowances. As we discussed, I am clear that the allowances are and should be a local matter, and that authorities themselves are best placed to consider what is appropriate in their circumstances. I would see no benefit in having some new central body to make recommendations or to decide allowances across the whole of local government. If the proposal was that each authority should establish an independent panel, or use its existing panel, to decide allowances, then, having reflected on this, it remains my view that it is best for the councillors themselves, with their understanding of their local circumstances, to take the final view on what are appropriate allowances in all the circumstances of their council. Notwithstanding, I note that the Taxpayers' Alliance has undertaken some research which is critical of the composition of Independent Remuneration Panels. I am open-minded to reform of such procedural processes Loss of Earnings Compensation
You suggested that an option may be to provide for loss of earnings compensation for people losing out on their income because of the time they spend on council work, and which would not be available to those who, for whatever reason, did not lose out on their income. Being a councillor is a voluntary public service; it is not a salaried job. In principle, councillors are already compensated for loss of earnings as allowances are intended to ensure that councillors are not out-of-pocket as a result of their public duties. The existing guidance states that the basic allowance, which all councillors receive, is intended to recognise the time commitment of all councillors, including such inevitable calls on their time as meetings with officers and constituents and attendance at political group meetings. Legislation to prevent employers discriminating against councillors
In our conversation, I was asked about discrimination by employers. I said that I had not seen any specific cases but that if there was a specific example I would be happy to look at it and consider what was behind it before commenting in a broader sense on any specific issues.
That said, I believe the last administration looked into this as part of their consideration as to whether councillors could have paid leave from their employment. They were going to work with a range of employers on a campaign to persuade them that time away from the office should not be viewed as wasted time, but as part of an individual's training and development. My view however that is this is best achieved locally rather than by direction from the centre. I would hope and expect employers and employees to work together to make provision for an employee being a councillor, or indeed any voluntary work. And I think there is a role here too for councils and councillors, engaging with the businesses in their patch. Such engagement should involve discussion between a councillor or prospective councillor and their employer about the roles and responsibilities of being a councillor, how this might be undertaken in a way that is most practicable for a councillor and employer, and the mutual benefit to both the council and the employer of the skills of such an employee.
However I am very clear that this is not the time to further constrain employment laws by, for instance, compelling small businesses to do without one of their workforce at critical moments whilst serving as a councillor. Placing further restrictions on employers when growth is the priority cannot be justified.
November 2012 Written evidence from Scott Nicholson (CC 01)
1 Summary
• Councillors should selflessly, represent their community • Councillors should have an enhanced role in leading the organisation of constituents into a community by creating community groups • There should be a movement away from the idea that only the retired have the time to undertake the role of the councillor • Greater remuneration, more councillor seats and a movement of council meetings outside of working hours may achieve this
2 Introduction
2.1 My name is Scott Nicholson; I am 27 and work for the University of Leeds researching the hospital superbug Clostridium difficile. I am based at Leeds General Infirmary but before this worked as a Scientist in the NHS at both the Royal Cornwall Hospital and Scarborough General Hospital.
2.2 In addition to this, I am the Secretary of Leeds Central Constituency Labour Party and the Labour candidate for Wetherby Ward in the Leeds City Council elections on 3rd May 2012.
3 The role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods
3.1 I think primarily the role of the councillor should be one of selfless, representation of his or her community. I do, however, feel that further to that it would improve our neighbourhoods if councillors were expected to take a leadership role in organising communities.
3.2 This organisation by councillors could see them acting as “managers” of perhaps the Prime minister’s “Big Society” idea. In this way it would be the councillor’s role to make sure that communities had youth groups, amateur dramatic societies, sports clubs, etc. I do not feel it should be the councillor’s role to run these groups, merely to lead the organisation of people into a community.
3.3 I very much feel it is the case that people need to be organised into becoming a community. I personally live with my girlfriend in modern flats filled with other young professionals, a lot of whom, I assume have also moved to Leeds from elsewhere. Generally, the interaction between neighbours is very similar to the interaction between commuters on the London Underground. 3.4 These people have no stake in the community but surely have in the past been in clubs and societies at schools or universities. This contrasts the Ward in which I am standing in which organisations such as “Wetherby in Bloom” bring people together in the community but also provide them a reason to be proud of their neighbourhoods.
3.5 I feel if it were the councillor’s responsibility to make sure these groups were present and that people were encouraged to be involved it would really give the young professionals in my area a reason to form a community. This organisation may even assist in reducing antisocial behavior in poorer areas by giving young people something to do but also more importantly, a stake in society and a sense of community. Furthermore the leadership of councilors in organising communities could possibly even prevent further destructive riots occurring.
4 Recruitment and diversity of councillors – and the implications for representation and local democracy
4.1 I can only talk about the Labour Party’s recruitment of potential councillors in Leeds. I feel that an email sent out to all members, asking if anyone was interested in becoming a local councilor and inviting them to attend a meeting to further discuss it, is a good recruitment procedure.
4.2 I do, however, feel that there is a distinct lack of not just young people but those that are still of working age in our local councils. Having an average age in a council of sixty years old is obviously unrepresentative, as is the lack of black and minority ethnic groups.
4.3 What really annoys me is that people of working age are put off from standing, by sitting councilors in their sixties, anecdotally telling potential candidates that they will not be able to work and simultaneously be a councillor due to time commitments. This was said to me when I applied to become a councillor.
4.4 If it is true and that people cannot possibly fit employment and casework into their daily life, then obviously there must be a change or we doom ourselves to only being governed by those who are in their sixties and seventies. This change could involve greater remuneration to allow further employment to be unnecessary or the creation of more councillor positions to allow the workload to be shared. In addition to this council meetings could also be held outside of normal working hours to allow younger people to combine employment with representing their community.
April 2012
Written evidence from Robert Howard (CC 02)
Executive summary:
Section 1: The role of councillors as leaders of communities. Para 1.1 Ward councillors do not have the power to act like leaders.
Section 2: Turning ward councillors into de facto leaders and 'mini-mayors'. Para 2.1 Voters should elect two types of councillors for their local authority area.
Section 3: Skills and training if you want to be a councillor. Para 3.2 Existing councillors should pay a levy to cover the cost of training courses.
Section 4: What it costs to stand a good chance of becoming a councillor. Para 4.4 Standing for election as a councillor can be expensive, so local authorities should publish ward election brochures containing statements from all the candidates.
Section 5: Councillors and work. Para 5.1 Being a ward councillor should not be seen as a 'primary occupation'.
Section 6: Helping councillors and personal commitments. Para 6.1 Every councillor should be able to appoint a part-time paid 'Assistant'.
Section 7: The role of communities in how councillors make decisions. Para 7.2 Ward councillors should be 'mini-mayors'.
Section 8: Final observations. Para 8.4 Councillors at their best are innovative and inspiring; at their worst, time serving and parochial.
Section 9: Appendix — Urban Forum workshop presentation, 'Local Action: communities and councillors working together', Westminster Hall, 29 June 2010.
Section 10. About the person making this submission.
1 The role of councillors as leaders of communities
1.1 Councillors should be recognised for what they are — de facto leaders. They have this position because they have been elected and are often the first point of contact not just for local residents, but for businesses and the media as well. The trouble is that all too few councillors have the power to act like the leaders that they are expected to be and this, in my experience, is why so many local residents and potential councillors are sceptical about what a councillor can do. This is often misinterpreted as 'cynicism'.
1.2 In inner-city Lenton, Nottingham, where I live, people don't go around saying that our ward councillors are in it for themselves, but they do ask, 'why can't they get a pavement repaired or a park fence mended?' Then there's the phasing of crossing lights outside the health centre, cycling on pavements or why did a local care service have to close and its work be taken over by a national charity? These are just a few examples of the things which feed local voters' scepticism. The plain truth is that it takes ages to get the simplest of things done because ward councillors almost everywhere have to refer these questions to a local authority department or the lead councillor / cabinet member / portfolio holder, call them what you will, who will then have to authorise that the change / expenditure can go ahead.
1.3 These seemingly simple matters can be further complicated when a community is served by two or more councillors from different political parties who are trying to represent the same ward, or the council itself is controlled by a different political party to that of the ward councillor. 'Independent' councillors are not above such problems. 1.4 As things stand, most individual councillors are made as good as powerless by such things and depend on the patronage of a ruling elite of councillors if they want to achieve the simplest of things in their ward. Even when you are part of such 'elites', as I have been in the past, your ward abilities are constrained. On too many occasions I was taken aside by the Council Leader and told to 'back off' or 'stop making waves' because my actions were upsetting another senior councillor or an officer who had the ear of the leader or some other councillor more powerful within the party group than me.
1.5 I suspect that most MPs know this to be true and have some experience of such things themselves. Bad enough when there are over 600 of you. Intolerable to some, like myself, when you are part of a group counted in tens rather than hundreds. I say all this because I believe the present system pretends that councillors are leaders when the actual power that they have within their wards tells us that they are, for the most part, at the mercy of others. Voters know this and is a reason why many choose not to vote.
2 Turning ward councillors into de facto leaders and 'mini- mayors' by creating single member wards
2.1 Voters should elect two types of councillors for their local authority area:
2.2 Ward councillors able to control doorstep policies, budgets, services and facilities for their own single member ward. They would also act as 'scrutinisers' when it came to the work of the strategic councillors in the same local authority areas. What I am proposing might be described as a system of 'mini-mayors'. Such a system would enable councillors to be innovative, able to pioneer new approaches to neighbourhood governance which other councillors may adopt or adapt to meet the needs of their ward.
2.3 Strategic councillors, elected by all the voters in a local authority area, would take the lead in strategic policies, budgets, services and facilities. Voters could choose to elect an executive mayor instead. In the recent Nottingham mayoral referendum I actively worked for the 'no' campaign in the absence of any empowering of ward councillors. If ward councillors could become 'mini-mayors' I would almost certainly support of the election of a executive mayor for the Greater Nottingham conurbation.
2.4 All councillors should represent single member wards because this will strengthen their role and position within the community or the cluster of communities / neighbourhoods which they represent. As a result, they are likely to become better known to more of their electorate and others whom they serve. Voters will, I believe, be more likely to engage in the political process by voting and attending meetings etc when they see that their councillor actually has the power to do things and can make decisions quickly.
2.5 Perhaps more importantly, single member wards will encourage more voters to seek election and this, of itself, will encourage and support diversity and make becoming a councillor not only easier, but a more competitive process as well. It will also make it easier for 'independent' ward councillors to be elected.
2.6 How? Take Nottingham. At present it has 55 councillors representing 20 wards (a mix of two and three member wards), many of which are clusters of communities and neighbourhoods. Nottingham has about 20–22 'self-defining' communities, fourteen of which existed in 1086 when the Domesday Book was created. If each of these communities existed as a ward in their own right, the number of voters per ward would range from c2,500 to c14,000, but I believe some of the smaller ones would want to work together and be part of one ward — this was something which the communities of Dunkirk and Lenton (where I live) decided to do in 1996 when local groups and individuals came together to create the Dunkirk and Lenton Partnership Forum, which still exists in 2012, with its own paid workers. It acts as a local support service and co- ordinating body, publishing a community newspaper delivered to some 5,000 households (the next issue will be No.50).
2.7 There will be those who say 'This won't work because of the disparity in the number of voters per ward', but if the role of a ward councillor relates to the community they 'want to serve' (as 88% of councillors say they want to do), this should not be an issue, especially if you elect my proposed strategic councillors with local authority-wide powers and responsibilities.
2.8 According to a spreadsheet (summary-table-for-all-authorities-website-protected- version) published by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, based on data collected in December 2010, the size of English wards at district, unitary and county level range from 1,776 (West Somerset) to 18,709 (Birmingham). I am convinced that many communities, probably most of them, would choose either alone or collectively to have one elected ward councillor with the powers to run local services and be, in effect, a mini-mayor and that this person would be their de facto leader and representative.
2.9 I believe that 'sense of place' trumps numbers any day and democracy does itself a disservice when it puts electoral numbers before the natural geographic boundaries of any one community.
3 Skills and training if you want to be a councillor
3.1 It should go without saying that training courses for all would-be councillors should be easily accessible and free. The courses should cover not just council budgets, procedures, the law or the civic aspect of being a councillor etc, but also campaigning and publicity skills and these courses should be paid for by a small percentage levy on the allowances paid to all existing councillors.
3.2 If existing councillors can make 'voluntary' contributions from their councillor allowances to their respective political parties (e.g. In Nottingham, Labour councillors pay a 10% levy, which amounts to over £100,000 per annum), then they can easily pay a levy to cover the cost of training courses for would-be councillors at an estimated cost of £2,000, assuming the course organisers have the free use of council premises. In Nottingham's case this would amount to a 0.2% levy on total allowances of £1,037,776 in 2011/2012.
3.3 From what I know of existing councillors, many will need training if they are to become the community leaders they should be. The present system of multi-member wards enables many councillors happily to take a back seat, doing what is asked of them and not much else.
4 What it costs to stand a good chance of becoming a councillor, why many don't bother and a new way to ensure fairness.
4.1 The other aspect to being a councillor which rarely gets mentioned is that of organising and funding an election campaign. If you are a member of a political party this can be made a lot easier. Your party is likely to organise campaign training, provide an election agent and funding, but I accept that this does not always happen, so prospective councillors have to fall back on themselves and, if they are lucky, a small group of active supporters.
4.2 In my experience a dedicated team of 6–10 people is enough to fight a good ward election campaign, with double this number on election day itself. The cost of a basic black and white A4 leaflet folded to A5 in Nottingham is £50 (£95 per 1,000 such leaflets), so in a small ward like Dunkirk and Lenton, where I live, with 5,000 households, every leaflet will cost at least £240, assuming you have the skills to do your own origination. Producing and circulating a leaflet four times a year equals £960 per annum and during election year itself you have to do this monthly. Assuming you begin your campaign six months after the last election, any one candidate in a single member ward with 5,000 households should expect to spend at least £5,000.
4.3 This is a lot of money by any measure and is, in my experience, the biggest reason why more individuals don't stand as candidates. They also know that even if they manage to get elected, they face four years of isolation on the back benches.
4.4 My solution to this problem is that the local authority should publish an election brochure containing statements from all the candidates in much the same way as political parties, trade unions and pension funds do when they send out ballot papers to their members. These would be delivered to every registered voter in the ward. In return for this service, all the candidates would be expected to contribute to the cost of printing the brochure (but not its distribution).
5 Councillors and work
5.1 Being a ward councillor should not be seen as 'a career' or a 'primary occupation'. A councillor should have a wider perspective of the community (and local authority) which he or she serves. Their role should not be confused with that of local authority employees. In many ways, with 'cabinet' style councils and executive 'portfolio' councillors who can spend millions without reference to any committee, the role of 'back bench' councillors is reduced to that of being little more than scrutinisers and serving out their time on 'area' committees with few powers or direct responsibilities, apart from handing out what small discretionary amounts of money they have.
5.2 I know of councillors who have been isolated by their colleagues for not conforming; for being over enthusiastic on behalf of the ward and communities they are trying to serve. Some leave the group, others are ditched during the re-selection process if they seek to stand again as a councillor. Others, like me, walk away, convinced they can actually do more for their community in other ways.
5.3 Being a councillor is time consuming. It always has been. Matters have not been made any easier by the 'professionalisation' of councillors' work, with daytime meetings, and ever larger local authorities covering larger geographical areas. It is this which has led to councils often being run by councillor elites — and it is the members of this group who I see as becoming the new strategic councillors I have already referred to, or who could be replaced by an executive mayor if this was the choice of the voters. These councillors should be regarded as full-time and paid accordingly, bearing in mind that many will have powers and responsibilities which exceed those of any back bench Member of Parliament.
5.4 Ward councillors / mini-mayors based in their local community or nearby, if central facilities and services were easily accessible, could work much more flexibly and organise evening meetings and work with staff expected to work evenings (and weekends occasionally). This would have less impact on councillors' existing employment and help minimise the days they need to take off from work (which can be especially difficult when working for a small business).
5.5 The basic councillor allowance in Nottingham is £965 per month (£11,582 per annum), which I regard as sufficient for being a 'super' community volunteer if we are to believe that the main reason that they are a councillor is because they want to serve their community.
6 Helping councillors and personal commitments
6.1 Ideally, every councillor should be able to appoint a part-time remunerated 'Councillor's Assistant' to assist them with casework, research and to act as clerk to their ward forum(s) in the absence of an existing parish or town council. This person would be akin to a town council manager or parish clerk. In other words, non-political and able to serve successive councillors while, in the process, building up a bank of local ward knowledge of invaluable benefit not just to the ward councillor, but to the community as a whole. This person would be paid the same as the ward councillor.
6.2 I lost my job in 1971 not long after being elected a Labour Party city councillor in Birmingham. My then employer paid me a large sum of money to leave which I accepted because it was enough to pay off our mortgage at the time. In 1983, I again lost my job, in part because my duties as Chair of East Midlands Airport took up too much of my time, so for two years I became a full-time county councillor.
6.3 The practicalities of being a councillor are demanding, especially if you have family commitments. I can fairly claim to have been the first Birmingham city councillor to have taken his children along to council events and others soon followed my example. Not that this prevented my first marriage ending in divorce and I think that the large amount of casework I had to do was a factor in what happened. A steady stream of visitors to our front door and telephone calls every day, plus living in the ward I represented, didn't help. I met my present (second) wife through my work as a councillor and I think it fair to say that we have been, and are, supportive of one another in the community work which we have both undertaken.
6.4 I tell you all this because I have worked with candidates and councillors in many capacities over the years and seen at close quarters how it impacts on work and family life. Being a councillor is a wonderful thing, but it is much harder now than at any time in the past — which is why I wanted to submit this evidence and to argue the case for having two types of councillors in the same local authority area.
6.5 Under my proposals, there would be fewer councillors, but they would all be of importance and have a powerful role to play in how our 21st century communities are governed.
7 The role of communities in how councillors make decisions
7.1 Individual ward councillors should have to work with statutory ward 'partnership forums', open to ward residents, local businesses and voluntary sector service providers working in the ward where 'matters of mutual interest' can be discussed and the councillor's activities publicly scrutinised. If a parish or town council already exists for all or part of a councillor's ward, this will act as the forum.
7.2 Because my ward councillors would be 'mini-mayors' able to respond quickly as and when a situation demanded action, I am confident there would be more public interest in their activities and local expectations of what a councillor should do and be would be much higher as well.
7.3 The councillor's paid assistant would act as clerk to the forum, but where a partnership forum exists already, they would take on the assistant's responsibilities — in the same way an existing town or parish council would.
7.4 The forum and the ward councillor would meet together to discuss the councillor's activities and to receive a financial report at least four times a year, with a published 'State of the Ward' address annually, which would be delivered to all households. In between the forum meetings, the councillor may well work with forum members and other interested parties on matters relating to specific services, facilities or events in much the same way as such a body might do already. The great beauty of this approach is that it would be a 'living democracy' — able to deal with the day-to-day practicalities of a councillor's responsibilities whilst always looking for new ways to engage with the wider community and to promote a sense of place.
7.5 Life has taught me that local communities and ward councillors everywhere have the ability to manage their own affairs, from rural villages to inner-city wards. All they need are the resources and the opportunity. I hope I have demonstrated how you can achieve the latter. As for the former, the starting point would be existing council budgets which already allocate revenue and capital across services and facilities, often managed by area managers. The local authority still manages the resources, writes the cheques and issues the budgetary codes. The only difference is that the ward councillor and their assistant prepare the budget and authorise expenditure and decide local charges.
7.6 Existing provision is often unfair, with some communities being favoured over others, so the ward councillors and their strategic councillor colleagues / mayor would have to agree a formula for how resources could be allocated to wards as fairly as possible. Models for doing this exist already and should need little more than tweaking. We are not reinventing the wheel. We're just adding a few gears so that it can cope better with the local terrain.
7.7 Until now, overseeing local budgets has been the preserve of the local council elite. My living democracy approach gives this responsibility to ward councillors and local communities.
7.8 At the end of this memorandum is an appendix. It is a copy of the hand-out I produced for an Urban Forum workshop, 'Local Action: communities and councillors working together' which I led at the 'Rethinking Public Services' conference organised by the Local Government Information Unit and National Council of Voluntary Organisations on 29 June 2010 in Westminster Hall.
8 Some final observations
8.1 We forget all too easily that the drivers of social change have, for the most part, been local people, some in small villages, others in large cities, who have pioneered so many of the things we now take for granted. Even our most beloved of national institutions, the NHS, has its roots in what was already happening in countless towns and cities. The same is true for housing, parks, schools, welfare services, public transport, bus passes and utilities and so much more.
8.2 At times I despair at the lack of faith we have in local communities to manage their own affairs and came to the conclusion a long time ago that it is all about power and the desire on the part of some politicians, both local and national, to control everything.
8.3 At the end of the day, I don't care what you call it. 'The Big Society', 'Localism', 'Neighbourhood Democracy' or whatever you want. The test of your commitment is your willingness to actually empower local communities and their elected councillors to get on with what they can do better than anyone else. In other words it all boils down to good local governance.
8.4 Councillors at their best are innovative and inspiring; at their worst, time serving and parochial.
8.5 All the evidence suggests that where and when money is limited, local communities offer better value for money when it comes to doorstep services and scrutiny. How we manage local services and facilities should by decided by ward councillors in partnership with their communities. It's as simple as that.
9 Appendix
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
10 About the person making this submission
10.1 1971–1978, Birmingham city councillor, chaired Youth & Community and the Midlands Area Museum Service, served on committees for Birmingham Airport, Leisure and Planning and the Standing Commission for Museums and Galleries.
10.2 1981–1985, Nottinghamshire county councillor, chaired East Midlands Airport and county Youth & Community Sub-committee and served on Leisure Committee.
10.3 C1982–1993, Chaired rating and council tax valuation tribunals in Nottinghamshire.
10.4 Lost job twice whilst serving as a councillor (1971 and 1983).
10.5 1960–to date, Labour Party member with extensive experience as an election agent, compiling manifestos and managing election campaigns at both ward and local authority level.
10.6 1996, co-founder Dunkirk and Lenton Partnership Forum and twice chair.
10.7 1999, author of new ward boundary proposals for Nottingham City Council which were partly adopted by Local Government Boundary Commission for England.
10.8 1980–2006, Lenton Community Association (LCA) chair on several occasions. In 1994, 2000 and 2004 led campaigns to keep the local authority owned Lenton Leisure Centre and swimming pool open when confronted with Nottingham City Council plans to close the centre. The centre finally closed in 2004, but in 2005 the City Council sold the building to LCA for £10, and the building then became The Lenton Centre (TLC). The swimming pool re-opened in 2008 and TLC has since won national acclaim as a flagship community led social enterprise. 10.9 For many years an active member of the Association for Neighbourhood Democracy (AND), then chaired by the late Sir Dick Knowles, former Leader of Birmingham City Council, but switched some years ago to arguing for councillors to be given more control over 'doorstep' services.
10.10 2010, Urban Forum workshop, 'Local Action: communities and councillors working together' at 'Rethinking Public Services' conference organised by the Local Government Information Unit and National Council of Voluntary Organisations in Westminster Hall.
May 2012
Written evidence from Age UK (CC 03)
The Communities and Local Government Committee is conducting an inquiry into the role councillors play in their communities. The inquiry will cover a range of aspects of a councillor's role. Age UK has a particular interest in the aspect of this inquiry focusing on the role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods.
Key points and recommendations
Age UK believes that understanding and acting on the views and needs of older people is central to any councillor’s role. They are in a position to challenge the council’s decision making and service planning and initiate change that meets the needs of older people in their ward. We believe they should: - Make time to listen to older people - Make change happen to improve older people’s quality of life - Make an ongoing commitment to keep people involved.
Role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods
Meeting the needs and expectations of people in later life, within a climate of reduced public spending, presents a significant challenge for councils. Councillors should understand and act upon the views of older people in their community. However, an Age UK survey in 2011 found that only a third (35%) of respondents agreed that councillors are working to benefit older people. Councillors should do more to challenge the council’s decision making and service planning and initiate change that meets the needs of older people in their ward.
Better council services
Older people expect better council services. Councillors will be aware that care and support services have faced unprecedented challenges as a result of budget pressures and continued increases in demand. Age UK analysis shows that in 2011- 12 there was a reduction in spending on older people’s social care of £341 million, or 4.5 percent since 2010-11. Taking into account growth in demand over the same period, this has led to a £500 million gap in fundingi.
This has resulted in the reduction in the breadth of council care provision and increase in the charges that councils make for care services. DCLG and NHS Information Centre data show that, in real terms, charges were £360 more in 2010-11 than in 2008-09 for each older person using local authority care servicesii. These quotes show the significant impact this will on the lives of older citizens:
“I found that [during] weekends [my father] would not be dressed and got out of bed, as that was when they have staff shortages [in the care home]”
“It became apparent that you needed to be on death’s door before even being considered and we were even told that had Mum lived in a different borough, she would probably have received funding.”
Older people’s needs and views also need to be considered across the range of council decisions, whereas there may be a tendency for councillors and officials to consider their needs only in relation to services such as care. The majority of older people will not be receiving care services. They will however be using services across the range of council provision such as housing, leisure and adult education which keeps them active and independent.
Better neighbourhoods
At a neighbourhood level all ward councillors have the opportunity to improve places for older people. For many older people, lack of good quality support and infrastructure within the neighbourhoods acts as a barrier that prevents them from being active locally. In a survey 52 per cent of respondents agreed that the lack of public toilets in their area stopped them from going out as often as they would like.iii Similarly poor pavements, a lack of places to sit down and poor access to local services act to isolate older people.
Age friendly neighbourhoods are communities that offer a good quality of life to all generations. That means accessible and inclusive design; environments which are aesthetically pleasing, safe and easy to inhabit; good local services, facilities and open spaces; a strong social and civic fabric, with opportunities to take part and have a voice; and a real sense of local identity and place.
As ward representatives, councillors have both the electoral mandate and the local knowledge to bring about positive change. This role can go much wider than any formal responsibilities or portfolio they may have within the council to cement the strong link between the councillor and their older electors.
What can councillors do?
Age UK believes councillors should: - Make time to listen to older people - Make change happen to improve older people’s quality of life - Make an ongoing commitment to keep people involved.
Time to listen Councillors should make sure older people have their voices heard. As the first level of elected representation, councillors have a responsibility to their electors and are in a position to hear the views of a wide range of older people in their ward. While some councillors will meet with older people through groups or surgeries, this is not happening consistently and often focuses on a minority of active older people.
It is particularly concerning that people aged over 75 are less likely to feel they can influence decisions that affect them locally than any other age groupiv. In addition, an Age UK survey found that more than half of people aged over 60 (54%) say they have never had any contact with their local councillors. Although this is a better response than for other age groups (75% of those aged between 16-24 and 69% of those aged between 25-59 have never had any contact) this is not a good record for local representatives.
On the other hand, the same survey found that when older people do have contact with their councillors, they are generally satisfied with the outcome (65% satisfied) and they are significantly more satisfied than younger people (57% aged 16-59 are satisfied).
There is an opportunity here to make sure older people’s views are taken into account. Councillors should consider and find ways to overcome the barriers to older people getting more involved. There is a variety of ways of meeting people who may not come to traditional meetings or surgeries, such as holding joint surgeries in GPs or a local Age UK or holding a ward walk (see case study 1) to make sure they hear the experience of a wide range of older people.
Case study 1: Councillors Jim Beall and Barbara Inman of Stockton Borough Council do regular ‘ward walkabouts’ to share local intelligence and to identify problems. As much as possible, they aim to solve problems on the spot – making a note of broken pavements and kerbs that need repairing, for example. The walkabouts involve officers from the council’s Care for your area, antisocial behaviour and enforcement services; the local neighbourhood police; the housing provider; and the residents’ association.
Initiate change Local ward councillors are ideally placed to play a leadership and co-ordinating role for their communities and neighbourhoods. They have both the knowledge of the local area and will have contact with some of the main players involved (inside and outside the council), plus the electoral mandate for action.
Take the example of older people’s concern about the lack of public transport to the local hospital. To improve the situation this could involve a private bus company, the county and or a district council, the hospital, the PCT cluster, or a community transport provider. The solution will depend on local circumstances and negotiating the best response for local people.
Councillors should be able to work with residents to identify opportunities to influence decisions. They will also know potential resources that are available or be able to help find new local solutions (for example see case study 2).
Case study 2:
A ward councillor in a rural village in the north of England, recognised that the
physical environment can play a major role in encouraging activity and well-
being and that making an environment more sympathetic to the needs of older
people can prevent injury and social exclusion. The area has the highest
proportion of older people in the council area.
The councillor persuaded first the Town Council and latterly the unitary council
to embark on a radical transformation of the village, which would benefit older
people. He was responsible for raising the £3.8 million and leading the
transformation programme.
The councillor ensured the formation of a Disability Advisory Group for the
project. The group had direct involvement in the design features and changes.
There was also a public exhibition, which sought feedback in order to listen to
older residents and resolve their concerns and needs.
The transformation of the village centre has increased the footfall and includes
features that are beneficial to older residents. For instance, in the street
different levels and trip hazards have been removed; more seating has been
provided; and road speed reductions have been achieved by design and
engineering.
Ongoing commitment A councillor’s role in their community is not a one-off occurrence. There needs to be an ongoing commitment to keep people involved and support their needs. One frustration commonly voiced about engagement with councils is that things do not change or that people never hear what happened in response to their views.
Through our Pride of Place campaign Age UK has been working with local councillors to improve neighbourhoods for people in later life. Over 200 councillors have committed to be advocates for older people from their ward and have committed to an ongoing dialogue with people in later life.
Councillors that took part in Age UK’s Pride of Place project identified a range of actions that they would do differently that relate to listening to older people, communicating with other councillors, improving links with other organisations and practical activities – see comments belowv.
Pride of Place: Councillors’ response to what they will do differently as advocates for older people
Give more attention to identifying hard to reach older people's groups.
Be more aware of needs of older residents (& need to think specifically about them) in terms of my council work and services council provides
Communicate what I've learnt to other councillors.
I plan to publicise the Pride of Place scheme within my local council and hopefully encourage fellow elected members to join the scheme.
More local ward work & contacts with older people's organisations.
Go and learn/find out what is happening, what is needed and go out and work hard to make a difference.
Will carry on and be more on the look out to do some things that I have learnt about today.
Try to give more priority to involvement with issues for ageing people both as a resource and also in terms of improvement of the environment.
May 2012
i Care in Crisis 2012, Age UK, January 2012 ii Care in Crisis 2012, Age UK, January 2012 iii Public toilets study, Help the Aged, 2006 iv Agenda for Later Life 2012. Age UK, 2012 v Pride of Place Evaluation, Age UK, 2012 Written evidence from Robert Knowles (CC 04)
PRACTICALITIES OF BEING A COUNCILLOR
Summary The time required to perform the duties and functions of a District Councillor, restricts those able to be a councillor. The allowances paid, after tax, can result in members being out of pocket. Every increasing email traffic and other social media, will doubtless result in few members standing for re-election.
+++++++
I am the leader of Waverley Borough Council, and was first elected to the Council in May 2007, becoming Leader in May 2010.
My Council consists of 57 elected members, covering a large rural district with four towns and a number of villages, all are different and have very little in common.
As Leader of the Council, I work an average 60 hours a week, and my deputy puts in a similar number of hours, for the huge allowance of £500 (five hundred) a year. I have a cabinet of ten members, the majority of which put in some 30 hours or more per week on their Executive role.
In addition my authority has a number of committees, the Licensing committee of 12 members, sits during the day, which is unusual as most meetings are in the evening, but having to sit to hear applications for various licences, the committee is required to sit during working hours.
The Council being the planning authority has four area Planning Committees, these have been introduced to make decision making on the important issue of planning local to the area concerned, this is popular with our residents as it is local councillors making a local decision. My Council moved to this system in 2008, before the Localism Act! However, this requires most of the fifty-seven members to sit on Planning. Each of the four committees sits every 28 days.
Overview and Scrutiny Committees, Audit and Standards also require involvement by a large number of elected members.
The clear problem, for me as Leader, and the Council, is the small number of members available during the day. It is not practical to be a Cabinet Member without substantial daytime availability, the same applies to Licensing Committee. Employers are not keen and many are not prepared to release employees to attend meetings of Council, and with the ever changing government agenda and almost daily circulars, the need for councillors who are available is even more essential.
The majority of my Council are retired, although I do have 19 and 23 year old members, but both are at University and find committing to any meeting difficult, but both are very keen. Those with full time work, who often commute or have young families can not give the time required to perform even basic council duties. Several younger members did not seek re-election in 2011 after a four year term, being unable to give even a basic amount of time to perform councillor duties.
From October to March each year most meetings start and finish in the dark, the Borough being rural, members travel up to 15 miles in often stormy or icy conditions with a lack of any public transport. With meetings often finishing at 2200 hrs., this is yet another disincentive for people to give their time to serve on the Council Of course for a city or compact urban council, this is not a problem.
A major demand on members time is e-mail. It is easy to circulate many emails to a large list of councillors, even 10 years ago this pressure was not there. It is easy to ping an email, when writing and posting a letter took mature thought and action. Members have no secretarial support and can spend many hours each day on email traffic. I have no doubt that the ease of social media will lead to many members refusing to stand for Council in due course. Councillors are volunteers, not professional politicians, certainly at district level, and a daily barrage of emails, including rude and abuse messages, eventually try members patience, especially as under the two tier system, representations are often about county council matters such as highways or school places over which my authority has no jurisdiction. I have even had representations, after the Member of Parliament has failed to satisfy a constituent, asking me to intervene!
The basic allowance paid by my authority is one of the lowest in England, just some £2300 per annum, before tax, this does not encourage people to stand for council, but the Council has been reluctant to increase this over recent years due to the financial situation. In 2011, the Council held a briefing evening for potential candidates at the May elections, this was non party political and when the basic allowance was announced, there was a clear loss of interest by those who had attended. I was my impression that they were not looking for an income, but were not willing to be councillors at a loss. The public impression that councillors get rich on their allowances is far from the truth in Waverley.
Whilst I recognise that my council could increase the allowances, as recommended by the independent panel, however members do not think the time is right under the present financial difficulties in the country, but this will need to be addressed sooner rather than later.
LOCAL DECISION MAKING
Summary
Whilst local members making local decisions is to be welcomed, there is a need for those decisions to be made at such a level that members are not open to local pressure. Training is required to maintain a level standard Government should not mislead the public of their power under Localism.
++++++++
As set out above, Waverley returned Planning decisions to local member committees in 2007/8. This clearly has the advantage of local members knowing their own area, but it is demanding on member time. It is important that members making decisions of this type are fully trained and aware of the Regulations, there is good evidence that Town and Parish councils, as consultees, make recommendations not based on planning law under pressure from residents of a Ward of neighbourhood, which if followed at District level would lead to numerous appeals and costs against the authority.
At a district level the majority of neighbourhood involvement is connected to planning issues, and there is a need for government not to mislead the public into believing that they can refuse every application in their area.
There is no doubt that ‘Localism’ is seen as a vehicle to obstruct and refuse planning applications, with little of no regard being given within neighbourhoods of planning guidance or policy, with a complete disregard of the possible outcome of an appeal.
April 2012
Written evidence from Professor Colin Copus, De Montfort University (CC05)
Bullet Point Summary
• The roles and tasks of the councillor are subject to a range of external pressures which shape expectations and responsibilities of the office • Many changes and developments in the office of councillor have been imposed by central government as part of moves to shape local government for its own policy purposes • The constitutional subservience of English local government to the British centre has undermined the governing capacity of councillors • The community leadership role of the councillor within his or her ward / division needs to be clarified and supported with powers, budgets and by the council infra-structure if councillors are to be able to lead disparate communities • Councillors need to be able to build alliances and coalitions focused on achieving desired gaols, rather than relying on the certainties of party politics. • Councillors adherence to a Burkean notion of representation – that is that they are free from the electorate to be able to make their own decisions – will challenge moves towards developing localised decision-making that passes power to communities • Localised decision-making must be a shared process between councillors and communities • Party politics and the demands of group loyalty and cohesion pose challenges to localised decision-making • Rigid party discipline and conflictual party politics undermines community representation • Representation and representativeness are contested notions. Interpreting ‘representativeness’ as meaning looking like (microcosmic representation) communities, can fundamentally undermine the traditional approach to representation as it implies that the representative’s focus is on the interests of a section of the community rather than on the wider whole, thus shifting from political to identity representation • Councils often under-use their electoral mandate as leverage within governance networks • Full and part time councillors require greater support from their councils for all facets of their work • Councils need to recognise and support the political and governing role of the councillor and structure the council to support that role
1. Introduction
The paper responds to the issues raised by the committee by using literature and data from a number of related research projects exploring the developing role of the councillor, including a 2010 cross European study.
The councillor occupies a central position in the dynamics of local politics. Yet, councillors are not in control of how the roles they carry out change over time. A series of European-wide pressures, such as those below, shape the tasks, functions, responsibilities and expectations of the office:
1. The changing nature and context of local government and democracy 2. The organisation and activities of political parties in local government 3. Increasing public participation in local decision-making, emerging from exhortations by central government, or from demands made by local communities 4. The fractured and often conflicting nature of the role of the councillor 5. Changing institutional arrangements for local government 6. Changing views that politicians at other levels of government hold about councillors’ roles
Key to the development of the role of the councillor is the interest it attracts from central government. Reviews of local government have explored the attitudes and roles of the councillor (see for example, Maud, 1967, Widdicombe, 1986) but the questions posed and the answers given were a product of their time and based on the subservience of local government in the constitutional framework. The latter reflects a recurrent theme underpinning explorations of the role of the councillor, that this level of elected representative role, unlike those at other levels, is somehow under-developed and in need of constant re-shaping and re-appraisal. Moreover, that it is somehow disconnected from those represented and is a product of a lower level of governing capacity and ability. Some scholars (Greenwood 1981; Jones and Travers 1996) attribute this to a cultural disdain for local government on the part of central government and civil servants.
2. Councillors as Leaders of Communities and Neighbourhoods
Councillors have been criticised for spending too much time in council meetings and insufficient time working with local communities (Audit Commission, 1990, detr, 1998). These views often arise from time allocation studies of councillor activity (Young and Rao, 1994, Widdicombe, 1986, ODPM, 2005). Such studies often underestimate the time councillors spend working within communities as they do not account for the proximity of the councillor to the community – particularly if the councillor lives within the ward represented. Nor do they adequately account for the fluidity and flexibility of the work of the councillor in ward and community leadership roles or how case-work and pastoral roles overlap with community leadership (Copus, 2004).
The community leadership role of the councillor is often something that is recognised by its absence because of the lack of any clear, comprehensive and agreed definition, unlike the concept of political leadership. Moreover, community leadership emerges from the soft powers resting with councillors as elected representatives particularly where there is no executive decision-making ability or budgets available to individual councillors. Community leadership blurs with the wider ‘representative’ role of the councillor, a role which itself has been distinguished as focusing on constituents (communities) and policy (see, Jones, 1975; Newton, 1976; Rao, 1994).
Distinguishing community leadership from other facets of the councillor’s role (policy concerns and case work, for example), means we can start to build a picture of what is entailed in providing leadership to communities:
• Community leadership is related to communities of place or interest; the former will be geographical sub-units of the authority area; the latter can cut across the authority area – communities of interest may also be geographically located o Communities of place or interest must be identified by, or make themselves identifiable to, councillors (the ward or division is only one community of place and often an artificial one at that) • Councillors need to develop a map of the communities that exist within their wards or divisions (support in doing this should come from the council) • Community leadership entails complexity and interdependence between elected and non- elected sectors, between national and local organisations (that impact on local communities) and between public, private, voluntary and community sectors. • Councils operate in conditions of network governance where they are among many bodies making decisions and forming public policy. Councillors similarly face competitors when it comes to decisions made that effect the communities they are expected to lead o Councillors require the soft and hard powers (and enhanced status and recognition as politicians), within their wards or divisions, to be able to bring together disparate bodies – many of which will be geographically larger than the communities with which councillors work o The electoral mandate provides councillors with moral and political leverage to bring together diverse interests to focus on community problems … o … But hard (executive) individual political powers are required to enable councillors to direct the engagement of non-elected bodies with issues arsing from communities (such hard powers should be distinct from the collective powers resting with a council or body of councillors) • As communities grow in assertiveness and are less willing to acquiesce with decisions made by public authorities, community leadership has become a co-operative process relying on councillors’ ability to: o Negotiate o Compromise o Build coalitions and alliances within and across communities o Reconcile conflicting views across communities about local problems and solutions o Use a wide range of avenues for political communication o Make hard decisions about rationing and the use of scarce resources o Place ideological concerns to one side when dealing with contentious local issues
Only so much can be achieved through soft political powers. Thus, the next section examines how localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods relies on hard political powers resting with elected members.
3. Localising Decision Making to Divisions, Wards and Neighbourhoods
There are two dimensions to localising decision-making. One is to see devolution as a process of transferring power or decision-making ability to local communities through ward committees or forum. The other is to transfer executive decision-making ability to councillors in their wards or divisions to enhance their community leadership capacity, both individually and collectively. Recent research has shown that councillors adhere strongly to the principles of representative democracy and to a Burkean interpretation of their role. But, there is also considerable support among councillors for people having opportunities to make their views known before important local decisions are made (Sweeting and Copus, 2012). Thus, the community leadership role of the councillor can be strengthened and informed by enhancing public engagement and participation in local decision-making.
It is in the task of representing the ward or division that councillors often experience the most rewards from their office but also the most frustration. Those frustrations arise from the low level of recognition often given by councils to the role of the councillor as a ward / divisional representative. That ward link is often transferred into a council-wide governing perspective drawing the member away from a focus on the ward or division (Copus, 2007); it is not the number of meetings councillors attend that takes attention away from the ward; it is that those meetings expect councillors to focus on the whole council area. Based on the research from which this paper is drawn the following devolution of responsibility to councillors is suggested to localise decision making (some already exist in some councils):
• Individual councillors to be able to place ward issues or any policy or decisions that might impact on the ward, on the agenda for cabinet, full council, or overview and scrutiny meetings. Responses to the items placed on the agendas to be sent to all ward councillors • All reports and decisions that affect or effect specific wards / divisions to go to ward councillors for comment before being sent to the cabinet or council • Ward councillors acting as a ‘representative team’ (or individual county councillors) to have an executive general power of competence within their wards • Devolved ward / divisional budgets to be created in each council o Those budgets to be allocated equally between councillors within a ward for spending on projects selected by the councillor • Ward councillors to be informed of and engaged in (supported by the council) any ‘community right’ to challenge, bid or build under the Localism Act • Every ward to constitute a ward committee. The committee would consist of the ward councillors and would meet on a regular basis. Membership to be open to each ward committee to decide, but might include: Representatives of local community groups Local residents Third sector bodies active in the ward Locally based business Other public service bodies The ward committee would have decision-making powers devolved to it from the council. • Councillors to rotate on an annual basis as ward mayor. The ward mayor would o Chair the ward committee o Oversee and co-ordinate the use of the general power of competence by the ward councillors o Negotiate with the council on the allocation of devolved ward budgets o Co-ordinate the decisions of individual councillors in identifying projects to be funded and consequent funding decisions made by the ward councillors. • The council leader / mayor and cabinet to report annually (at full council) on how decisions and policy have effected individual wards
In single member wards and county divisions the above role enhancements would need to be reconfigured to be concentrated in the single elected member. The above may seem a recipe for more meetings, but those events will take place in and be focussed solely on the ward or division represented by the councillor. In addition, they will involve others from the local community in a formalised and localised decision making process.
4. The Recruitment and Diversity of Councillors – and the Implications for Representation and Local Democracy
There has long been a debate as to whether ‘representation’ and ‘representativeness’ should be understood as acting politically and in the interests of others, or whether it means resembling the others represented (see, Pitkin, 1972). Minorities in the context of liberal representative democracy have traditionally been political and not identity minorities. The contemporary debate has shifted towards representative democracy and representation being seen by some as sociological or microcosmic representation; that is, that representative bodies (in this case councils) should reflect as numerically as possible the ethnic (or other) make-up of the local community.
Arguments for microcosmic representation appear to assume that only those who are from certain communities can undertake the task of representing them. Thus, the role of the councillor is not to represent the interests of the whole community, but the section of it from which the representative hails. That approach has serious implications for community cohesion as it displays a far more exclusive view of representation than has hitherto been the case. Indeed, a dangerous sectarianism could enter council chambers and party group meetings if diversity of recruitment is seen as an end in itself. Yet, the success of Respect in the 2012 Bradford council elections raises questions: whether the main parties will continue to lose support to those smaller parties that are perceived to represent the interests of minority communities; and, whether or not support for smaller parties, such as Respect, indicates a worrying sectarianism in local politics (see, Clarke, et al, 2008). Thus, councillor diversity is complex question which can only be answered suitably by a careful consideration what it is that the councillor as a representative is expected to represent.
There are numerous studies of the recruitment of councillors, (see Brand, 1973, Barron, et al, 1989, Rao, 1998, Steyvers and Verhelst, 2012, Reynaert, 2012) which indicate that political parties are not only the key councillor recruitment agencies, but also create barriers to diversifying the councillor population. The academic literature highlights the way in which parties capitalise on: • Candidate motivations • Resources available to parties and individuals • Political opportunities • Informal negotiations between potential recruits to overcome resistance, to encourage those drifting towards candidature and to indentify committed potential candidates • Judgments made about the characteristics favoured by parties • Judgements about the qualities of potential candidates
Studies also show how the candidate recruitment process is shaped by: • The professionalisation of parties and local government • The way in which potential candidates are filtered internally by political parties • Path dependent traits within political parties
The Councillors Commission (Dclg, 2007) summed up the barriers to councillor as: • Lack of awareness about the role of the councillor • Political culture • The confidence of individuals to take on the role • Concerns about time commitment • Concerns about the reaction of employers and about effects on career prospects
Many councils have begun to actively encourage individuals to stand for local election, but doubts remain as to the success of these attempts while parties remain the key recruitment agency for candidates with the highest likelihood of victory at the polls. Parties are actively seeking to diversify the pool of candidates from which they select. Some local parties have advertised for candidates or recruited on the doorstep. Such activities normally receive criticism from political opponents, but they offer candidature to a wider pool than that possible by insisting all candidates are existing party members. Whatever actions parties take to widen the pool of candidates, one question remains: if an independent candidate from an under represented group stood for election, would the political parties stand a candidate against him or her?
Encouraging diversity among the councillor population requires parties to examine internal selection processes to identify and rectify barriers – while at the same time avoiding patronising tokenism. Parties need to think more imaginatively about recruitment and selection and not to oppose suitable non-party candidates that may emerge, rather to offer endorsement and even support. The restrictions of group disciple and loyalty and confrontational party politics, to which many do not wish to subject themselves, may also act as barriers to councillor recruitment. Parties therefore need to consider not just recruitment, but their own conduct of local politics and council politics in particular.
Research shows that the key focus of councillor loyalty is not the community (or ward or division) represented, rather the councillor’s political party. Indeed, councillors will place group decisions above the articulated views of their constituents (Copus, 1999, 2001, 2007, 2010). Given the dominance of party politics in local government and the strength of party group discipline and loyalty, it is unlikely that moves towards a greater diversity among the councillor population would lead to greater ‘representation’ of minority interests.
There is a further key issue of diversity of representation that the committee may wish to consider. As a result of the 2012 council elections around 93 per cent of all councillors in England are from one of the three main national parties. By contrast, only around 1 per cent of the population are members of political parties nationally (SN/SG5125, 2009). The most under-represented group of people in local government and among councillors are those that are not members of the three main political parties.
5. The Practicalities of being a Councillor: Time Commitment, Time off Work, Casework and Remuneration
The committee will no doubt receive evidence about the time commitment and time allocation for councillors’ duties and some of that literature has been referred to in section 2. In this section, therefore the two competing conceptualisations of the role of the councillor are briefly contrasted; the part-time lay representative and the full-time professional councillor. What is presented below are ideal types, and the reality of councillors’ experiences and ways of working will exist on a continuum between the ideals.
The Lay part-time member: If a task of the councillor is to hold an administrative machine and a political administration to account, then he or she is not required to be an expert in the specific services and responsibilities of the council. The strength of the lay member comes from bringing outside life experience, backgrounds, abilities and expertise to bear and from the ability to question, challenge and critique proposals and council activities. Those qualities enable the lay councillor to examine the activities of the council and policy problems in a way that that experts and full-time politicians may over look.
The lay councillor avoids becoming professionalised and thus avoids being distanced from those he or she represents. He or she will see their responsibility to the community as the cornerstone of council activity and will therefore place a focus on case-work and community engagement.
The full-time professional councillor: councillors become professional, full-time members either by drift caused by weight of work and a gradual rise through the career structure, or from a choice based on a political commitment to party and / or council service. The full-time councillor is immersed in all aspects of council work and has developed day-to-day working relationships with council officers at a strategic and operational level. They are most likely, but not exclusively, to be members of the council executive or to hold senior council positions. The focus of the professional councillor is on strategic policy development, broad governing issues and ensuring alignment between the council and the political objectives of the majority party group.
The full-time councillor is able to develop a strong appreciation and understanding of all aspects of the council’s responsibilities but as a consequence is often drawn into defending the council – if a member of the ruling group – rather than channelling the views of the public into the council machinery. He or she will undertake case-work and other ward duties and, being close to the council, is able to navigate the internal systems to good effect. He or she will be well-connected within their political party locally, regionally and possibly at a national level. Unlike the lay member the full-time professional councillor would not eschew the title ‘politician’. Opposition leaders can of course also be full-time professional councillors.
These two ideal types bring to the fore considerations about remuneration and whether local government now requires full-time salaried councillors. The pressures and nature of council work and the expectations on elected members, alongside the demands of working at leadership and cabinet level, means that a system of allowances is no longer an appropriate way of remunerating certainly senior councillors. Indeed, the creation of council executives as a result of the Local Government Act 2000 makes it vital that at least cabinet members operate on a full-time salaried status. A similar status for overview and scrutiny chairs should also be considered.
On the other hand there is still the need to ensure that councillors are not expected to become full-time. As we have seen the part-time lay member has much to contribute and is a counter-point to the distancing from the voters that full-time members can experience. A danger does lie in this argument however, that is that the ruling group by dint of having full-time salaried incumbents may be given an unfair electoral advantage if opposition leaders are carrying out their business on a part-time basis. Councils may then need to look closely at the nature of the support given to opposition councillors as a group to ensure accountability is practiced as effectively as possible.
Part-time and full-time councillors will both experience the demands of case and ward work and such work only differs by the nature of the ward and not the part or full-time status of the councillor. The proximity of the councillor to those represented, means, unlike MPs, that they are constantly and easily approachable for constituents. Case work is not limited to surgery time alone. Rather, councillors are on 24-hour call.
6. Strategic Leadership and Governance
The executive member may logically be seen as responsible for providing strategic direction and contributing to governance networks, but such responsibilities are not limited to executive members alone. Councillors outside the executive, through overview and scrutiny, are able to contribute to the strategic direction developed by the executive and to wider governance networks. The latter however, is generally an underdeveloped aspect of the scrutiny function. One of the implications of the separation of powers introduced by the Local Government Act 2000 is that councils should be able to speak with more than one voice and while executives and scrutiny are not in competition, they will make different contributions to leadership and governance. Yet, governance fundamentally alters local democracy and the role of the councillor and such a shift requires councillors to:
• Focus externally on developing governing capacity to shape / direct / influence the activities of non-elected bodies • Use the leverage provided by a democratic mandate to construct a shared vision for the development of the locality and communities within it • Integrate and mediate between competing interests and views of how the locality should develop • Operate within networks that extend beyond the boundaries of a single council • Recognise the need to move away from traditional party-based representative forms of local government to be congruent with network governance, market and participatory competitors to the representative system
While councillors, as party members, continue to be geared towards fighting and winning elections and focusing internally towards the working of the council, they are likely to continue to act in a way that benefits that role. In that case councillors are also likely to become more and more marginalised in the governance of local communities.
7. Skills, Training and Support for Councillors
While some councils make good provision for training and for support to councillors the general pattern is a scattered one. By and large, councils focus far more on their public service responsibilities than they do on their role as a representative institution. Indeed, councils are synonymous with service provision, rather than being seen as a governing entity within the locality. Thus, councils are often not set up as much as they should be to support the political, governing and representative role councils and councillors undertake. Councils need to review the support provided to councillors in the following areas:
• Policy • Research • Administrative / secretarial • Ward / division duties • IT facilities
Support to councillors needs to be seen in the same way as support to managers and as a key function of the council. It is a dangerous false economy not to provide high-level and high-quality support and training to all members equally and in all facets of their work. Training must not be used to managerialise the role of the councillor, rather as a way of developing political, critical and governing skills.
8. Conclusions
Councillors inhabit a level of government which experiences forces for change often beyond their control and frequently generated by other levels of government seeking to reform local government. Centrally inspired reforms may come and go, but councillors are the foundation for representative local democracy and have a key role to play in wider governance networks. All councillors contribute to community leadership, either through the position they hold in the council’s leadership, or by virtue of being an elected representative for a ward or division. It is simply the scope of that leadership and engagement with governance networks that varies.
Much investigation into the work of the councillor is conducted with a view that it can be improved and that somehow it is lacking, rather than from a desire to explore what is required to enhance the governing capacity of local government and councillors. Councillors as governors, representatives and decision-makers need the political and institutional powers to be able to govern their localities. That in turn requires a devolution of power from central to local government that views councils as political entities and not only as bodies responsible for public service provision.
May 2012
References Audit Commission (1990), We Can’t Go On Meeting Like This: Changing Role of local Authority Members Barron, J., G.Crawley and T.Wood, (1989) Drift and Resistance: refining models of political recruitment, Policy and Politics, 17:3, 207-219 Brand, J., (1973) ‘Party Organisation and the Recruitment of Councillors’, British Journal of Political Science, 3 (4), 1973, pp. 473-486. Clark. A., K. Bottom., C. Copus., (2008) More Similar Than They’d Like to Admit? Ideology, Policy and Populism in the Trajectories of the British National Party and Respect, British Politics, 3:4, 511-534 Committee on the Management of Local Government, (1967)Vol. I, Report of the Committee, London, HMSO Committee on the Management of Local Government, (1967) Research Vol. II, The Local Government Councillor, London, HMSO Committee of Inquiry into the Conduct of Local Authority Business, (1986) Report of the Committee into the Conduct of Local Authority Business, Cmnd 9797, London, HMSO. Committee of Inquiry into the Conduct of Local Authority Business, (1986), Research Vol. II, The Local Government Councillor, Cmnd 9799, London, HMSO Copus, C., (2010) The Councillor: Governor, Governing, Governance and the Complexity of Citizen Engagement, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 12:4 569-589 Copus, C., (2007) Liberal Democrat Councillors: Community Politics, Local Campaigning and the role of the Political Party, Political Quarterly, 78:1,.128-138. Copus, C., (2004) Party Politics and Local Government, Manchester University Press. Copus, C., (2001) Citizen Participation in Local Government: The Influence of the Political Party Group, Local Governance, 27:3.151 – 163. Copus, C., (1999) The Councillor and Party Group Loyalty, Policy and Politics, 27:3, 309-324. DCLG, (2007), Representing the Future: The Report of the Councillors Commission Detr, Modern Local Government: In Touch with the People, 1998. Greenwood, R. (1981), 'Fiscal Pressure and Local Government in England and Wales', in Hood and Wright, Big Government in Hard Times Oxford: Martin Robertson. Jones, G. and T. Travers (1996). Attitudes to Local Government in Westminster and Whitehall. Commission for Local Democracy Report No 14, May. Jones, G.W., (19750 ‘Varieties of Local Politics’, Local Government Studies, 1:2 17-32. Newton, K., Second City Politics: Democratic Processes and Decision-Making in Birmingham, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1976. ODPM, 2005, Councillors and the New Council Constitutions Pitkin, H., The Concept of Representation, University of California Press, 1972 Rao, N., The Making and Unmaking of Local Self-Government, Aldershot, Dartmouth, 1994.Rao, N., (1998) The Recruitment of Representatives in British Local Government: pathways and barriers, Policy and Politics, 26:3, 291-305 Reynaert, H., (2012), The Social Base of Political Recruitment. A Comparative Study of Local Councillors in Europe, Lex Localis, 10:1, 19-36 Standard Note (2009), SN/SG/5125 Membership of UK political parties, House of Commons Library, Steyvers, K., and T. Verhelst (2012), Between Layman and Professional? Political Recruitment and Career Development of Local Councillors in a Comparative Perspective, Lex Localis, 10;1, 1-17 Sweeting, D., and C Copus, (2012) Whatever happened to local democracy? Policy and Politics, 40:1, 21-38. Young, K and N. Rao (1994), Coming to Terms with Change: The Local Government Councillor in 1993, York, Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Further written evidence from Professor Colin Copus, De Montfort University and Dr Melvin Wingfield (CC 05a)
1. Introduction
The report has been prepared as additional evidence for the Communities and Local Government Committee inquiry into councillors and the community. It is based on responses to a questionnaire survey distributed, to councillors in 16 countries across Europe. The questionnaire was completed at different times in each country throughout 2008. The data contained in this report is based on the responses of councillors from England, Scotland and Wales. The questionnaire was mailed to all councillors in 119 authorities via member services or equivalent. The distribution of authorities was as follows: 63 English districts, 13 English unitary councils, 10 English metropolitan boroughs, nine English county councils, nine London boroughs, nine Scottish unitary councils and six Welsh unitary councils (104 English authorities in all). The distribution was proportionate to the number of councillors in those types of authorities; proportionality between the main political parties at the time was ensured. In all, 6,082 questionnaires were distributed.
In total, exactly 700 questionnaires were returned ‐ a disappointing response rate of about 11.5%; 588 were returned from England, 22 from Scotland, and 15 from Wales. Some 75 questionnaires, though otherwise completed satisfactorily, had obliterated the tracking number that identified the authority to which the questionnaire had been sent. Other datasets can make better claims to being fully balanced and statistically generalisable samples from which inferences can be drawn about the whole population of councillors. The dataset however, does share broadly with larger sample surveys, particular key characteristics such as average age of councillors, gender distribution, and average length of time served. Given the composition of the councillor population and the responses to the survey, the findings can be reported with confidence that they represent broad patterns existing in the wider councillor population. A note of caution must be added however, when reporting data from low response rate surveys; only new surveys and a larger response rate could confirm or refute the patterns that emerged from this survey. The questionnaire contained some 49 questions, with a total of 307 sub‐questions in total. What is reported here are the responses to those questions which are relevant to the discussion at the committee’s evidence session held on 2nd July 2012.
2. General Characteristics of the Councillor population: An International Perspective.
The data available from the research referred to in the introduction enables us to make a few observations about the overall councillor population (the research sample) to add to what is already know from sources such as the Local Government Association’s survey of councillors. Set out below is the position of UK councillor respondents to the survey in a series of international league tables displayed by the following categories: age, retired from employment, length of service, gender and education.
Table 1 : Age
Country Mean Median Spain 45.16 45.00 Switzerland 47.77 48.00 Italy 48.29 49.00
Young Young Greece 48.60 50.00 Austria 49.87 50.00 Israel 53.31 55.00 France 53.80 55.00 Germany 54.12 56.00 Old Old Sweden 54.21 57.00 United Kingdom 58.57 60.00
Table one shows that when using both mean and median averages the UK has the oldest councillors from those countries included in the survey. An exploration of the roles, expectations, remuneration, status of councillors, powers and responsibilities of local government and a range of other factors, in countries with far lower mean and median average ages would uncover, in some detail, the strategies required to encourage younger people to stand for office of councillor. Such research could be conducted from existing material, although primary research will no doubt add to that knowledge.
The age composition of the councillor population is even more evident in table two when looking at the percentage of councillors who are retired. The UK is in a league of its own with 1,237 per cent more councillors who are retired than Spain, the country with the smallest percentage of retired councillors. The Office for National Statistics noted that in 2010, 17 per cent of the population was 65 or over. Retired of course, does not mean you are necessarily in that age group, but it is a useful proxy indicator and the international comparison is shown in table two.
Table 2 : Percentage of Retired Councillors
% Retired United Kingdom 43.3 France 30.2 Poland 20.0 Most Most The Netherlands 19.1 Germany 18.9 Greece 11.7 Austria 11.7 Switzerland 10.6
Fewest Fewest Czech Republic 10.5 Spain 3.5
The age distribution of the councillor population takes on a slightly different perspective when we consider the length of service of our councillor respondents from across Europe. Table three displays the length of service by the country of the respondents.
Table 3: Length of Service
Mean Median Germany 11.690 9.000 Sweden 10.190 8.000 Austria 9.990 8.000 United Kingdom 9.880 8.000 Belgium 9.765 8.000 Czech Republic 7.822 6.000 Norway 7.599 5.000 Greece 7.428 6.000 Italy 6.626 4.000 France 6.622 1.000 Switzerland 6.609 5.000 Israel 6.604 5.000 Spain 6.584 6.000 The Netherlands 6.197 5.000 Poland 5.722 5.000 Croatia 5.113 4.000
Whether mean or median is used the UK has some of the longest serving members. The interesting data point is France. Using the mean they are in the middle, but the median figure indicates a number of French councillors standing down after a year. If the UK has some of the longest serving members then given the age composition of our respondents, councillors were either elected at a younger age and the current age profile could be a product of length of service; or, councillors were elected at ages above that of the average population and length of service has distinguished the age difference between councillors and the overall population still further. The answer is probably a combination of both.
As table four illustrates that the UK is neither at the top or the bottom of the distribution when it comes to the balance between male and female councillors. Comparison with the extremes of the distribution however, could be interpreted as either a more progressive approach in the UK than other countries, or conversely a must do better, conclusion – depending on whether one looks up or down the table.
Table 4: Gender
Male Female
France 54.6 45.4 Sweden 57.1 42.9 Norway 61.5 38.5 Most Most Spain 66.7 33.3 Switzerland 68.8 31.2 Germany 78.3 21.7 Poland 80.9 19.1 Greece 83.3 16.7 Percentage Female Female Percentage
Fewest Fewest Italy 86.2 13.8 Israel 87.0 13.0
United Kingdom 73.6 26.4
A similar conclusion can be drawn between the question of gender and age. It could be assumed that gender (and age) distribution are not only related to personal factors or to gender and age itself, but also to a range of institutional and organisational factors concerning the powers, roles, responsibilities, status and functions of local government and councillors, across Europe. Research into these institutional and organisational factors would assist in providing policy solutions to the age, gender and no doubt ethnicity composition of the councillor populations and provide valuable data on how to develop policy to ensure that the councillor population resembles that of the wider population. The committee may want to consider commissioning such research.
Next the educational background of councillors from our survey nations is set out in table five and the data here can be interpreted in one of two ways.
Table 5. : Education
University / college or equivalent.
Israel 84.4 Spain 77.0 United Kingdom 72.2 Most Most France 71.8 Czech Republic 69.0 Croatia 58.3 Germany 54.0 Percentage Percentage Italy 48.9
Fewest Fewest Sweden 47.1 Austria 30.5
When it comes to an international comparison the UK has an educated councillor base which is what is required when it comes to tackling the complex array of decisions with which councillors are faced and in producing solutions to complex local problems. An alternative interpretation exists however, in that the table emphasises what we saw with age and gender, that the councillor population does not resemble the overall population insofar as they don’t ‘look like us’, that is, the social structure they represent.
We now move on to consider responses to the broader questions asked in the international survey.
3. Political Influence
The research sought to uncover where political influence rested in local government and to understand the views councillors held about influential groups or individuals when it came to council business. Councillors were asked to reply to the question below and table six shows the per centage responses to the influence of the individuals or groups they were asked to consider.
Table 6: Influence
On the basis of your experience as a local councillor in this City, and independently of the formal procedures, please indicate how
influential each of the following actors are over the Local
Authority activities. influence
influence influence influence high
influence
very high No little some The leader .1 1.0 12.3 34.9 51.6
The Chair of the Council 14.4 39.2 30.9 10.9 4.7
The Chairs of Council Committees 1.1 10.2 50.8 32.1 5.8 The Executive .2 3.2 10.3 42.7 43.8 Individual councillors 5.6 34.2 50.0 7.5 2.7 Myself 8.1 25.6 46.1 13.7 6.5 The Heads of Department in the local authority .3 1.7 20.8 58.5 18.8 The Chief Executive .0 2.1 8.5 37.7 51.7 Professional Consultants/Experts 2.1 12.8 48.1 29.2 7.8 Local MPs 16.9 40.4 33.7 6.4 2.6 Local trade unions 25.8 42.8 27.7 3.5 .2 Journalists 23.0 39.3 31.7 5.0 .9 Local business people 11.6 38.2 43.9 5.9 .5 National and international firms 24.1 44.4 26.5 4.3 .6 Faith groups 32.5 44.7 20.4 1.7 .6 Local voluntary associations 12.3 43.8 39.1 4.3 .6 Local single issue groups 13.1 45.3 38.1 3.0 .5 Neighbourhood committees, forums or partnerships 7.9 28.2 51.1 11.5 1.4 Party leaders 4.6 18.1 48.0 24.9 4.4 Party groups of councillors in the council 2.7 13.7 45.9 29.6 8.1 Local political parties including non‐councillors 14.0 40.3 35.8 7.6 2.3 Regional and upper levels of government 5.0 12.5 32.0 32.3 18.3
What we can see from table six is a clear distinction made by councillors, between the degree of influence over council business that is had by actors internal to the council and those that are external to it. When looking at the highlighted figures, taking the central column as a mid‐point, we can see a clear direction of travel in the responses and some interesting patterns emerged. Chairs of committees (overview and scrutiny, etc), the council leader and executive members are clearly seen as ‘influential’ by councillors. The non‐ executive councillor and individual councillors are seen as having less influence than executive members. The role of individual members is interesting and while they are perceived to have marginal influence respondents think they have slightly more influence as an individual as opposed to all councillors. Moreover, the influence of appointed officers is clearly recognised by councillors and responses here about the influence of the chief executive and other directors, parallel responses about the council leader and executive members.
A telling point is that as soon as we move outside the council the direction of travel of responses is reversed: there is a noticeable trailing off in influence for those outside the council. That is not the case, however, for ‘neighbourhood committees, forums or partnerships’ but these can be seen as still being part of the council. The responses question the embededness of councillors within the communities they represent. By assessing a range of external actors as less influential than internal actors, councillors display the strength of their connection with the council rather than the wider social world. It also means that councillors have not used their own offices to redress this balance. Councillors are not yet a gateway for the wider world into council affairs and decision‐making. Moreover, such responses raise questions about councillors and therefore councils’ contribution to and engagement with, governance networks beyond the council.
In producing an international comparison for the influence councillors grant to the leader of the council and the chief executive an interesting pattern emerges. Table seven displays councillors’ perceptions of the influence of the council leader and for ease of presentation the table (and the other tables showing international comparisons in this report) shows only the top and bottom five groupings from the data set.
Table 7: Council Leader Influence by Country
High and Very Very High No Little Some High High Combined Israel .0 .0 1.4 9.0 89.7 98.6 France .1 .3 1.3 11.8 85.3 97.1 Greece .4 1.7 1.7 14.0 82.1 96.2
Top Five Top Five Italy .3 .9 2.9 19.6 76.4 96.0 Spain .4 1.4 2.5 20.1 75.6 95.7 are councillors from with influence within councils. where perceptions accorded party) Table emerges Turning When Without structural be despite Spain top
as Influence five included
the
U.K
and
quite
and 8: the the taking
executive
most
Highest political
Bottom Five going Chief
to
councillors leaders as
to
aspects
same
France where role ntdKndm 21853. 17 89.5 51.7 37.7 8.5 28.6 2.1 24.3 48.7 77.3 38.3 0 Italy 2 44.6 18.2 Sweden 0.5 52.3 90.7 22.5 United Kingdom 68.9 4 Norway 0.2 8.3 6.6 0.9 accord
United Kingdom The Netherlands Norway Czech Republic Switzerland
as
of shown political the
then influential
influential of the Executive into leader country
leader
can the influence the
political as where
the
the
combined
in
an too
appear
law leaders wield, leader
leader influence. table
explanation. UK and
will leaders
the much formally
as
decision Influence
would
which with
differ
in
was of some
eight. mayor in substantial
the detail ‘high’
the the
we seen local No Little Some High High Some Little No
When
places depending
‐making is jump of bottom
top see heads again chief
by
their government as about and
Israel, five
looking Country executive from instrumental influence.
.3 6.5 .3 6.5 31.8 49.4 12.0 .3 3.2 15.6 47.7 33.2 .2 2.8 12.3 39.8 45.0 .5 2.4 11.3 42.1 43.7 .1 1.0 12.3 34.9 51.6
often a in executive part overseas
‘very
in
party systems on England,
th Greece
our
of related population at e
high’ the
power as list
bottom table the
If counterparts
an
of in (in council in however, and table,
to reason
institution the categories
local derives in local Spain
their Italy–
five sizes
the
political while
leaders
governmen
for
hands government the formal
to
of with the from
judge
at and
a the the
mayor
process.
we council
response
the
are
directly of
formal, position. of fourth
league
High High the very the
highlight
same not course t
is overseas
area. mayor. el
also In seen
a elected
ected
legal for highest
tables
time
this Mo
different from Combined
Very High
So High and
head
those ‘some’ by reover, It
case powers
indicating heads
looking the councillors
mayors; we the appears
in of
responses
responses
61.3 80.9 84.8 85.8 86.5 informal
influence influence terms can the
pattern systems
of resting
at
their
loca and, take that that
the
to of l
Belgium 2.1 5.625.4 43.6 23.3 66.9 Czech Republic 1.5 10 39.1 38.1 11.4 49.5 Austria 1.6 13.339.3 39.3 6.5 45.8 Switzerland 5.1 19.5 33.5 33.9 7.9 41.9
Lowest Lowest Poland 8 15.836.3 33.8 6.1 39.9 Greece 15.9 17 27.5 33.5 6.1 39.6
Taking the same approach of combining the ‘high’ and ‘very high’ influence responses we see that councillors in the UK are second in the international table of perceptions of chief executive influence. The results reflect an often repeated comment from councillors that the authors of this report have experienced from qualitative research, where councillors claim that either ‘officers’ or ‘the chief executive’ ‘run this council’. Although Italy also appears in the top five, as it did in table seven of leader influence, the combined score places it well below that of the UK. Norway was in the bottom five of leader influence and so, unsurprisingly makes an appearance at the top of table eight. What we are seeing in some case then, such as Norway, is a contrary set of responses – if the council leader lacks influence, then the chief executive must have influence. The result from the UK is more complex, given the overall scores for leader and chief executive influence. Despite a shift to an executive system of council leaders and cabinets the appointed chief executive is still perceived by councillors to be of sufficient influence to appear in the top five of the international table, while the leader sits in the bottom five. The results indicate a structural location of power and influence with an appointed rather than elected head – at least in the view of councillors – and indicates the pervasive influence of managerialism within local government. .
4. Candidature
The research explored how councillors were first nominated to stand as a candidate so as to understand the nomination process and where responsibility rested for indentifying potential candidates: the party or the individual.
Table 9 and chart one present the responses to a simple question:
Table 9: How did you become a candidate the first time you were nominated?
How did you become a candidate the first time you were nominated? %
I proposed myself (or I requested party colleagues to nominate me for selection) 18.8 I was asked by others (including being nominated by party colleagues) 81.3
Chart one bellow presents the responses diagrammatically.
Chart 1: Candidature
In the overwhelming number of cases being a nominee of others, as opposed to being a self‐ ‐nominator, is the route into candidature. Yet, exploring the data shows that self‐ nominators are not the same as Independents. Independent respondents were also ‘nominated’ in that it was suggested to them by others in the community or an organisation that they should stand for the council. Party members were present among self‐nominators and had either nominated themselves where the opportunities arose, or had sought out a nominator to ensure they were able to enter the selection process. Labour Party selection processes allow party members to self‐nominate and effectively all nominees could be ‘self‐ nominators’, so it is interesting that the figures for self‐nomination are not higher. Councillors distinguish between an organisational process and where they have been asked to stand by colleagues.
There is an interesting difference in age between self ‐nominators and nominees. Self‐ nominators are on average younger by 6 years than their counter‐parts who secured (or requested) a nomination from other sources (mean for SN = 54; mean for other 60). While a six year difference does not appear great it was a statistically significant difference and indicated two very different types of approaches to candidature. Self‐nominators were among the younger cohorts of councillors and as such the results indicate the continued emergence of a more confident and self‐assured councillor population.
While the number of younger councillors is relatively small, we can say that they have a propensity to behave differently to their older colleagues. Table 10 illustrates this clearly. Respondents have been grouped into age categories starting with the youngest and working through to the oldest group which was 70 and over.
Table 10: Age categories * How did you become a candidate the first time you were nominated?
How did you become a candidate the first time you were nominated? I proposed I was asked by Age categories myself others Total 19-29 Count 3 5 8 % within Age categories 37.5% 62.5% 100.0% 30-39 Count 13 25 38 % within Age categories 34.2% 65.8% 100.0% 40-49 Count 23 55 78 % within Age categories 29.5% 70.5% 100.0% 50-59 Count 32 144 176 % within Age categories 18.2% 81.8% 100.0% 60-69 Count 42 204 246 % within Age categories 17.1% 82.9% 100.0% 70 and Count 6 93 99 above % within Age categories 6.1% 93.9% 100.0% Total Count 119 526 645 % within Age categories 18.4% 81.6% 100.0%
There is an abundance of research showing that on average councillors are older than the population they serve. In the National Census of Local Authority Councillors 2010 conducted by the LGA, the average age of councillors had shown an increase on the previous census from 55 to 60, while the average age of the population as a whole was 40. The findings in our survey are consistent with the LGA’s finding, what is of interest is how younger councillors behave in defined circumstances compared to the average. By grouping ages in Table 10 we can see a pattern of behaviour emerges whereby those in the younger age groups have a greater propensity to nominate themselves. In the youngest age group, 19‐ 29, 37 per cent of respondents were self‐nominators, but this reduces age group by age group until in the oldest age group only 6 per cent nominated themselves. The implication is that future generations of prospective councillors will be more likely self nominate compared to the current councillor population. As the population of councillors ages the tail of self nominators will grow; the data shows older councillors will continue to rely on the nomination process until they cease being councillors. The influence of the party and official party structures on selection could dissipate over time as younger councillors self nominate.
If we look at the data internationally, in table 11 we see that the UK sits just above the mid‐way point in the table of nominations. The explanation for the ranking can be found, again, in structural differences between the various local government, political and electoral systems, as well as ein th political culture of each country. Such factors help councillors determine the political strategies they will employ when seeking nomination. It is also clear that across our survey population in Europe, nomination or suggestion that an individual should stand, by party colleagues or other contacts, is the main route to candidature. Although, as we have seen above, this route may be changing.
Table 11: Councillor Nominations
I proposed myself I was asked by others Israel 38.0 62.0 Poland 34.7 65.3 Greece 31.6 68.4 France 26.3 73.7 The Netherlands 26.3 73.7 Belgium 26.0 74.0 United Kingdom 18.8 81.3 Switzerland 17.1 82.9 Italy 15.0 85.0 Germany 8.4 91.6 Czech Republic 5.0 95.0 Austria 4.7 95.3 Norway 4.5 95.5 Sweden 3.8 96.2 Croatia 3.1 96.9 Spain 3.1 96.9
5. Task Orientation
The survey asked respondents how important they thought were the various tasks that the councillor was required to undertake. The tasks presented to respondents were designed to provide an indication of the different roles undertaken by councillors and designed to ask councillors to comment on the importance of broad aspects of council business and political representation.
Table 12 sets out the responses received.
Table 12: Task Orientation
In your experience as a councillor, how important
are the following tasks for you as a councillor great
None Little Moderate Great Very Defining the main goals of the local authority .6 5.3 19.0 33.1 41.9 Controlling what the local authority does 1.0 3.6 22.0 36.8 36.6 Representing requests and issues emerging locally .1 .4 6.6 35.2 57.6 Publicising debate on local issues before decisions are taken .7 4.3 23.0 41.4 30.6 Explaining decisions of the council to citizens .3 1.8 18.7 39.4 39.8 Implementing the programme of my political party/ movement 4.9 11.0 36.4 30.2 17.5 Supporting the executive 9.3 12.7 30.4 27.6 19.9 Mediating local conflicts 1.6 5.5 32.5 39.3 21.0 Promoting the views and interests of local minorities 1.8 9.9 32.9 34.2 21.2 Promoting the views and interests of women 6.3 15.3 38.0 24.9 15.6
The responses show that councillors have distinct perceptions about the different roles that they undertake and while the importance of these roles may vary somewhat, each are seen as a key task for the councillor. The direction of travel in the responses is, in every case, from moderate importance to very great importance.
It is clear that councillors place importance on their role in ‘explaining decisions of the council to citizens’, so the idea that councillors are a conduit for the council to the citizen, rather than the citizen to the council has some credence. Much of the reason for this response comes from the relationship councillors have with their party – particularly if it is the ruling group on the council and this can be seen when looking at the other important role councillors conduct: Implementing the programme of their political party. Yet, when it comes to ‘Representing requests and issues emerging locally’ we see an equally un‐ ambivalent and somewhat contradictory response. The contradiction here is explainable in that representation is not confined to formal council settings or meetings, but takes place in a wide range of settings: the party group; private meetings with citizens, officers or other members; community events; and, interactions with government departments, public sector bodies and other partner organisation. Thus, councillors distinguish between what they do in formal settings, such as council meetings, where party loyalties and party discipline come into play and in more informal settings and interactions (where political opponents are not present) where party becomes less of a consideration.
Worthy of some note are the responses to the statements asking about the importance to councillors of ‘Promoting the views and interests of local minorities’ and ‘Promoting the views and interests of women’. The responses to these questions are set out in tables 13, 14 and 15.
Table 13: Representing Minorities by gender
In your experience as a councillor, how important are the following tasks for you as a 38. Are you male or female? councillor: - Promoting the views and interests of minorities in the local society Male Female Total None Count 11 1 12 % within Are you male or female? 2.2% .6% 1.8% Little Count 55 10 65 % within Are you male or female? 11.2% 5.8% 9.8% Moderate Count 177 42 219 % within Are you male or female? 36.0% 24.6% 33.1% Great Count 158 70 228 % within Are you male or female? 32.2% 40.9% 34.4% Very great Count 90 48 138 % within Are you male or female? 18.3% 28.1% 20.8% Total Count 491 171 662 % within Are you male or female? 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Women councillors place greater emphasis than their male counterparts on the importance of representing minority ethnic groups. While just over half of male councillors see the role as of great or very great importance, 69 per cent of female councillors fall into those two groups. Interestingly, however, table 14 shows that while there is a difference in the perceptions of the emphasis women place on representing women the differences are not as great when compared to their male counter‐parts as with the question above. The single largest group for both male and female councillors was a moderate response to the proposition in table 14 below.
Table 14 : Representation of Women by Gender
In your experience as a councillor, how important are the following tasks for you as a 38. Are you male or female? councillor: - Promoting the views and interests of women in the local society Male Female Total None Count 36 5 41 % within Are you male or female? 7.4% 3.0% 6.3% Little Count 76 24 100 % within Are you male or female? 15.6% 14.2% 15.3% Moderate Count 192 59 251 % within Are you male or female? 39.5% 34.9% 3% Great Count 115 47 162 % within Are you male or female? 23.7% 27.8% 24.7% Very great Count 67 34 101 % within Are you male or female? 13.8% 20.1% 15.4% Total Count 486 169 655 % within Are you male or female? 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Table 15 below, shows that of those councillors with a high degree of belonging to a minority ethnic group, 71 per cent, thought that the representation of minority groups was of great or very great importance. That result compares with just over half of councillors who thought the issue of great or very great importance but who had no sense of belonging to minority ethnic groups.
Table 15: Ethnicity and Responsiveness
To what extent do you feel that you belong to the following groups in society? - An ethnic minority group Neither high To a low nor low To some To a high In your experience as a councillor, how important are the following tasks for you as a councillor: - Promoting the views and interests of minorities in the local society Not at all degree degree degree degree Total None Count 7 2 0 1 0 10 % within An ethnic minority group 1.7% 6.3% .0% 4.0% .0% 1.9% Little Count 47 2 0 3 4 56 % within An ethnic minority group 11.7% 6.3% .0% 12.0% 14.3% 10.9% Moderate Count 141 12 7 9 4 173 % within An ethnic minority group 35.0% 37.5% 28.0% 36.0% 14.3% 33.7% Great Count 129 9 14 10 13 175 % within An ethnic minority group 32.0% 28.1% 56.0% 40.0% 46.4% 34.1% Very Count 79 7 4 2 7 99 great % within An ethnic minority group 19.6% 21.9% 16.0% 8.0% 25.0% 19.3% Total Count 403 32 25 25 28 513 % An ethnic minority group 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
I
6. Information Available to Councillors
To be able to act effectively across their various roles, councillors require adequate information on which to assess and discuss the issues before them, make judgments and take and justify decisions. As part of understanding how effectively councillors can act the survey asked them about the amount of information available to them. Table 16 and chart two sets out the responses.
Table 16: Satisfaction with Information Available
Do you get a satisfactory amount of information from the local authority to perform your job as a councillor? % Completely unsatisfactory 3.1 Mostly unsatisfactory 5.7 Neither satisfactory nor unsatisfactory 14.8 Mainly satisfactory 58.2 Completely satisfactory 18.2
Chart 2: Satisfaction
Again, as with all responses so far, there is a clear direction of travel towards one end of the scale, giving us a clear outcome: members are by and large satisfied with the information
they receive to perform their roles. A note of caution must be made here however, as making a judgment on the adequacy of information supplied requires the recipient to be aware of alternative sources of information and to have some criteria on which to judge the information they receive against those other sources. It is also difficult in a questionnaire survey for an individual to admit the information they have to carry out their role is inadequate as by implication that questions the adequacy of their own activities.
These responses somewhat contradict the results of qualitative research conducted by the authors in various projects. Councillors often question not only the adequacy and quality of information received but also the quantity: not enough and they are being deliberately misled; too much and they are being deliberately swamped in detail to disguise some key or important issues. Yet, on the face of it, the results of the survey do indicate satisfaction among councillors with the information they receive.
Table 17 presents the data comparatively from our international survey respondents. The table uses a scale from 1, which is ‘Completely Dissatisfied’ with the information flow, through to 5, which is ‘Completely Satisfied’ with the information flow. The higher the mean score the more satisfied councillors are with the flow of information.
Table 17: Flow of Information
Mean
Croatia 4.07 Czech Republic 4.05 Poland 3.93 Norway 3.93 Sweden 3.92 Germany 3.88 Switzerland 3.87 United Kingdom 3.83 Austria 3.80
councillor? Italy 3.72 Belgium 3.68 The Netherlands 3.67 France 3.67 Spain 3.60
municipal administration to perform your job as a job as your to perform administration municipal Greece 3.45
Do you get a satisfying amount of information from the from the of information amount satisfying Do you get a Israel 2.92
The table underpins the discussion so far with a mean score which places councillors in this country at the mid‐point in the table when it comes to satisfaction with the information
available to them. It is informative that three relatively new democracies top the table when it comes to information satisfaction, probably indicating a response to moving from a system where information was heavily restricted and manipulated to a more open and transparent system by comparison. Accounting for this factor sees the responses from the UK move up the table somewhat.
7. Councillors’ Allowances
Given the regular publicity about the level of councillor allowances, the research sought to uncover whether or not councillors felt the allowance regime was adequate to support them in their role. Table 18, 18.1 and 18.2 and chart three displays the responses received. Tables 18.1 and 18.2 have been produced by recoding the variable in the questionnaire: Considering your responsibilities, do you think the allowance you receive as a councillor is adequate or not? In doing so the middle option was removed and the remaining six categories were re‐coded into two: Inadequate (responses 1‐3) and adequate (responses 5‐ 7) Table 18.1 shows the mean age of the two groups and Table 18.2 shows that the difference is statistically significant. Again, the implication of this finding is that overtime as prospective councillors come forward the issue of remuneration will be assume a greater significance for a generation not steeped in the notion of a public service ethos. While the age difference between the two groups may appear slight, three years, it does not detract from the fact that on average councillors who perceive the level of remuneration as inadequate are younger than those councillors who are satisfied wit the level of allowances. As the older age group cease to be involved as councillors this difference can only grow and produce a policy dilemma that future generations of policy‐makers will have to resolve.
Table 18: Allowances
Considering your responsibilities, do you think the allowance you receive as a councillor is adequate or not?
% Not Adequate 15.4 2 13.4 3 14.6 4 14.0 5 13.1 6 9.1 Adequate 20.4
Chart 3: Allowances
Table 18.1: Group Statistics
13. Considering the corresponding responsibilities, do you think your allowance as a councillor is adequate or United Kingdom not? N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean United Kingdom 37. How old are you? Inadequate 284 56.92 11.431 .678 (years) Adequate 277 59.64 11.382 .684
Table 18.2: Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Mean Interval of the Sig. (2- Differe Std. Error Difference
United Kingdom F Sig. t df tailed) nce Difference Lower Upper
United 37. How old Equal .032 .859 -2.831 559 .005 -2.727 .963 -4.619 -.835
Kingdom are you? variances (years) assumed
Equal -2.831 558.76 .005 -2.727 .963 -4.619 -.835
variances 1
not assumed
1 ( The tables are explained below in footnote )
1 Tables 18.1 and 18.2 are the results of a statistical testing of the mean difference between the two groups. In this case whether age was a factor in councillors’ perception of reward. The mean difference which is ‐2.727 – is the number of years between those that think rewards are inadequated an adequate. The heading Sig, in this case is .859 (given that it is greater than .05 we ignore the bottom line of data and focus on the top line). We then turn to the column headed Sig (2 tailed) and the figure is 0.005 which is less than 0.05. This, tells us that the difference in years, although appearing slight, is statistically significant. This is further reinforced by the end column where the range does not pass through zero which adds reliability to the finding in the previous column. What we can say, is that based on a statistic of t= ‐2.831, p<0.05, on average, younger councillors view rewards as inadequate.
What the tables and chart 3 shows is a spread of views about the adequacy of the allowances councillors receive, that spread was created by the variables available to the respondents. But, when age is taken into account a very clear and stark pattern emerges from the responses. Younger councillors, on average, find the allowances inadequate while older councillors, on average, find them to be adequate. What we are seeing here is a distinction between those at the beginning or middle or their working life for whom councillor allowances do not compare favourable to salaries available and those that may have finished employment, for whom allowances are not compared to other potential earnings. We may also be seeing a difference in the approach taken to council work by younger and older councillors with the former always relating their activities and resource investment to paid occupation.
We get a slightly different view when looking at the international comparisons, which are set out in table 19. In producing this table a scale from 1 ‘dissatisfied’ to 7 ‘satisfied’ has been employed. The higher the mean the more satisfied, on average, councillors are with the remuneration regime.
Table 19: Allowances
Mean Poland 5.30 Czech Republic 4.85 Austria 4.57 Croatia 4.47 Norway 4.40 Belgium 4.37 sponsibilities, do you sponsibilities, Germany 4.33 Sweden 4.31 Spain 4.31 Switzerland 4.12 United Kingdom 4.05 France 3.83 Greece 3.74 The Netherlands 3.71 Italy 3.49 Considering the corresponding re Considering the corresponding
think your allowance as a councillor is adequate or not? or not? is adequate councillor as a think your allowance Israel 1.97
The UK is at the bottom of a cluster in the middle of the table but recoding a score of just over ‘4’. Given a seven point scale, 4 is the middle point which might say something about the UK regime system. Interestingly, in the above table 96 per cent of Israeli councillors and 26 per cent in both France and Greece do not receive an allowance, so no surprise they are dissatisfied. In the Netherlands and Italy, however, 100 per cent of members receive an allowance, yet are relatively dissatisfied with the remuneration received.
The responses to questions about the allowance regime raise an important matter for policy‐makers wishing to encourage larger numbers of young people to stand for council and the answer is clear: increase or change the allowance regime to properly reward members for the commitment they make. Maybe the time is erip to consider the issue of full‐time, salaried members.
8. Party Loyalty
The party politicisation of local government makes it important to understand the relationship between the councillor and the party of which he or she is a member and the public he or she represents. The research sought to test the key reference point for the councillor by posing a hypothetical question that asked councillors how they would decide to vote come a difference of opinion between party, citizens and themselves on an issue.
Table 20 and chart 4 display the responses to the question.
Table 20: Party Loyalty
If a councillor is opposed to the party line on an issue, and the councillor is also opposed to public opinion on an issue, and the party line and public opinion are also in opposition, how should the councillor act? % Vote according to his/her own conviction 57.8 Vote according eto th opinion of the party group 25.0 Vote according to the opinion of the voters 17.2
Chart 4: Party Loyalty
Initially, we see a clear display of what might be called a ‘Burkean’ approach towards representation at the local level. The majority of councillors state that they vote according to their own opinion rather than the views expressed by the two other reference points provided in the question. On the face of it the responses challenge the idea that party politicisation has a negative effect on the ability of councillors to make decisions about issues before them based on their own assessments.
More careful consideration is however necessary and we have to examine the interaction between councillors and the party group of which they are a member. Given that some 93 per cent of councillors in England are members of one of the three main political parties it is highly likely that ‘their own opinion’ coincides with that expressed by the party group – particularly as councillors will have been present at pgrou meetings, contributed to the debate and voted at any meeting. Thus, the councillors ‘own opinion’ and the ‘opinion of the party group’ are likely to be one and the same. Local representative democracy is not seen by the majority of councillors as necessarily based on expressing or voting for the views of local citizens.
When we look at the responses we see that party loyalty and gender appear to be connected. Chart 5 shows responses to the question by gender.
Chart 5: Party Loyalty and Gender
Further analysis shows that women and men act differently when it comes to the reference point for deciding how to vote. Women tend to be less individualistic than men and they are more inclined to vote for the views of the voter or the party group. But, a note of caution is needed as the issue is complicated by the way the question was asked as the place for ‘voting’ was not specified and so when responding councillors will have made their own judgment about where a vote was taken. It is possible to vote in a group meeting, but be defeated in that meeting and then vote in other settings, such as council meetings, in accordance with the majority expressed in the group. Thus, councillors may have voted first in accordance with their own opinion and second with the group: what we may be seeing in the responses we received from female councillors is a reporting of the last place voted (after the group) and from males a reporting of the first place voted (the group).
9. Candidate Support
The research explored how much support councillors received at election time from various organisations and individuals active within local communities. It did this to explore how close councillors were to the communities they represent and how that closeness, or otherwise, was displayed in the electoral process. Table 21 displays the responses received.
Table 21: Support
As a candidate in the last election, to what extent did you have all the support of the following groups:
great
at
Little Moderate Great Very Not % Your national party 17.6 13.0 30.8 23.8 14.8 Your party wing/faction 27.0 8.3 21.2 25.4 18.0 Your party at the local level 7.7 3.0 12.7 29.9 46.6 National politician(s) 31.2 19.5 26.3 13.8 9.2 An influential local person 46.3 15.9 18.2 12.0 7.6 Trade union(s) 78.0 7.6 6.9 4.8 2.8 Local business group(s) 78.5 11.3 7.5 2.0 .6 Women’s organisation(s) 82.2 8.4 5.7 2.9 .8 Local media 64.1 16.9 15.7 2.6 .8 The Church 76.8 10.7 7.9 3.7 .9 Local (voluntary) association(s) 67.5 12.1 14.0 5.0 1.4 Ethnic group(s) 82.4 7.9 5.1 3.4 1.2
The direction of travel within the responses indicates that councillors overwhelmingly receive the most support at election time from their political parties, at various levels, except from national politicians. Indeed, party sources were the only actors that received a positive score as the direction of travel for all other actors was towards the negative. Taken with the party politicisation of local government and the high level of party representation on councils this finding is not a surprise. Indeed, it reinforces the view of local representative democracy as a place where party organisation, structure, finance and activity are key resources for the potential councillor.
What the responses show is the distancing, at election time, of the councillor (and party candidate) from the very communities that they govern and represent. It may be that elections are a time when candidates and organisations deliberately separate from each other with the latter not wanting to be seen to actively support a particular party. Moreover, candidates may not wish to expose non‐party organisations to the battlefield of local electoral politics. Thus, a deliberate distancing of politician from represented occurs.
It is more likely however, that what we see in the responses is a natural separation of the councillor from active support from community groups at election time and that the work
councillors undertake with a range of bodies does not manifest in active support during elections. The responses support the idea that elections are something that is the property of political parties and other organisations enter the fray at their own peril. Thus, civil society is distanced from electoral politics and this may partly explain low levels of engagement in local elections
10. Motivations for Standing for Election
The survey explored the various sources of motivation for councillors to stand for office. It did this by focusing carefully on the ‘first’ time a candidate stood because what motivates an existing councillor to seek re‐election, given their experiences of office and a political maturation process, can reasonably be thought to vary from the original source of motivation. Table 22 sets out the responses to a range of motivational factors that result in councillors first seeking office.
Table 22: Motivation
How important were the following reasons in motivating you to
stand for the council for the first time?
all
at
importance importance
importance
importance important
little moderate utmost great
Not Of Of Of Of % General interest in politics 5.4 7.8 27.2 33.9 25.8 To highlight the needs of the group I represent 19.3 13.1 21.0 27.2 19.5 To learn how local politics works 22.3 24.7 26.8 18.5 7.8 To work for the political party I represent 14.9 14.6 25.2 28.0 17.3 To control the administration 19.0 19.7 27.4 23.3 10.5 The member allowances 56.4 28.5 12.5 2.1 .5 To make contacts and network 36.5 25.0 22.8 11.9 3.8 To be held in high esteem 51.0 25.0 18.7 3.6 1.7 To start a political career 45.4 25.4 17.5 7.4 4.3 To influence specific issues 10.4 5.4 22.5 37.1 24.6 As part of civic duty to engage oneself in council affairs 7.2 9.5 25.1 32.2 26.0
Political parties again feature in the responses and working for the party of which the councillor is a member is a clear motivating factor in first seeking office. So too does working for the ‘group’ the councillor seeks to represent and this response is a companion to working for the party as the two sets of interests will come together for the candidate. There is also a strong ethos of public service displayed in the responses and a rejection of any self‐interested motivations such as allowances or social status. It is apparent that the desire to influence the outcome of individual local issues or policy concerns is also a motivating factor. What we see, again not surprisingly, from the responses is a politically
orientated motivation in standing for the first time, with party looming large in the considerations. But, standing for council for the first time, is not motivated by a desire to embark on a political career. It appears councillors do not see the council as a stepping stone to other levels of government or are motivated by advancement on the council.
11. Future Plans
The idea that councillors do not see the council as a stepping stone to other levels of government is supported when the survey asked councillors about the plans they had for the future. Table 23 and chart 6 sets out the responses received to that question.
Table 23: Future Plans
What are you planning to do at the end of the present term of office? % I would like to continue as a councillor 68.3 I would like to continue my political career in a higher political office on the council 7.2 I would like to continue my political career in a higher political office at the regional or national level 4.7 I would like to leave politics 19.8
Chart 6: Future Plans
The majority of respondents intended to remain as councillors – party and electorate permitting. With so many councillors intending to seek re‐selection and election, the opportunities to refresh the existing pool of councillors with new entrants from different backgrounds depends on parties themselves selecting new candidates and inevitably de‐ selecting existing ones. It also rests with the voters going on to elect those candidates. The responses show however, a continual and strong commitment among existing councillors to public service and political activity and that is a positive feature for local democracy.
12. Reasons for Leaving
The survey then went on to explore the reasons why those councillors that were intending to leave the council had decided to do so. Table 24 and chart 7 show the responses to the reasons available to councillors when asked why they were intending to stand down.
Table 24: Reasons for Leaving
If you want to leave politics, could you please state why? No Yes % I want to concentrate on my professional occupation 83.3 16.7 I want to work for a voluntary organisation 80.2 19.8 I have done my civic duty 37.3 62.7 Local politics is too time‐consuming in relation to family or occupation 40.8 59.2
I lack influence (myself, my party, or councils in general) 70.2 29.8 I am too old 40.5 59.5 I will move from the council area 85.0 15.0
Chart 7: Reasons for Leaving
What the responses indicate is that councillors intending to leave the council appear to be doing so to ‘spend more time with their families’ (or their jobs). In other words, council duties are a time consuming set of responsibilities and maybe too demanding for some, given that the office is not full‐time and paid in the same way as a salaried occupation. Although, leaving the council to concentrate on a professional occupation is not such a great motivator, so what we are seeing here is a reaction to the time demands of council work.
Among the leaving councillors there is also a sense that they have fulfilled their civic duty and that it was time to move on to other things. It may be that the public service ethos identified above as a motivating factor to stand for council has a limited life‐span. It also appears that a number of councillors feel that they are now ‘too old’ to continue as a councillor, so contradicting the point made above in discussing future plans that it might be difficult to change the composition of the councillor population with so many intending to seek re‐election. The contradiction is eased however, by remembering that the responses are from those that have indeed decided to step down and thus we are looking at a smaller group of members, for whom, age is a key factor.
Conclusion
A constant theme running through many of the responses is the strength of the relationship councillors have with their political parties and more specifically their party group on the council. Indeed, representing the party is a key factor for councillors and it is through this vehicle that a wider group or set of interests that the councillor focuses on are also represented and promoted. There is a noticeable distancing however, in the responses, of the councillor from the wider social world and while councillors clearly come from and perceive they represent that social world, they are not, as a body, as connected to it as would be expected in local government. Yet, there is still a strong element of public duty and public service ethos that is clear from the way councillors approach their responsibilities.
Councillors have a tendency to look inwards towards the council rather than outwards towards the various communities and other public sector bodies within their areas, at least when responding to the questions presented to them in this survey. Indicated here is a disconnection between the perceptions councillors have about the influence of their own institution and the myriad of other public sector bodies that operate in eth same wider networks within which councillors themselves also work. That perception may not always match the reality of the resources and policy‐making power of organisations, other than councils, within governance networks which councillors appear not to recognise.
The dedication of councillors to their localities is emphasised by the fact that local government is not seen as a stepping stone to higher levels of government. The responses indicate the existence of a division of political labour with councillors seeing political service as being delivered within their locality and through local government, rather than at the national level. It is a sign of strong local government and politics that so many motivated to stand for office for political reasons, see local government as the place where they are committed to continue serving.
October 2012
Written evidence from Dame Jane Roberts (CC 06)
Summary
• The Councillors Commission’s report, “Representing the Future” was published in December 2007. It addressed very similar issues to those that the Select Committee is currently investigating.
• A copy of “Representing the Future” has been made available to members of the Select Committee to accompany this submission as this is “material that has already been published elsewhere”, as in the guide for written statements to Select Committees. My submission will summarise therefore key issues pertinent to a number of areas listed in the Select Committee’s Announcement of Inquiry. It will not cover all the deliberations of the Commission nor all its recommendations.
• Progress since the Councillors Commission is briefly covered.
• It is suggested that the role of councillors could usefully be considered within a wider framework, together with the role of other elected representatives.
BACKGROUND TO THE COMMISSION
1. The Councillors Commission, that I chaired, was set up by Ruth Kelly, MP, then Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (CLG), in early 2007. It was asked to make recommendations regarding the incentives and barriers to: encouraging suitably able, qualified and representative people to serve as councillors; their retention and development once elected; and their being able to secure public interest and recognition for the work that they do. It was an independent and cross party review.
2. The review was prompted by concerns at CLG that councillors were very unrepresentative of the communities that they represented. At the time of our deliberations, only 4.1% of councillors were from ethnic minority backgrounds, only 29.3% were women, and only 13.5% were under 45. Younger councillors with a disability were few and far between. The most recent survey of councillors shows little change with representation by women stubbornly static, but the average age has increased to 60.
3. The work of the Commission took us to many different parts of England and Wales, listening to hundreds of people. We received over 200 submissions; we both commissioned research and reviewed existing research including the evidence internationally.
4.The considerations of the Councillors Commission took us wider than merely matters of, for example, support and remuneration to elected members. We felt that we could not useful recommendations without stepping
back to consider wider changes that had taken place concerning local democracy and governance more generally in recent times.
5. We reported to Hazel Blears, MP, by then Secretary of State at CLG, in December 2007 with our conclusions, listing five principles for effective representation, and 61 recommendations in “Representing the Future.” The recommendations were grouped into four areas: making councillors central to local democracy; making the role of councillor more widely known and better appreciated; making it easier for everyone with the potential, regardless of background, to come forward and for a more diverse range of councillors to be elected; and making it easier for busy people to be councillors.
6. The Chair of the Commission met with the Chairman of the Conservative Party, the President of the Liberal Democrats and with the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party. Harriet Harman, MP, instigated the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) Councillors Task Force towards the end of our deliberations.
7. The Government made its response to the Commission’s report in July 2008, accepting most of our recommendations. Our first recommendation, that local authorities should be charged with a statutory duty to promote local democratic engagement, was central to the Communities in Control White Paper and was incorporated into legislation that received Royal Assent. It was later however repealed by the coalition government.
AREAS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE SELECT COMMITTEE’S ANNOUNCEMENT OF INQUIRY
8. Role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods
8.1 We came to the view that there were profound concerns about the relationship between the individual citizen and the state, characterised as one of “disenchantment, disengagement and mutual incomprehension”. Local councillors should be part of the solution to this democratic malaise rather than seen as part of the problem which is too often the case, and a key link in the chain of governance. It is, after all, at the local level, that people are first most likely to be interested and get involved in decision making, perhaps by virtue of their children’s schooling, by tenant participation or by interest in other local environment issues. This may lead to more formal roles as school governors, tenant leaders etc. Professor George Jones has stated, “a participatory democracy can only be built at local level” and “the task of local government should be to foster the habit of citizenship”.
8.2 Councillors have an added legitimacy by virtue of their election for a wider geographical area although they should recognise that others will also have legitimacy: we live in a more plural world. Place – both the physical and social aspects of place – remains key to our experience of life. Its importance is often under-estimated.
8.3 We saw elected local representatives as “the indispensable link between the public and decisions that have to be made in the collective interest”. This does not preclude more direct participative means of democratic engagement – indeed, representative democracy depends on participative democracy to inform and enrich it. Councillors act at the interface between representative and participative democracy.
8.4 We saw the modern councillor “using a rich mixture of ways to link the different communities that she or he represents to formal decision making processes. Councillors need to look outwards into the community as well as inwards to the formal processes of the council. Their function is of two way translators, communicating public feelings into the council’s priority setting and decision making structures, and explaining and making sense of council decisions and the reasons for them to the public”. This does, of course, put a high premium on communication skills.
8.5 The Commission suggested a more specific starting point for a councillor role description that could then be adapted and developed by councils to suit local circumstances.
9. Recruitment and diversity of councillors
9.1 Unbalanced representation in councils compounds a sense that we are governed by a separate political class who look and talk very differently from “ordinary people”, that in turn distances people from an understanding of the political process and its importance, and can feed a destructive cynicism in politics. Professor Stephen Coleman, whom we quoted in the report, writes compellingly on this issue. The Commission’s report argued on page 14 that descriptive representativeness is important both symbolically and substantively whereby different core interests can be fed directly into the democratic process.
9.2. The Commission’s report goes into considerable detail about the reasons why more women, more people from a BME background, and more disabled people do not consider standing in local elections, are not selected and are not elected. In summary, there is no one reason but rather a combination of issues (notably a lack of awareness of the democratic process generally and more specifically how to get more involved, electoral arrangements, the culture of the political parties and local government, lack of confidence, time commitment and the anxieties about the possible impact on work and family life, attitude of employers, as well as the practicalities in terms of organisation, timing of meetings, lack of support). There was some evidence that it may well be more difficult to get selected than elected and this is obviously a crucial issue for the political parties to address. The Committee could consider the writings of Professor Gerry Stoker, in for example, “Why Politics Matters. Making Democracy Work” (2006 Palgrave MacMillan) whom I quoted a great deal when speaking about the Councillors Commission. His CLEAR model is useful for considering the constraints and prospects for participation in the democratic process: our own findings very much echoed his academic work.
9.3 Given that there are a range of reasons why relatively few women, people from a BME background, younger people and those who have a disability become councillors, so in turn, there is no one magic bullet that remedies the problem. I did however come to the view that it is not quite as difficult to attract a wide range of candidates as is often made out. What is however extraordinarily difficult is for there to be real determination and commitment, particularly on the part of those with influence, to bring about change. The focus and drive of local political leadership here is absolutely crucial. The tendency, however, of those in power to remain in power – and only in the last resort to replace themselves, but then in their own likeness, should never be underestimated.
10. Skills, training and support for councillors
10.1 The skills demanded of councillors are complex: we listed “listening; negotiating; probing and scrutinising; handling contradiction; lobbying; campaigning; community development; conflict resolution; mediation; and of course, decision making. Few individuals will have all these skills in equal measure, hence the usefulness of gauging the balance of skills across the council as a whole and across wards and divisions.”
10.2 Local government has made considerably more headway over recent years than central government in recognising the need for and establishing training programmes. A number of councils have brought in innovative schemes, recognised by the national Member Development Charter scheme and annual awards. Training should be available in a range of areas including in approaches to community development. We recommended that personal development plans should be drawn up so that training tailored to individual development needs can be facilitated. There should be an explicit expectation that councillors will fulfil their side of the bargain and take up such training opportunities. Formal accreditation to validate councillors’ acquisition of skills should be widely established.
10.3 We recommended that local authorities should meet specified minimum standards for support to councillors that would include administrative support for case work; research support for ward work; IT equipment for use at home or mobile; arrangements and publicity for advice surgeries; arrangements for child and dependent care cover; and social networking training and support. I understand that there is still considerable variation between councils in terms of the range and amount of support offered.
10.4 Remuneration of councillors is a vexed issue. The Commission’s view, based on an overview of the evidence, was that there should be no financial disincentive to becoming a councillor rather than any financial incentive. We recommended a national framework of guiding principles for member allowances, suggesting a national minimum basic allowance for each type and size of authority, and a carer’s allowance.
11. Practicalities of being a councillor
There are a number of practical factors that can make it very difficult to become and remain a councillor:
- a lack of awareness about local democracy, what councils are, and how to become a councillor in the first place. The Commission examined this issue in greater depth as we were very concerned about the lack of understanding about local government and what councillors do, let alone about how to become a councillor. And in areas of England where there are counties and districts, it can be even more baffling. This led to our first – and in my view, most important recommendation – that local authorities should be charged with a statutory duty to facilitate local democratic engagement. The recommendation suggested means by which councils could pursue this duty using four tiers. The LGA has in recent years put considerable effort into publicising a wider range of people that stand to be councillors but there is a great deal more that councils themselves and political parties could do;
- time commitment, both perceived and actual, and the possible consequences for family life and employment. We recommended that councils should adopt modern business and meeting processes which seek to remove potential barriers to participation. These should include accessible meeting times (not necessarily in the day, and with specified end times), efficient chairing, the use of modern technology where appropriate, support for childcare, and concise paperwork. We felt strongly that councillors should be able to work in a variety of other employments, have domestic commitments, and be a councillor.
- employers’ attitude. Despite the requirement that employers should make “reasonable provision” for employees who are councillors, there is a significant minority who do not. In current austere times, this may well be exacerbated. Better engagement of local authorities with employers and a better perception of the value of serving in local government is a necessary part of addressing this issue.
12. SINCE THE COMMISSION
12.1 Representing the Future’s principles, and most of its recommendations, were accepted by the government in 2008. The report was very well received by local government commentators, academics and many in local and central government although others seemed to find some of its recommendations more radical than perhaps they were willing to go along with. Political parties were not interested enough, a problem then and, I suspect, now. The recommendations were directed at a number of different players: central government, the LGA and the Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA) as it then was, local authorities, political parties, employers, public service broadcasters and Ofcom.
12.2 Members of the Commission met for the final time in April 2009 to examine how much progress had been made. Reasonable progress had been made in some areas for example: by central government in its inclusion in legislation of a statutory duty to promote democracy; and by the LGA and IDeA in its communications and national campaigns to promote the role of a councillor. I spoke at numerous events up and down the country about the Commission’s work up to mid 2010. Since then, however, there have been numerous changes of council control, a change in the LGA leadership, and of course, a new government in Westminster.
12.3 I have always been clear that in order to effect substantial change, determined and persistent leadership of the issues raised by the Commission within local and central government and within the main political parties is required. It is the political will to effect change that is so important: it is not, I believe now, hard to make a difference to raising the profile of councillors, to recruiting a more diverse group, and to supporting councillors better. The debate nationally has, however, been overshadowed by an almost exclusive focus on the merits or demerits of directly elected mayors.
13. THE NEED FOR A WIDER DEBATE
Having thought over the years about the issues that are now raised by the Select Committee’s Inquiry, I suggest that the role of councillors is not most usefully examined in isolation from other elected representatives (MPs, MSPs in Scotland, Assembly Members in Wales and London and, to a lesser extent, MEPs).
Sir Michael Lyons, in his masterful report from the Lyons Inquiry, talked of local government being part of “a single system of government”. Yet there is little debate about the roles of representatives at different layers of governance: who can most effectively do what; how can elected representatives at different levels best work together? Any one area may, for example, be represented by five people (a councillor at parish, district, and county level, a Westminster MP and a MEP) but how much communication do they have with one another? How does this make sense to an individual constituent? MPs have been encouraged in recent years to spend more time in their constituencies but they will often feel under pressure to respond directly to constituents on matters that come within the remit of local government. Is this helpful? What is the nature of the relationship between an MP, a leader or a directly elected mayor, particularly with regard to issues of place?
May 2012
Written evidence from West Midlands Councils (CC 07)
Communities and Local Government inquiry into the role councillors play in their communities
Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the important discussion on the role of councillors in their communities.
West Midlands Councils serves the interests of councils in the West Midlands. It is collectively owned by its member councils, who together decide on the activities and priorities of the organisation.
The submission reflects a diversity of views and in reality many apply or span a number of the questions that you have posed.
The role of councillors as leaders of their communities and neighbourhoods
People generally become councillors in order to “make a difference” to their local area. By virtue of their unique position of being democratically elected to represent the people of their area they are well placed to act as leaders in their local areas.
Councils have a range of different ways in which councillors can exercise their local leadership role including ways to influence local priorities and spending, as well as being the voice of their communities within the wider council.
While all areas are different, councillors will have effective relationships to different extents with parish or town councils, residents groups and other local organisations. However, in other areas there will be less social capital, fewer volunteers and therefore less beneficial activity locally.
Some councils are actively exploring how the role of councillors as community champions can be redefined and modernised, for example through prototype projects such as using social media tools for networking between local community organisations and leading local ownership of community assets.
The ability to make something concrete happen in their area can be greatly increased by councillors having control over a specific sum of money. Initiatives such as Local Community Funds through which councils devolve a set amount of money to ward councillors are a positive contribution to this.
Sums in the order of £10,000 per councillor can give councillors additional scope for positive engagement in the community and gives the council as a whole greater flexibility to respond to what is happening in localities. Approaches differ, but the funds can be used for small grants or in some cases several years’ worth can be rolled forward to be used on larger schemes.
Another important leadership role for councillors is to engage and influence the increasing diversity of public, third sector and private providers operating in their area. This can be a challenging task with, in many cases, limited direct or even indirect influence through the council but it can be a valuable and productive one.
However, in some cases, despite the desire to make a difference, councillors find there is less autonomy that they would wish and find themselves unable to respond to local concerns even when they are well evidenced.
Where there is no sense of “making a difference” ward councillors can become disheartened when local views and evidence are “over-ruled” or discounted in a wider decision-making process, potentially leading to distrust of officers and processes.
There are clearly tensions for frontline councillors in this respect which are not always resolvable, particularly where wider than local issues need to be considered on a greater than local or even greater than council basis. However, perhaps more could be done in terms of involvement in processes and communication with decision-makers to reduce these tensions.
In these situations councillors can also have a leadership role in informing their communities of how these wider issues affect them. Through being actively involved even where the overall decision may have gone against the local councillor’s views, there should be scope to ameliorate any perceived adverse impacts, for example in working to secure sometimes very significant community facilities from new development.
Recruitment and diversity
Would be councillors need to believe they would be able to make a difference if they are going to make a commitment and give up valuable time.
One of the biggest incentives for recruiting councillors is therefore ensuring that they have a clear role and will be trusted with decision-making and that they are not by-passed by boards and trusts and the like which have only nominal or even no councillor representation.
There are some concerns that the some aspects of the localisation and decentralising agenda are contributing to this by creating more bodies and organisations active locally, but with their accountability increasingly to central Government and/or with no direct relationship to the local council.
Potential councillors may, therefore, also be unclear about the different layers of governance in a locality and the influence that they have over different aspects of public life. This makes it difficult to attract people.
There are particular issues for prospective younger councillors who may have a young family and demanding work commitments. Indeed, becoming a councillor could well result in a significant loss of earnings.
Employees can be reluctant to ask for time off for public duties fearing that it would undermine their career prospects.
In this light, it would be helpful if the role of councils and councillors were portrayed more positively by Government particularly to businesses. There is a need to encourage employers to see benefits in employing local authority councillors and to view it as a contribution to their community’s public life.
A tax incentive or similar for employers with councillors on their payroll may overcome some of their reluctance to employ councillors.
It is important that councillors are drawn from a wider pool of people. The financial implications and time costs risks narrowing down the breadth of representation further to those who have time such as the retired, the unemployed and students.
Even where younger people have become councillors there is a substantial risk that they will give up the role in order to pursue a career and to bring up their families.
Skills, training and support for councillors
The learning curve for new members is particularly steep and they can feel disillusioned and out of their depth with full time professional officers.
Many, particularly those new to the role, find that being a councillor it is far more onerous and time consuming than anticipated. Therefore, it is important that local authorities support members by making the best use of their time for example by providing more timely and effective information, minimising the number of meetings and enabling members to be more visible to, and directly active with their constituents.
Through improved promotion of the role of the council, the councillor and induction procedures, the levels of expectation of member development and support has been improving. Indeed, most, if not all, councils provide training opportunities and/or encourage councillors to participate in national LGA, West Midlands Councils or other training events.
Member seminars to bring people up to speed on particular issues and other forms of training, or councillor support may form part of regular council meetings helping to ensure that they reach the appropriate members without unduly adding to their time commitments.
West Midlands Councils is the organisation owned by its member local authorities, who together decide on the activities and priorities of the organisation.
One of the services that West Midlands Councils offers is a Member Development Charter process that helps councils improve their performance through elected member development. The process raises the profile and standard of member development within participating authorities and recognises the commitment and achievement of those that have been satisfactorily assessed; in all around 20 councils in the West Midlands have achieved either the Full or Primary Charter levels.
In addition, West Midlands Councils offers bespoke member development services and a “Knowledge Shot” seminar programme (reaching around 1,100 councillor and officer delegates in 33 events), briefings on specific issues and a twice monthly newsletter to help keep councillors up to date on key issues affecting councils in the West Midlands.
The expectations of training from younger Members are likely to be higher than more established councillors, particularly where they have experienced this in a work environment. Such members may expect a flexible and tailored approach to supporting their development, along with effective communication and the sort of business processes that are commensurate with leading successful businesses.
These members may be more likely to be concerned with political career progression and how their parties organise succession planning.
There can be an important role for senior councillors to support ward councillors on particular matters. With councils having less of a formal role in education for example, ward councillors could have a role in developing close relationships with their local schools. For most ward councillors, however, education is unlikely to be their main interest. To help, at least one council is developing a “framework of support”.
Lead members could have a key role here to support and encourage colleagues in different issues. Having a technical understanding of the technical matters and engendering interest will clearly be important, but increasingly so will be the softer skills needed to make best use of their contacts with schools, FE colleges and other organisations operating locally where there is no statutory role for the council or a requirement on the organisation to cooperate.
In two tier areas some councils are looking at the opportunities to draw on their bigger councillor resource to share the load, increase coordination and avoid duplication.
The practicalities of being a councillor
Although the amount of time put in by councillors varies greatly, it appears younger would-be councillors generally have to choose between a career and council commitments. Moreover, there is little that can be done about the lack of security in the four year term of councillors. Remuneration packages are unlikely to be able to substitute for this.
Generally speaking the level of remuneration is not related to the increasing time and work demands and is not enough to attract younger people and those with families.
That said, there are clearly dangers around the perception of using expenses and attendance allowances as an incentive to public service, potentially changing the emphasis to something more akin to a “normal” job and away from its democratic, representative status.
The remuneration varies markedly from authority to authority but there is a danger that if it is too high then people will seek election for the pay rather than the responsibilities of public service. Moreover, the loss of office would also become a significant financial shock as well as an emotional one.
The demands on leaders and cabinet members make it exceptionally hard for people in full time work. For some the Special Responsibility Allowance is a fair recompense, but for more complex Cabinet portfolios the time commitment can be enormous.
Of course, as in other areas of public life there are pressures not to increase allowances or at least not to accept them, which is a further disincentive particularly for younger councillors or those on low or fixed incomes.
While perhaps not an issue for most ward councillors, these are important considerations for attracting people into public service, or at least not erecting unnecessary barriers, and in retaining those interested in political progression.
In this respect, the messages that Government gives consciously and inadvertently about councils and councillors are very important.
Unfortunately, these can sometimes add up to quite a negative image, colouring the public’s understanding of the worth of councils and councillors and therefore influencing whether or not people would be interested in becoming a councillor.
Localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods
Many, if not all councils have local, devolved, decision-making arrangements, utilising these would reinforce existing democratic structures to enable challenge over differentiated service provision, economies of scale and coordinated commissioning in an authority’s different neighbourhoods.
Having a process and budget to support and empower councillors locally is clearly an advantage and some councils have taken measures to decentralise some of their spending and decision-making.
As well as the before mentioned Local Community Funds there are a number of ways this can be facilitated such as Local Committees, Divisional Panels and devolved Neighbourhood Budgets, although there can be risks that such mechanisms could be dominated by the “usual suspects” or vocal single issue interests.
Having Neighbourhood Managers who work closely with the ward councillors and other local groups can also be very effective in supporting councillors and brining forward appropriate potential schemes.
A challenge for councillors is the amount of public funding coming into areas from Government to local groups that require governance structures, such as the Community First Neighbourhood Fund Forums. Together with other local governance forums such as those for Neighbourhood Plans, there is scope to use these initiatives to reinforce local action around agreed priorities, but with different governance structures for each this could be a real challenge for already pressed local councillors.
Councils in the West Midlands are also experimenting with a range of pathfinder, vanguard and front-runner activities, often with locally elected councillors leading the innovation and putting accountability at the heart of the relevant service reform. Examples of this include collaborating closely with town and parish councils in the development of Neighbourhood Plans, giving the local councillor a significant role in developing “Place Plans” guiding local spending and investigating the roles of councillors in preparing for Community Budgeting.
Oversight, facilitation and accountability
It is clear the role of frontline councillors is becoming increasingly complex. Some of the localism and decentralisation processes have the potential to increase the number of independent, non-democratically accountable bodies active locally and the number and range of providers of public services.
At the same time there is increasing autonomy for further education colleges and schools and an increasing diverse range of businesses and organisations who are delivering public services in local areas.
There is scope for councillors to be involved in some of these and to help coordination to avoid duplication or assist in focusing on local priorities. However, there is also a risk that councillors themselves could be spread too thinly.
In many cases it is the council that is likely to be held to account for the services in their area whether they are responsible for them or not and there will be pressure on councils to step in and intervene where things go wrong. Having a working understanding of their roles and keeping up to date with their performance in order to understand performance and to hold them to account effectively will undoubtedly be a challenge, particularly where they are not directly commissioned by the council.
Strategic, leadership, governance and responsibilities
The move to the Cabinet system and away from the Committee system a few years ago meant that other than overview and scrutiny there a relatively few central roles for “back bench” councillors. While the scrutiny and oversight role is an important one, as has been set out, people generally become councillors to make a difference rather than to scrutinise the decisions of others.
Realistically, however, councils and the business of councils has increasingly moved away from the Committee model and is changing further.
With more decisions being made on a partnership basis, for example the Troubled Families initiative, there are more joint arrangements being put together. There are also more supra-local decisions through partnership arrangements with business such as the Local Enterprise Partnerships as well as the more operational move to more shared services between local authorities.
These require different decision-making arrangements but the scrutiny role of local councillors both formally and informally becomes even more important to ensure that the decision-makers are held to proper account.
May 2012
Written evidence from Buckinghamshire County Council (CC 08)
Summary • Submission from Buckinghamshire County Council • Focusing on the characteristics & requirements for Councillors • Two-tier areas have specific challenges particularly in relation to the community understanding of County and District Councillor roles and Buckinghamshire has developed a successful Local Area Forum model • Councillors as community leaders is an increasingly important aspect of the role requiring people with drive and commitment who are willing to be proactive in their local areas • There are a significant number of Councillors for whom community leadership does not resonate and this is a challenge for local authorities in moving towards community solutions to service delivery • The County Council has a Charter Mark for its Member Development programme, reflecting the commitment to supporting Members • Managing conflicting demands on their time for working Councillors can be a challenge
Introduction Buckinghamshire County Council is a principal authority in a two tier area in the south of England. The County Council welcomes this opportunity to contribute to the CLG Committee inquiry and to provide the organisation’s views on Councillors and their role in communities. This submission focuses on the characteristics and requirements necessary for Councillors to carry out an effective community leadership role and the challenges therein. This submission will not cover party political issues as it would be inappropriate for an authority to do so, and is for others to comment.
Two-tier Areas The two-tier arrangement of local government brings with it specific challenges in relation to Councillors working in their local communities. From the electorate’s perspective there is often confusion around the County and District Council remits and therefore which Councillor to contact. Good local working relationships between Councillors of the various authorities are therefore critical in providing a ‘seamless service’ to local people.
To assist this in Buckinghamshire we have developed Local Area Forums. The County has 19 local areas each with a Forum providing a place for County, District and Parish Councillors, together with local representatives from other key public sector organisations and often other key local players, to come together to discuss and take action on local issues. Many Local Area Forums have worked with their communities to develop local plans - an activity which was happening in Buckinghamshire before the Localism Bill. However, in our experience the level to which Forums have taken the opportunity to make local decisions and take responsibility for local services has depended very much on the vision and tenacity of individuals involved.
Councillors as Community Leaders Community engagement - stimulating interest and action in any local area - requires people with drive and commitment. Over the past decade there has been a growing recognition within British society of the need for communities and individuals to be more self-sufficient. As a result, the ability of the local elected Councillor to provide community leadership is an increasingly important trait.
The number of Councillors who are proactive locally is growing. These Councillors make the time to go out and about in their local communities - learning about the communities they represent and the issues that they face. The most effective Councillors in their communities are those who understand the value in building good working relationships locally. These tend to be individuals who also recognise the need for change and actively campaign, leading where necessary to ensure improvements happen.
However, there are still a significant number of Councillors who are less involved in their local areas. The community leadership role appears to resonate less with these individuals, posing more of a challenge for Councils. Delivering improvements or meeting challenges in local areas is best achieved when services, Councillors and their communities are working together on issues. The willingness of Councillors to engage with this work depends very much on the individual Members involved.
Member Development Here at Buckinghamshire County Council, we have always had a strong focus on Member development, ensuring Members can be the best that they can be and that their skills match their passion for improving lives in their communities. Our Member development programme puts emphasis on our political skills framework and the Corporate Plan.
Our approach is Member-driven and holistic. From the moment someone expresses an interest in becoming a Councillor they can find useful information on our website, including a leaflet and DVD on how to become a Councillor. Once elected all our Councillors receive a comprehensive Member Induction Guide, linked to the skills framework and individually tailored to reflect the Member’s division, and we offer senior Councillor mentors.
For those Councillors who are willing to provide leadership for their communities but who lack the necessary skills, we provide group and individually tailored learning opportunities which continue throughout the term of the administration.
The organisation considers it vital that Councillors are supported to develop their knowledge, techniques and understanding. Events are planned in response to Councillor needs and are designed specifically to help Members to gain confidence in working with their communities. Buckinghamshire County Council has been awarded The Charter Mark for our Member development programme.
The Working Councillor A significant amount of time is necessary to carry out the Councillor role effectively, which can be a challenge for those in full-time employment and for their employers too. Unfortunately society does not attribute a particularly high-status to the role of the Councillor and as a consequence individuals can find it difficult to manage employment and Councillor work. In the experience of some of our Members, the choices made by Councillors can impact on career prospects. This may be one of the issues that discourages younger people from considering standing for election.
Acknowledging the complex demands on twin-hatters in this two-tier area, the County Council holds meetings during the day time. Just over half of our County Councillors are also District Councillors and many are Parish Councillors, school governors and involved in other local groups and organisations, the majority of which hold evening meetings. For working Councillors, this is an additional challenge.
May 2012
Written evidence from the Office for Public Management (OPM) (CC 09)
Summary
Developments around localism, encouragement around building a more active citizenry, and the financial pressures faced by councils all have implications for the way councillors will need to operate. Based on members’ experiences of their specific local projects, and more general feedback, we would suggest there are five broad roles that members can expect to take in helping to generate positive outcomes in their areas. The appropriateness of each will depend on the project, as well as the personal strengths and preferences of the member, and sometimes a successful project will see members perform aspects of each. In the case of the first three in particular, the councillor’s legitimacy to act in these roles is rooted in their status as democratically elected representatives. • Councillor as mobiliser – being able to enthuse, motivate, and build the confidence of others; being honest and clear on how much they can do; and being able to ‘make the case’ to council colleagues, partner agencies and local people • Councillor as convenor and facilitator – understanding who has a stake (and interest) in what, to bring the right range of skills and ideas to bear; having the skills to facilitate meetings with a degree of distance rather than always giving a personal view • Councillor as broker and arbiter – showing diplomacy, sensitivity and tact; acting as a bridge between key people / organisations; being persistent; being a good active listener; knowing what support can be drawn on from the council and other agencies • Councillor as signpost – being honest and clear on how much you can do; knowing what support can be drawn on from the council and other agencies, and who to point people towards • Councillor as communicator - communicating the reasons behind and the implications of council decisions affecting an area – even if you don’t personally support those decisions
Introduction
In reference to your call for evidence, this submission addresses two of the areas of focus: - the role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods; - localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods A current area of interest for OPM is the role of local authorities in ‘unlocking’ the capacity of local communities. As illustrated in our recent report1, councils are taking a range of approaches to tap into the ideas and energy of local people in order to: give local people more control over their areas; realise the health and well-being benefits that volunteering can provide; and take pressure off traditional council services at a time of squeezed budgets. Some of our recent work asks the question: ‘what does all this mean for councils?’ and also, more specifically, ‘what does this mean for elected councillors?’ The evidence that follows is based on OPM’s work with Shropshire Council, and all quotes are from officers, elected members or other people involved in this work.
Why the role of councillors is so important at present
Squeezed budgets
As councils continue to make difficult decisions about spending, so too the conversations they have with residents about how to make savings will also be difficult. Officers should have the technical and professional expertise to advise on what will be feasible and how outcomes can be safeguarded in potentially new ways, but as the elected face of local authorities, councillors will need to be at the forefront of those conversations, explaining reasoning to residents, bringing resident voices to bear on decision-making, and increasingly being able to tap into resident time and energy to help maintain certain sorts of provision where council resources are no longer enough (e.g. libraries, community transport etc.)
Localism
Local communities are being invited to have a stronger voice in deciding what happens in their area. On the one hand, that could be seen to reduce the relevance of councillors, as individuals and community groups will be encouraged to have their say direct rather than channelled through an elected member. On the other hand, the fact that councillors are elected and therefore have both the mandate and the legitimacy that others don’t, means it will be hugely important that they remain at the centre of conversations and decisions affecting their areas.
Building community capacity and the ‘big society’
Again, this could be seen as reducing the relevance of councillors; side-stepping them and encouraging citizens to do more and take part beyond the traditional processes of contacting a councillor to ‘sort things out’. In some cases, councils and councillors can act as barriers to local people wishing to tackle local challenges themselves. But this is only partially the picture, and in most cases individual and communities need support in order to do more – that capacity will not be ‘unleashed’ simply by lifting red tape, it will
1 See Francis, Unlocking Local Capacity, OPM 2012: http://www.opm.co.uk/resources/33885 need to be ‘unlocked’ with the time and resources of local councils, acting to nurture, encourage and coax. Elected members should be well-placed in communities to help join the dots – between council and residents; between local people, local groups and ideas. That might involve acting as arbiter between competing interests, and being an important interface between the council and others when a group or individual steps forward with a proposal.
Learning from OPM’s work in Shropshire
Background to our work with councillors in Shropshire
Shropshire Council established the Focused Local Learning Programme as a prototype in January 2011, involving councillors in eight wards in the south east of the county. The programme was designed to help elected members provide their communities with the support they need to do more for themselves, as increasingly they will need to in an era of reduced resources. In addition to helping to generate concrete results on specific local challenges in the pilot areas, the work aimed to answer the following questions: • Who might councillors work with to improve outcomes for local people? • How can community capacity be unlocked, developed and measured? • What are the main skills and qualities that members and their supporting officers need to provide community leadership? • What development do members and others need? • What changes does the council need to make in organising itself?
Different ways of performing the elected member role
People often see the local councillor as a problem-solver – someone who can sort out local issues, often by referring them on to the relevant council officer. Councillors often see themselves as having this role. The starting point for this local learning programme was that this can’t be a sustainable approach for achieving results for communities – elected members don’t have the time or skills to do everything themselves, and councils don’t have the resources to always provide the solutions. Councils appreciate that local people often have the ideas and the energy to help find solutions themselves – the question is what the role of councillors can be in bringing that local energy and those ideas to bear. At the beginning of the programme, members’ self-assessments of their own skills were very positive, suggesting they were already confident in a range of aspects of their work. Nonetheless, following their focused local learning projects, some did think that they had developed their practise and done things in a different – and more effective – way than previously. Perhaps the learning here is that members will not necessarily have a prior sense of what skills or techniques they can usefully develop if the very approach they’re being encouraged to take is outside their usual remit. In other words, we don’t know what we don’t know, but when encouraged to work in a different way, the value of certain skills or approaches might become more evident. The table below sets out some of the aspects of the member role that have been evident through the focused local learning programme. In the right-hand column are corresponding knowledge, skills and competencies that feedback suggests are useful in performing those roles. Aspects of the member role Knowledge, skills and competencies
Councillor as mobiliser: the role of the councillor can be to start Ability to enthuse, motivate and build the confidence of the ball rolling on how to tackle a specific challenge or set up a other people – conveying your own enthusiasm and commitment specific project. This may mean launching a campaign and with confidence and assurance and knowing ‘what buttons to galvanising local support in the mould of a community activist or press’ with different organisations and individuals to get their community organiser. support; helping to build ‘ladders of involvement’ so that there are ‘You can’t be a wallflower as a councillor … you have be new people coming through. confident in yourself and what you have to say.’ (member) Understanding what channels are most effective at reaching It may also mean mobilising council officers or senior councillors to different local audiences – for instance, would social media help give their support, which will require making a sound case for in spreading your message and ideas? Is a traditional public action. meeting the best way to bring people on board? ‘I’ve learnt that if you get the local community involved and Confidence to be honest and clear at the start – about what maintain their interest, you can go into any office at Shirehall you as a local member are willing and able to become involved in, and say ‘this is what the people want.’’ (member) so as not to over-commit and set expectations too high. It’s important not to overstretch yourself. Ability to make the case for action – drawing on evidence of local need, demand, and potential impact to do that. Councillor as convenor and facilitator: the elected member has Understanding who has a stake in what issues – which the legitimacy to pull people and organisations together for a council departments, which other public bodies, which community specific local challenge, but not necessarily the time or resources to groups and which individuals – and the relationships to call on draw on to find a solution themselves or with one or two council where necessary. officers. In that context, being able to galvanise support from the Skills in facilitating a meeting – basics like how to set the most relevant quarters and lead initial discussions will be scene, how to ensure different views are heard and tension important. diffused, and how to summarise comments at key points in a ‘This is definitely something I’d do in future following this meeting to reassure that views have been acknowledged before experience – if I can get a partnership together on other topics, the conversation moves on I will do. It’s about the council facilitating rather than doing everything.’ (member) ‘You’ve got to be able to winkle people out – to know the right people in the village to approach.’ (member)
Aspects of the member role (cont.) Knowledge, skills and competencies (cont.)
Councillor as broker and ‘problem buster’: the most useful role Diplomacy, sensitivity and tact – avoiding creating personal of the elected member can sometimes be to act as broker or go- tensions and stepping carefully around those tensions that already between when personal relationships about an issue have exist, maintaining a position of balance and impartiality to steer an deteriorated, or where technical and legal problems are too much objective course through a difficult situation; being clear whether for community groups or individuals to navigate alone. Here, you are advocating a particular course of action or facilitating drawing down the right help from the council and even other others to reach a decision. agencies may help to get things moving again – without the Persistence – being prepared that progress can take time and member having to solve the problem directly themselves. small steps might get you further in the long run ‘This was a project where something was stuck. The local support was there, but it was about working with an individual Being a good listener, and in particular being an active – the thing that was stuck was a relationship, and we had to listener – it’s one thing to listen to what someone wants, but work to turn that around.’ (member) another to ensure you understand why they want it and what they want the outcome to be. These conversations can sometimes reveal that what people really want can be achieved in other ways, and may also point towards ways in which the community itself can play a part in making things happen. Understanding of the council structure – the roles and remits of different departments and officers, so that you can call on then right professional and technical support at the right point in the process.
Councillor as signpost: even based on this approach of sharing Understanding of the council structure – the roles and remits the burden and finding solutions with others, elected members will of different departments and officers, and where possible, an not be able to devote time and energy to all the potential projects understanding of the council’s corporately agreed strategies and in their area. When members feel they can’t put a lot of effort into priorities with which local activities can demonstrate synergy. an issue brought to your attention, however, it will be important Confidence to be honest and clear at the start – about what to direct people towards individuals or organisations who may be you as local member are willing and able to become involved in, better placed to help. so as not to over-commit and set expectations too high. It’s ‘My advice would be don’t take on something you can’t help important not to overstretch. with … but nor should you desert those people or that idea – put them in touch with A, B and C … we need to be able to bring in the right council officers and join the dots.’ (member)
Councillor as communicator: elected members are the primary Ability to explain the council’s position – just as members in a connecting point between the local community and the decision- ‘mobilising’ role will need to be able to make the case for action in making local authority. When a local authority makes decisions front of local people, so too they will at times need to that could affect local people, the councillor will need to be able to communicate the reasons for no action – or unpopular actions – communicate (if not always justify, depending on their own views) when certain decisions are needed. the reasons and the implications. Confidence to have difficult conversations: particularly at a time when council resources are constrained, some organisations and individuals will be disappointed by spending decisions affecting their area. As the face of the authority in that area, the member will need to be prepared for the difficult conversations that result from that. Ability to challenge voices in the community: sometimes members may need to hold up a mirror to people in their community and challenge their ideas and assumptions – particularly where their impact threatens to undermine other people’s input and willingness to be involved.
Implications for councils – how to support elected members to be leaders in their communities
Putting more energy into locality-focused work
If local members are to use their grassroots knowledge of communities and issues as the basis for practical projects that marshal local energy and interest; and if local people are to get behind those projects, then the place must be the focus, rather than the issue or the theme or the service traditionally tasked with sorting things out. For members and communities to be supported on these place-based projects, councils need to be able to offer resources and support at that level – across departments and perhaps at a level of locality many officers are not accustomed to. ‘Taking this very local approach is definitely what we would look to do more of in future – you need that for the member, because it’s the level at which they are seen by residents, and it’s also important for the community because the results are more tangible to them.’ (senior officer)
Members need different types of support at different times
There are times when the skills members value the most in officers relate to organising the process of a project – liaising with the relevant organisations, keeping them informed, running meetings effectively etc. In one of the Shropshire projects that was felt to have been very successful by those involved, the member attributed this in part to a strong project manager. Some other members (and local stakeholders) spoke about the potential value of having a ‘case worker’ for each project who could provide those skills, or at least pull them in from elsewhere as required.
Making it easier for members: avoid jumping through hoops
Members cited instances of some council processes that can feel as though they generate work unnecessarily and which, at times when a member is seeking to galvanise community organisations and residents into positive action, risk sapping good will and energy. The primary example was of funding application processes attached to council resources. Some members had found themselves spending many hours struggling to fill applications forms in, and following rejections of those bids they and other local stakeholders felt not only disheartened but unsure of what they were getting wrong. In light of earlier conclusions about the importance of building local people’s confidence and in building relationships with potentially valuable bodies like parish councils, these are the sorts of obstacles the council should think about addressing. ‘I did feel like the council was being very bureaucratic in the early stage … when the first bid was rejected, we were back to stage one.’ (member) Internal bidding processes may be a mechanism for promoting fairness between areas and transparency of funding decisions, but the council may want to review
whether this is the best use of members’ time and skills, or whether this should legitimately be seen as part of an officer’s skills set whereby members articulate the vision but paid officer time is used to put the bid in writing.
Enabling barriers to be removed where it is sensible to do so
If the community is able to make a bigger contribution of time and expertise itself, the burden on some of the council’s traditional functions should be reduced over time. Different sorts of support will be needed, however, so that people in the community (along with their elected members) are in a position to make those contributions. The council needs to be aware of this. ‘Its felt like the councillor has been really good at removing potential blocks to progress, e.g. around planning permission, non-domestic business rates and so on. He’s found ways round things that have come up. The lesson is, if it’s sensible – find a way!’ (project stakeholder) Removing barriers to good projects will partly be about changing the structures and processes that can unnecessarily or inadvertently slow things down. In many cases, however, it will more important to shift the culture and behaviours in parts of the organisation so that when barriers are encountered, there is a will and an ability to overcome them there and then. In the case of the pub project in the village of Neenton, it was deployment of a new planning policy that made the proposed development feasible. This was an example of members and officers turning the rules to their advantage to make something happen. Enabling other hyper-local projects to work in the same way will require the council to be similarly bold and creative.
Allowing members access to senior officer – and cabinet member – support
Removing barriers may be something that requires the influence of senior officers and cabinet members. During the course of the projects, some councillors found that the intervention of the area director or cabinet member had been crucial in generating energy, suggesting solutions and ensuring action from officers or other organisations in a way that prevented blockages from forming.
Member development: learning through doing rather than through training
We found mixed views in Shropshire, both from members and officers, about the extent to which the council is well set-up to support members to play this sort of enabling role. Members were generally happy with the training they had received on being elected / re-elected as a councillor, but some felt that in light of this work with OPM and the sort of approach they’ve been encouraged to take, there could be opportunities to enhance training on ‘softer’ skills for those
who wanted it – skills such as basic project management, forging links with community groups, facilitating meetings etc. ‘I didn’t really have much training regarding making contacts locally.’ These could form part of a ‘menu of options’ available to councillors rather being than mandatory. That said, it was also suggested that traditional training was not necessarily what was needed, but facilitated opportunities for councillors to get out into the community and hear what people had to say. We would agree with those members who felt that learning through doing is often the most effective way of building their skills and confidence, and the focused local learning programme aimed to provide those opportunities. In essence, all of the ‘enabling’ aspects of the member role we have talked about – mobiliser, facilitator, broker, signpost and communicator – rely on good relationships being built and maintained. As members’ local projects have demonstrated through the course of the programme, it’s often good relationships that enable things to happen. If members can help to forge those relationships – even where they’re not directly involved themselves – they will be playing a valuable role in effecting positive change. Sometimes those relationships might be formal, between partner agencies, and sometimes they will be informal, between individuals and community groups in the area. Elected members may not always have a central role in facilitating those relationships, but they are the ones with the legitimacy to start the conversations, to bring people together and marshal the ideas and energy.
May 2012
Written evidence from Sunderland City Council (CC 10)
This s u bmission will highlight:
1. The centrality of community leadership and the role of Councillors to the Sunderland Way of Working – the City Council’s overarching framework for public service reform, organisational development and local governance. 2. The progress of SCC’s Community Leadership Programme (CLP) – designed explicitly to develop the role of Councillors as community leaders, change agents and partners in the transformation of social outcomes and public service effectiveness in the city. 3. The potential for further development of these themes as a response to encouraging evidence so far, and as part of SCC’s evolving programme for service delivery and governance in future.
1. Introduction to the Community Leadership Programme
1.1 Sunderland City Council has driven its work supporting the role of Councillors through its Community Leadership Programme (CLP). The CLP was designed in 2009 as part of SCC’s strategy to deal with the challenges of future funding constraint, changing citizen demand and a need to improve social and economic outcomes in the City. At root, the CLP represents a belief that elected members must be at the heart of Sunderland’s strategy for social and economic renewal, but that to fulfil their potential as community leaders, they need a new type of support and capacity building, and a new set of tools to lead.
1.2 Accordingly, the CLP incorporates a variety of support interventions and development initiatives under three broad strategic directions:
a. Engaging Councillors more effectively as community leaders – creating new support structures that can improve communication and responsiveness, build stronger bonds of trust, and empower Councillors at the community front line. b. Engaging Councillors in the development of Responsive Local Services (RLS) – creating new governance and engagement mechanisms that support Council services that get closer to citizens and are more directly responsive to the needs of people and place. c. Engaging Councillors as partners in local economic growth – developing the means to engage Councillors in the City’s Economic Masterplan growth framework, particularly around the potential of citizens and communities to develop new SME’s and public service spin‐outs.
About the City and its Councillors
1.3 Sunderland has 75 Councillors, broken down as per section 3 below. The City is administered through five area committees, each of which corresponds to one of the City’s ‘regeneration areas’: West, East and North Sunderland, Coalfields and Washington areas. Each area committee is made up of between 4‐6 wards.
[see section 3 for more information]
1.4 The City of Sunderland has faced huge social and economic challenges since the de‐industrialisation of the 1980s. The ‘Sunderland Way of Working’ has been developed in part with this legacy in mind, setting out a pragmatic and localised response to the fiscal and demand challenges of the current context. Central to this is the need to leverage resources already within sight of the Council, shift emphasis from the Civic Centre to areas and neighbourhoods, and improve the responsiveness of services and communication. The CLP has driven these shifts through tapping into the capacity and desire of Councillors to do more to build the resilience and assets of their communities.
Community Leadership in Practice: some headline figures
1.5 Sunderland City Council has placed considerable political emphasis & goodwill on supporting Councillors to be at the forefront of strategies for social and economic renewal in the City. In the following pages, we detail how this has worked in response to specific areas of focus highlighted in the CLG Select Committee call for evidence. Three years after inception, the CLP retains real momentum, andis a focal point for much of the Council’s strategy for public service reform and community wellbeing. Yet we also believe that the story so far is one of vindication for SCC’s focus on the role of Councillors as key agents of change, and advocates for a new way of working in the City. Some snapshot figures illustrate this (see also Appendix 2):
a. Most recent survey figures show that 91% of Councillors consider officer support services ‘good’ or ‘excellent’. This is a rise of 26 percentage points on the 2009 baseline figure.
b. Frequent use of ICT amongst Councillors has risen from 35% in 2009 to a recent highpoint of 97% in large part due to the role of account managers supporting this transition.
c. Individual Account Managers assigned to Councillors as part of the CLP have returned a satisfaction rating (rated ‘good’ or ‘excellent’) of 94% for accessibility and 91% for speed and quality of response to member queries.
1.6 SCC has achieved these notable rises in member satisfaction and capability through an open, reflective approach that has been responsive to the needs and
aspirations of elected members themselves. We have deliberately sought to break down the concepts of member satisfaction and community leadership into manageable, measureable constituent elements (see Appendices 1 & 2). This has resulted in an ongoing programme that eschews top‐down change programme implementation in favour of a cumulative, evolutionary process, in which momentum has been built around meaningful change on a range of issues that Councillors themselves care about. We continue to be open to new ideas and the potential of improving Member‐Officer relationships, and, ultimately, supporting Councillors to play a transformational role in their communities. The following pages set out specific developments against the points of focus set out in the Select Committee call for responses.
***
SECTION 2 – THE ROLE OF COUNCILLORS AS LEADERS OF COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBOURHOODS
2.1 This has been an area of considerable focus for Sunderland. The belief that Councillors are community leaders provides the normative basis for the city’s Community Leadership Programme, and we have achieved demonstrable success in supporting Councillors to fulfil this role. A strong over‐arching framework has driven this process, and some small – yet significant – interventions have helped to generate buy‐in and enthusiasm.
2.2 As we detail in the following pages, these interventions were designed to address issues Councillors themselves identified as barriers to acting as community leaders. As the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has shown ‘many members feel it is hard to achieve...because they are marginalised in decision making, lacking the information they need to shape and influence broader plans, and unable to act directly on many very local concerns’.1
2.3 Member surveys show the impact of shifting the focus to community leadership and directly addressing these issues. Our 2009 member survey indicated that 65% of members thought that officer support was good or excellent.2 The implementation of the CLP raised this percentage to 85% in the short term, with most recent figures indicating a 91% ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ rating. We believe that placing community leadership at the heart of the Council’s corporate strategy and way of working is a key reason for this.
1 James, S. & Cox, E. (2007) ‘Ward Councillors and Community Leadership: a future perspective’ Joseph Rowntree Foundation online at http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/2125‐local‐government‐ Councillors.pdf 2 This survey was conducted approximately 6 months after CLP kick‐off activities such as workshops on member role definition. Informal estimates suggest the figure would have been closer to 40‐50% before this.
Our experience indicates that the following were key:
a. A clear and obvious focus on community leadership as a key functioning of the Sunderland Way of Working. This has clearly linked the role of Councillors to some significant developments in organisational reform and local public service decentralisation.
b. An emphasis on collaboration and openness – working with elected members to break down good community leadership into understandable and actionable interventions. These have been measured and published as a Member Satisfaction Flow Chart, which measures and tracks member satisfaction against these specific support mechanisms. The Flow Chart has become a key indicator of progress within the CLP, with the member satisfaction survey itself designed around these issues.
c. A sustained drive to improve Councillorofficer relationships and create effective partnerships to facilitate better community leadership. An upsurge in goodwill as a result of the programme has been leveraged to push the CLP outside of the traditional comfort zone of Councillors and officers, allowing the Council to progress major reforms to responsive local public services in partnership with Councillors.
SECTION 3 – RECRUITMENT AND DIVERSITY OF COUNCILLORS
3.1 Sunderland City Council is a metropolitan authority serving a population of c 280,000 people. The Council has 75 Councillors divided into 25 Wards. The composition of the Council at May 2012 is
Labour 64 Members
Conservative 8
Independent 3
3.2 The Council has experienced a major turnover of Councillors in recent years. 60% of Councillors have been in office for less than 5 years, 80% for less than 10 years and only 7 for longer than 20 years. We have welcomed 30 new Councillors in the last three years. (40% of our total Councillors).
Composition of the Council
3.3 Some key indicators are as follows:
a. Approaching 40% of our Councillors are women.
b. We have no Councillors from minority populations. This is similar to the wider regional picture where 98.8% of Councillors are of white origin
c. We have three Independent Councillors at the moment and have probably peaked in this respect for the time being
d. Sunderland has 10% fewer Councillors in full‐time, part‐time of self‐employment than the North East region or England as a whole. We have 10‐15% fewer from professional or technical backgrounds, but 30% higher than the national average from executive or management backgrounds.
e. The city has many more Members from local government (including associated organisations & networks) backgrounds. This is 50% higher than the broader North East region, and 150% higher than England. We do, however, have 25% fewer Members than the national average from private sector occupations.
f. In terms of higher‐level qualifications, our Councillors score 20% lower than the North East region, but at GCSE/A‐level we are nearly 50% higher than both regional and national averages.
g. The city has a much higher young Councillor (under 25) figure than either the region or England. 46% of our Councillors are over 60 (likely to fall as a % after the current election), as compared with an average 64% within the North East, and 59% nationally.
SECTION 4 – SKILLS, TRAINING AND SUPPORT FOR COUNCILLORS
4.1 SCC has placed great emphasis on skills, training and support, with several key mechanisms put in place since 2009. At the core of our approach has been an understanding that Councillors must be given the right tools to become community leaders, but that our understanding of what these tools are must move with the times, and be responsive to the needs of Councillors themselves. Developing stronger bonds of trust between Councillors and officers has been key to this process.
4.2 The impact of these member ‘customer care’ initiatives in Sunderland has been very positive – with aforementioned satisfaction ratings for officer support reaching 91%. Deploying time and resources on providing better support has led to higher satisfaction and greater trust between members and officers, which has allowed the CLP to build momentum, take sensitive decisions more quickly and move into exciting and radical new territory. Our experience indicates that the following facets were key:
4.3 A collaboratively designed role definition for Councillors. This tapped into and developed Councillors’ understanding of what a community leader should represent, how they could achieve this in practice, and what support and tools
they needed to get there. Defining this role was a cost‐free foundation that identified future service improvements and built confidence in the process.
4.4 A bespoke service directory for Councillors. This is an electronic directory that provides first point of contact officers’ for member enquiries. It was developed according to members own ‘in tray’ priorities, and designed with quick response in mind to ensure that Councillor queries are directed to the right person first time around. Key Council staff have been inducted and trained according to these priorities, with an emphasis on responsiveness and empathy to Councillor needs. A 95% ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ satisfaction rating indicates the success of this initiative.
4.5 A Member Satisfaction Survey based on key themes identified by the aforementioned Member Satisfaction Flow Chart. This electronically conducted survey has achieved returns of between 62 and 66% across (five surveys have been conducted so far), and is designed to take the pulse of Councillors against the key issues they have themselves identified. Findings are analysed at granular level and form an evidence base for following phases of reform.
4.6 The introduction of designated Account Managers as a key part of improving responsiveness and member‐officer relationships (see Appendix 5). AMs’ are officers who have volunteered (over and above their ‘day jobs’ within the Council) to be a first point of contact to Councillors, providing a range of capacity development, communications, opinion testing and support functions. SCC currently has over 50 account managers who are largely partnered with Councillors on a 1:2 basis. AMs are considered very valuable by Councillors – especially newer members who are building new relationships within the Council and community. A recent survey recorded 94% satisfaction (‘good’ or ‘excellent’), including a 91% satisfaction rating for speed and responsiveness to member enquiries.
4.7 A strong focus on ICT capacity development. AMs have enabled a step change in the use of ICTs by Councillors – helping to increase the percentage regularly using ICTs from 35% to 97%. Electronic Ward Bulletins have improved access to information and current events within Sunderland’s wards, with 75% of Councillors regularly using them, and 75% of those Councillors reporting ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ service levels. Electronic Ward Bulletins are a fundamental part of building trust and capacity of Councillors – giving them information on their wards before they hear it elsewhere, and from an accurate source. Emphasis on this area is in direct response to a perceived and reported lack of awareness about key happenings ‘on the doorstep’. More integrated use of ICT allows this information to be disseminated quickly and accurately to Councillors.
SECTION 5 – LOCALISING DECISIONMAKING TO DIVISIONS, WARDS AND NEIGHBOURHOODS and OVERSIGHT, FACILITATION & ACCOUNTABILITY
5.1 The Sunderland Way of Working has enshrined a commitment to the meaningful decentralisation of local public services to areas and neighbourhoods. The agenda is being rolled out in practice under the banner of Responsive Local Services, which has transformed the governance and delivery of environmental (street scene) services in the city, and is currently being rolled out in other service areas. Fundamental to this is the de‐siloing of traditional services into ‘people’ and ‘place’ units, the governance of which will take place through Responsive Local Service Boards (analogous to the current Area Committee structure) populated by Councillors, officers and citizens.
5.2 SCC has recently completed a fundamental review (completed in March 2012, see Appendix 3) of its Executive and Committee arrangements to support these processes, and has engaged independent peer reviewers to facilitate the exercise. Following all‐party support, Annual Council is being asked to consider the following radical changes to local decision‐making and governance.
a. Consolidation of the role of Area Committees as local hubs of community leadership and service redesign
b. Introduction of Area Boards for ‘place’ and ‘people’ as the focus of de‐siloing Council services and decentralised governance. Area boards are effectively the ‘working hubs’ of decentralised service arrangements. They give local Councillors a direct, practical influence on a wide range of services, and bring together Councillors, officers and residents to take collaborative decisions on neighbourhood issues.
c. Active encouragement of area boards to recommend bottom‐up changes to current service standards and approaches – which we intend to lead to tangible improvements in policy and practice. This places huge emphasis on the role of Councillors as catalysts and change agents in the Council’s relationship with citizens and communities
d. Establishment of a clearer relationship between Cabinet, Area Committees and Area Boards to aid the introduction and bedding in of aforementioned area arrangements.
e. Faster and more effective decision‐making (and a freeing up of local area budgets) on local budget determination as part of radically improving responsiveness to citizens and Councillors at the front line.
5.3 Creating Local Area Boards for neighbourhood/ward level public service delivery is central to the next phase of the Community Leadership Programme and the Sunderland Way of Working. The intention is for Area Boards to become the focal point for information and insight into micro‐local issues, a hub of
relationships and decision‐making at the local level, and a vehicle for member‐ officer interaction and a new generation of locally responsive public services.
5.4 Local Area Boards shift the Councillor role from scrutiny and performance review, to direct involvement in setting the pace and changing standards and service model at the local level. Integration of existing annual ‘State of the City’ with new ‘State of the Area’ public debates will be a key part of ensuring that citizens’ voices are reflected through this process in multiple ways.
SECTION 6 STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP, GOVERNANCE & RESPONSIBILTIES
6.1 The City Council’s ‘Sunderland Way of Working’ represents a uniquely local way of working, utilising the resources the city has at its disposal, and creating a means through austerity and an evolution of public service arrangements with Councillors in a leading role. We have – to date – deliberately underplayed our considerable progress in this area, wanting to under‐claim and over‐deliver on a programme that is vital to the future wellbeing of Sunderland’s communities.
6.2 Nevertheless, the changes in budget allocation, staffing and organisational structure that have arisen as a result of the spending review and internal change mechanisms are profound. The Council has achieved £88m worth of efficiency savings over two years – the front loaded element of a four year mandate to save £125m. During that period, non‐school local authority posts have been reduced from 8,100 to 6,800 without a single voluntary or enforced reduncancy.
6.3 We have taken calls to achieve ‘more for less’ very seriously, and see Councillors and community leadership as fundamental to achieving this. We believe that we have helped to achieve not only service parity, but a step change in quality through this period, using the crisis as an opportunity to develop a more collaborative form of strategic leadership with better member‐Councillor relationships at the core.
Community Leadership in a Regional Context
6.4 Sunderland City Council is in position to play a leading role developing community leadership and the role of Councillors in the wider North East region. Our public and political profile in the region is high, partly on the back of notable economic success stories (new investment in the Nissan manufacturing plant, for example) and some landmark developments in public infrastructure (securing Department of Transport funding for a new £82.5m Wear bridge connecting the City with the A19 corridor). We are keen to use this raised platform to openly discuss and develop the future of community leadership, as a recent programme review by the RSA’s 2020 Public Services Hub (see appendix 4) makes clear.
6.5 Cllr Paul Watson is current chair of the Association of North East Councils (ANEC), and the executive is active in a range of policy debates around local
governance, economic growth and community development through organisations such as the Centre for Cities and the RSA. The legacy of focusing on community leadership and building trust between Councillors and officers is a working culture that we believe is now collaborative by default. SCC’s joint‐ leadership team works on the basis of articulating shared problems and developing collaborative means of solving them from the outset. Early information, a joint mandate and a commitment to bringing people together in a ‘shared space’ are vital to the success of the CLP and the Sunderland Way of Working. This shift in mindset has driven tangible change and a much more rapid ideas‐to‐practice journey, creating a collaborative, problem‐solving atmosphere from a baseline of siloed decision‐making and vested interest.
SECTION 7 CONCLUSION & INVITATION
7.1 Sunderland City Council has put the role of Councillors firmly at the centre of its strategy for local service devolution and improvement, its collaborative agenda for local growth, and its corporate strategy for the evolution of a 21st century North East urban Council. Evaluation (both internal and external) of the Community Leadership Programme indicates significant improvement of Councillor‐member relationships, significant increase in the ability of Councillors to respond to local issues with speed and accuracy, and a shift in mindset towards collaborative working that is beginning to pervade the entire organisation. Our aim has been to ‘close the loop’ through planning, design, review and implementation ‐ to ensure collaborative working at the top of the organisation through shared Councillor‐executive leadership, and shared problem solving and service accountability at the front line. What we have learnt is that achieving this is about delivering on tangible, manageable and personalised elements of change, the cumulative effect of which has been to build trust and enable faster movement on some previously intractable issues for the Council and its residents.
7.2 We believe that this focus on the role of Councillors in the community has catalysed positive change that would have been hitherto unthinkable. We would like to invite members of the Communities and Local Government Select Committee to visit Sunderland and observe the impact of the CLP and attendant changes to local responsive services within the city’s neighbourhoods. We would be delighted to give further (written or oral) evidence on this subject as we look to develop Sunderland City Council’s role as an advocate for community leadership and an observatory of good practice within the region and beyond.
May 2012
Written evidence from LGA (CC 11)
The Local Government Association is here to support, promote and improve local government. We will fight local government’s corner and support councils through challenging times by focusing on our top two priorities:
• representing and advocating for local government and making the case for greater devolution • helping councils tackle their challenges and take advantage of new opportunities to deliver better value for money services.
1. Summary
• The role of councillors is changing. As more powers are devolved to local communities and neighbourhoods, ward councillors are more able to play active roles in their communities, so making a real impact on people’s lives. It is not just the ward role that is changing. Council leaders are increasingly focused beyond authority boundaries, looking at conurbations and sub- regions. And councillors in cabinet roles are focusing not just on what is directly delivered, but on local public services as a whole.
• The role is therefore becoming more demanding and expectations are rising. There is also a desire for councillors to be more representative of their places and for more people from all walks of life to become councillors. The LGA welcomes this opportunity to explore how the changes to the role of councillor could be an impetus to make the role more appealing, accessible and better understood, thus encouraging more people to become councillors.
• There are challenges to making this happen yet these are not insurmountable. They require a step change in how we support councillors. We need to recognise the vast range of skills and knowledge that councillors bring to councils, and support councillors to recognise and develop their talents. For some councillors, the demands on their time are the biggest hurdle and it is often felt that it is not possible to hold the position and have a full-time job. However, we need a growing recognition that councillors’ time is limited as it is a voluntary activity and not an alternative to employment. We as a sector need to make the best use of councillors’ skills and knowledge within this time constraint.
• We also see the public attitude toward politics,1 coupled with the lack of awareness of the role of local politicians, as a key barrier for new people to get involved. We need to improve the recruitment of councillors, use their time and skills better and to support them
1 The July 2011 Veracity Index compiled by Ipsos MORI showed politicians to be the least trusted profession. http://www.ipsos- mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/2818/Doctors-are-most-trusted-profession- politicians-least-trusted.aspx
better – these are mutually supportive elements to reinvigorating local politics.
2. Background
We are at a pivotal moment for local councils. Strong leaders are needed to navigate the challenges of severe financial constraints and seize the opportunities of central government reforms of public services. There is a real opportunity for us to realise our ambition for councils to be truly at the heart of local communities – delivering and commissioning better public services. In this time of austerity, we will also need to be even more ambitious when it comes to reshaping services in the future.
Local government is only ever as vibrant, effective and relevant as the people elected to run it. We need councillors who are capable, energetic and engaged, with both a passion for change and a commitment to the local people they are seeking to represent. Ensuring that councils better represent their electorate is not simply a case of encouraging more diversity in terms of age, gender or ethnicity, although that does play a part in making councils more relevant. We need different kinds of people willing to stand for election to give our electorate real choice.
Councillors are crucial to the LGA’s shared vision for local government. We need to ensure our members are bold and ambitious leaders, equipped to tackle the challenges facing their communities: reinvigorating local governance, ensuring strong democratic accountability, supporting local government to make a difference, to deliver and to be trusted.
Effective political leadership is at the heart of effective democracy. We are committed to supporting and developing the councillors on whose shoulders this rests. From the Leadership Academy, our longest standing support programme from which over 2,000 councillors from almost every council in the country have graduated, to Next Generation, the only national support programme for councillors developed within party traditions, we have a range of opportunities to support members in their changing role and throughout their career. We also foster strong alumni networks.
3. The role of the councillor is changing
Pressure on public finances, a rising demand for services and increasing expectations from service users is driving a sea change in the way the state and its citizens interact. Seen through the lens of public services, this brings together a demand for greater efficiency of delivery, with higher expectations of service quality and outcomes.
This entails a fundamental rethink in the way public services are delivered and how local communities and neighbourhoods are involved in that delivery. Meeting these challenges needs a strong link between the state and other service providers – civil society groups, the private sector, social enterprises etc – and the users of these services.
Councillors have the democratic legitimacy to undertake this role and
ensure that public services, regulatory activity and asset management are properly held to account. This is particularly important given national and local trends to localise decision-making and service delivery. We need recognition that there is something unique about holding any democratically elected role that sets the office holder apart from other public servants.
Linking services and their users is undertaken both through formal structures (for those members with executive responsibility) and community- based activity. The latter will be particularly important in coming years and it is here we see the future role of councillors being played out. This has implications for the strategic leadership role of councillors. Council leaders will be focused not just on their authorities but beyond their boundaries such as to cities and regions, sharing best practice, information and strategic vision. Cabinet members will also be looking not just at what is directly delivered, but at local public services as a whole.
All councillors need leadership skills for their ward, divisions and neighbourhoods. They might become, in effect, cabinet members for their ward.
3.1 The role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods
Success as leaders will depend on leading and convening the many groups that make up local communities – whether voluntary and community organisations, Small and Medium Enterprises, faith groups, groups of service users or others, and making sure that the needs of seldom heard groups are included in the decisions about their local public services and neighbourhoods. Councillors have the democratic mandate to convene conversations across their wards and divisions. Councillors act as brokers to bring together those with common interests to make progress on shared aims and act as the link between local groups and the council.
Councillors must have the deep knowledge of their communities that allows them to represent local people’s needs effectively: they know who the people with most need are and will understand them as people rather than customers or problems. At the same time, councillors must balance the needs of individuals and groups across often diverse communities to ensure that services are delivered in the best way to achieve better local outcomes.
As public services become more joined up through, for example, Health and Wellbeing Boards and Community Budgets approaches, effective representation of local people will become even more important. A councillor’s local knowledge and understanding is going to be critical to the development of responsive, effective and accountable services.
Councillors will increasingly need to influence other organisations and service providers to ensure their residents receive services that meet their needs and help them realise their local aspirations. This calls for a different kind of leadership and the LGA’s Next Generation, Leadership Academy and Leeds Castle Leadership programmes help councillors develop the appropriate skills.
Good councillors know that residents do not just present public services with problems to be solved, but have the abilities to help find and deliver solutions. Councillors have a track record in developing solutions with local people – not just for them. This has been seen through initiatives such as Hampshire County Council’s person-centred social care services and the current Troubled Families work. The LGA is supporting initiatives such as the national challenge and learning network for the whole place projects to help embed these practices more widely.
Councillors will be increasingly called on to play a development role in their communities and neighbourhoods as more local people become involved with service delivery through new provisions such at the Community Right to Challenge and Assets of Community Value. Good councillors have been working with communities for years to include them in service design and delivery and asset management, as is demonstrated in the LGA’s ‘Doing something Big’2 and ‘Empowering Communities’3 publications, and the LGA is working with councillors through programmes such as ‘Keep it REAL: Councils at the heart of their communities’ to help spread good practice and raise the capacity of councillors across the country.
3.2 Localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods
We are aiming to rebalance power from the centre to localities through mechanisms such as the Localism Act 2011; Local Government Resource Review; National Planning Policy Framework; Health and Wellbeing Boards and others. The LGA believes this necessarily involves a revitalised local democracy that devolves decision-making to the most local level: nearly twice as many people feel they have the potential to make a difference at a local level than do at a national level.4
Greater devolution of decision-making will provide more opportunities for councillors to exercise their strategic leadership and facilitation skills to ensure that local decisions such as Neighbourhood Plans are made with an understanding of the wider needs of the locality as a whole. For example, councils at times face local opposition to economic development that would benefit the area as a whole. Councillors have an important role to play in facilitating conversations between residents, officers, developers and other interested parties to help secure outcomes that will meet local needs and drive local economic growth. Even greater devolution of power to the councillor can demonstrate to people and their communities that they have the potential to make a difference in their localities.
Councillors are already well versed in including their residents in local decision-making through a variety of methods, for example:
2Available at http://www.local.gov.uk/web/guest/publications/- /journal_content/56/10161/64956/PUBLICATION-TEMPLATE 3Available at http://www.local.gov.uk/web/guest/publications/- /journal_content/56/10161/3515617/PUBLICATION-TEMPLATE 4 Hansard’s Audit of Political Engagement 9 http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/press_releases/archive/2012/04/25/audit-of- political-engagement-9-part-one.aspx
• The London Borough of Lewisham has 18 ward-based assemblies, with over 13,000 people attending meetings between 2008 and 2011. Councillors play a key role in representing community views back to the council and taking on case work arising from issues identified. • Westminster City Council’s councillors each have a budget of £50,000 to spend in their ward as part of the Neighbourhood Funds scheme. This allows councillors to help their residents address local issues and priorities. • South Somerset District Council has run their Community Forums as ‘Opportunity Events’, using participatory budgeting to increase the number of people who can influence local decision-making. • Newcastle City Council’s ‘Let’s Talk About Newcastle’ events aim to involve local people in a more engaging, accessible and ongoing conversation about council policy decisions. The events have reached four times as many people as would normally respond to a council consultation exercise. • Hertfordshire’s locality budget scheme launched in 2009 gives each elected member of the County Council £10,000 to spend in their division on worthwhile projects in their community that promote social, economic or environmental wellbeing. Applications for funding can be submitted by community groups and organisations. In 2011 this scheme was expanded to allow each local member to allocate £90,000 funding for local highway issues, making a total of £100,000 each - in total £7.7 million not controlled by the Cabinet.
The LGA supports councillors to find and share examples of good practice including through our online Knowledge Hub and Leadership Academy programmes, helping to improve the capacity of councillors to support local decision-making in their wards, divisions, and neighbourhoods.
New ways of working such as Neighbourhood Budgets can make leadership of place contested space for councillors as traditional power relationships shift to a more complex, influence-based model. We believe councillors should be at the heart of Neighbourhood Budgets.
The new provisions in the Localism Act 2011 for councils to apply to the Secretary of State to take on other local public functions has the potential to see more powers transferred to locally democratically-elected representatives. This will increase the accountability to local people and further strengthen councillors’ relationships with and responsibilities to their divisions, wards and neighbourhoods.
3.3 Strategic leadership, governance and responsibility
Since the Lyons report there has been an increasing recognition that the core challenge for councillors is leadership of place. Councillors have a unique knowledge of their area because they are elected to represent a specific place. Most public services, whilst geographically located, address
specific needs and are delivered in specific ways. Councillors, with their focus on both their ward/division and the wider local authority on which they serve, are able to focus how those services impact on citizens and communities. The councillor’s expertise will be their local community and local place. At the same time, some councillors will be able to utilise personal professional expertise in a way that serves their community effectively but that does not necessarily result in as great a ward focus as their colleagues. As part of a team, councils should be able to ensure all councillors’ skills and knowledge are used to serve the local community.
Councillors can also help lead and mediate conversations in communities about how a place might evolve. The key agendas facing communities, such as public safety or a healthy local economy, are not the domain of any single public service. Councillors can use their democratic mandate to bring together both public and private agencies with local people to see how best to meet those challenges. That role operates both at a very local level (‘cabinet member for your ward’), but also more strategically across the whole authority – and increasingly on many agendas across a group of authorities.
Leadership beyond place and local authority boundaries is something that councillors now have a stronger focus on as we look to local economic regeneration issues that cannot be contained to a single authority. Councils have a long and honourable tradition of driving economic growth in their localities. While the institutional landscape has changed recently with the emergence of local enterprise partnerships (LEPs), councils remain key to growth, as evidenced in our Local Growth Campaign launched last year.5
A key theme for the LGA this year is adult social care – an area that highlights how councillors can dramatically impact people’s lives and future generations both in their place and also through national policy debate. With recognition of this strategic role, people and communities will see the impact they can have on the way public services are delivered and on their local community as a whole.
Councillors who take on these strategic roles will necessarily have less time to dedicate to their ward work – again the team dynamic will impact where councillors can support each other to make sure that the strategic and local needs are met by the team as a whole.
The LGA works with the Centre for Public Scrutiny, which leads on the issues of scrutiny and overview. For a fuller examination of issues, please see: http://www.cfps.org.uk/
4. The recruitment and diversity of councillors
The benefits of representative democracy are not solely achieved through demographic diversity. Local government benefits from councillors’ life experiences that reflect the experiences of the local community. At a time when councils are being asked to work in new and innovative ways,
5 More information is available at http://www.local.gov.uk/web/10161/topic-economy/- /journal_content/56/10161/2899620/ARTICLE-TEMPLATE
councillors can offer a fresh insight into the challenges facing councils. That resource of experience and knowledge should not be overlooked. There is no one-size-fits-all councillor and each will bring their own expertise to best serve their community. Whether it is from voluntary work or through skills from their working life – which are increasingly from a professional, managerial and private sector background – the value that this extra expertise and experience can give should not be underestimated.
4.1 Recruitment
93 per cent of councillors in England represent one of the three main political parties – this means that we must have an understanding of those political processes to understand issues around recruitment. The different parties have their own methods for encouraging people to stand, selecting candidates, as well as supporting their members and colleagues. These processes will reflect the parties’ values and principles and will often also have local elements to reflect local needs and challenges.
There are also a substantial number of independent councillors or councillors who stand for a smaller political party. Standing as an independent has its own strengths but carries additional challenges - both in terms of campaigning as well as after being elected where these councillors cannot draw on the support of a party process, but look to the various independent networks in existence to support them in developing their role.
4.2 Barriers
Information about what discourages people from standing is anecdotal – fundamentally it is difficult to consult people about a decision that they did not make. However, we can draw out three areas for discussion:
4.2.1 The practical barriers
Councillors spend, on average, 23 hours per week on council/political business, with eight per cent spending more than 40 hours a week. Yet for the majority of councillors this is a voluntary role, with no salary but with basic expenses covered, and some allowances for time spent in council meetings. This means it is not an alternative to full time work and those with family or voluntary commitments for example have to balance competing demands on their time.
Travel and the timing of council meetings are also often cited as barriers. The LGA feels that councils should resolve this individually as it is for each council to decide the best way to work with councillors regarding council meetings. However, we can see a greater role for councillors outside the council offices and within their communities.
4.2.2 Public opinion towards politics
We are currently facing a crisis of public confidence in politics and politicians, but effective political leadership is at the heart of effective democracy. The LGA has a range of political leadership support offers for councillors to support them to be confident politicians and to be able to be
champions for the sector as well as for political leadership. We are committed to supporting and developing the councillors on whose shoulders this rests. Councillors are crucial to our shared vision for local government. We need to ensure our members are bold and ambitious leaders: reinvigorating local governance, ensuring strong democratic accountability, supporting local government to make a difference, deliver and be trusted.
4.2.3 Public knowledge of local government
Awareness of local government generally varies by place, but local government is often thought to have an important effect on people’s lives; public awareness of local councils is above that of many other political institutions. On the other hand, there is disparate awareness of various types of councils and the services they run. Similarly, councillors are considered to have an important role in local public services, but few people say they know much about what they do and fewer still have actually met a councillor.
Public knowledge of local government and the role of local politicians is patchy at best. It is understandable then that many people have never considered being a councillor simply because they do not know much (if anything) about the role.
4.3 ‘Be a Councillor’ campaign6
The LGA believes that increasing the pool of talent from which councillors are elected is a key challenge for local government. Only by encouraging the brightest stars to stand for election can we ensure that councils are able to do the best for their communities. We need plenty of high-quality prospective councillors ready and willing to work hard and make a difference to their local communities.
The LGA is encouraging everyone to play their part in ‘talent spotting’ – actively looking out for committed, enthusiastic people who could make great councillors. We have been working with councillors, those involved in the formal selection process, and also active party members keen to initiate change. They all have an important role to play. There has been a considerable amount of work with the political parties to find ways to encourage more people from a range of backgrounds to stand to be councillors in ways that reflect the parties’ values and traditions.
To raise public awareness the LGA has produced a free toolkit of materials for councils to use, or edit to fit their local campaigns. Ultimately, it is the electorate that decides who becomes a councillor, but we can all help to raise the quality of the candidates they choose from.
5. Skills, development and support for councillors
5.1 Skills
There is no formal qualification or skill requirement to be a councillor.
6 http://www.local.gov.uk/be-a-councillor
Councils need councillors who not only reflect and represent the communities they serve, but also have a broad range of skills and life experience. This doesn’t mean councillors need to be highly educated or have a profession. Skills gained through raising a family, caring for a sick or disabled relative, volunteering or being active in faith or community groups can be equally valuable. Where councillors have specialist expertise, they will be able to utilise their skills in a way that best serves their communities. Councils require team work so that councillors can deploy their skills in the areas that need them.
5.2 Support and development
91.3 per cent of councillors responding to the councillors’ census had been in receipt of one or more training and development opportunities in the last 12 months. All councils provide training for councillors. There is however a challenge for councils to ensure that their local development offer adequately supports the evolving role of councillors.
5.2.1 The LGA offer
The LGA believes that: • councils are responsible for their own performance • developing stronger accountability drives further improvement • councils have a collective responsibility for performance.
The LGA has a range of support for councils; the “LGA Offer” to councils. More details of this support can be found in appendix one.
5.2.2 Support
The amount of support councillors receive will vary across councils and also depends on the councillor’s roles and responsibilities. Councils are best placed to decide their local needs.
There are over 20,000 councillors in England and so the desire to support them to reach the best potential for their communities must be balanced by practical and financial constraints. For example in the councillors’ census, from a list of eight resources or learning opportunities, councillors ranked highest IT support (21 per cent) and administrative support (20.5 per cent).
As the councillor role becomes ever more challenging and demanding, the need for support will likely rise. If we are to see people from all walks of life becoming councillors then this support offer will need to adapt in response.
Conclusion
Local politicians have the potential to understand, enthuse and lead their communities. They have the potential to join together the public sector in a place and link it to those who need it most, and to have an impact on people’s lives from the hyper-local to national level of delivery and policy making. The process is self-reinforcing: with greater devolution of power to councils and an understanding of the difference councillors can make using these powers, more people will want to become involved in the councillor
role.
We need to improve the recruitment of councillors, use their time and skills better and to support them better – these are mutually supportive elements to reinvigorating local politics. Only through this will we be able to sustain a local political system that represents the communities it serves and that can allow people to meet their aspirations for themselves and their places.
Appendix One
The “LGA Offer”
1. Provision of a peer challenge, free of charge, over the three year period. 2. Five days of free member peer support for all authorities undergoing a change of political control. 3. Development of the Knowledge Hub, a cross public sector resource to enable people to work together and share experiences. 4. Development of the LG Inform service to allow benchmarking and comparisons with others. 5. Provision of one subsidised place on our Leadership Academy for every council for each of the next three years and one fully funded place for district councils which have had a change of political control. 6. Work with councils to develop local accountability tools and support from Centre for Public Scrutiny. 7. Support networks for elected members and officers at national and sub-national level. 8. Encouraging the sharing of best practice through a large number of other ways, including but not limited to, regular email updates, workshops, Knowledge Hub groups and relevant meetings for Leaders and Chief Executives.
To promote councillor training and development, the LGA also has developed the Political Skills Framework which councils and individual councillors use to help identify their training needs. The LGA also promotes the Member Development Charter: these regionally based awards are made to councils that meet set criteria in terms of their approach to, and provision of, councillor development. Over 220 councils of all types are signed up to the Charter and 128 currently hold the Charter award.
May 2012
Written evidence from Hertfordshire County Council (CC 12)
Summary
Hertfordshire County Council’s vision of localism seeks to position councillors as an indispensable resource within active communities. Whilst central decision‐making will inevitably have to persist for some issues the ambition of a localist council has to be to maximise the range of areas in which local people can have a real say in local decisions. The councillor will be critical in working with the communities to identify exactly what those needs are. This requires councillors to forego the pretension of ‘leading’ their communities for a more subtle role of facilitating, mediating and advocating in communities who in turn make their own decisions and evolve their own leadership to solve problems for themselves. Such an approach presents a real challenge that applies equally to those recruiting councillors, to the way in which councillors are supported and to the councillors themselves.
The role of councillor as leaders of communities and neighbourhood
Effective councillors have always played a key role in their communities, engaging with residents, and communicating their opinions to the Council. Prior to the emergence of the ‘Big Society’ agenda, Hertfordshire County Council developed a commitment to giving local people more say and control over local services under the title Hertfordshire Local. The current drive towards localism has reinforced this. Our vision of localism is built on active, participative democracy with active involvement of individuals, rather than a localising of power within traditional structures of representative democracy.
Although returning power to the people may seem to reduce councillors’ roles, the Council believes that it in fact puts them at the heart of the community. True localism therefore enhances the role of every councillor within their community.
Our stated vision is ‘to shift power from the state (in the form of the County Council and its local partners) to individuals and families, both personally and also in geographic localities in which they live. It seeks to position councillors as an indispensable resource within active communities. It aims to ensure that residents are suitably informed to allow them to influence and shape local services and take a more active part in helping them help themselves.’
Therefore, one of the most welcome impacts of localism is to enhance the role of every front‐line councillor. For too long – and too frequently – most council decisions have been taken authority‐wide, with little scope for local variation. Inevitably, central decision‐making will have to persist for some issues, but the ambition of a localist council has to be to maximise the range and significance of decisions where local flexibility of outcome can be allowed – and encouraged – and to develop processes that give local people a real say in local decisions. The councillor will be critical in working with the communities to identify exactly what those needs are.
It will also mean that councillors will have to forego the pretension of ‘leading’ their communities for a more subtle role of facilitating, mediating and advocating in communities who make their own decisions and evolve their own leadership. There will be a new relationship between councillors and the people they serve: Councillors will be community ‘activists’, one among equals, (perhaps, even a first among equals) but helping and encouraging respective ‘little societies’ and individuals within their area.
An effective councillor will not see their role as being confined to the service responsibilities of the council. Rather, they will see it as extending it to anything and everything that impacts on the wellbeing of their communities, further aided by strong knowledge of the needs of their local area and services provided there. Councillors must become an indispensable resource at the heart of active and connected communities, using collaborative and facilitative approaches to broker solutions to local issues. They will then become part of the social activism that binds local people together; their contacts, networks and access to resources enabling them to help communities secure their aspirations for their local area.
Recruitment and diversity of councillors
If front‐line councillors are to be able to fulfil this wider and more demanding role, it will be of great importance that those who select candidates on behalf of political parties understand the expectations and accountabilities of those they hope to see elected. Whilst there is often a wide range of training available for councillors, time spent identifying the right candidates will pay dividends for the community (and the party). Recruiters and selectors need to be looking for people with the right mix of softer, interpersonal skills needed to be successful as social activists as well as having the drive to maintain a high profile in their communities and the strength to be held personally accountable.
Skills, training and support for councillors
For those who are elected, the programme of member development offered by councils will have to be broadened to develop not just knowledge of the council’s business and procedures, but the skills councillors will need locally. In order to make Hertfordshire County Council’s vision of localism a reality, member training has been re‐examined to explore this changing role. Communication and consultation skills and techniques needed to engage with their local communities are being emphasised to enable councillors to be successful as social activists.
Councils will also have to change the way officers do business by assisting councillors in their localist role and allowing residents to engage effectively and influence outcomes. This will require front‐line staff to recognise the legitimacy of differing local perspectives about their services; to identify which elements of service delivery can be varied locally; and to offer choices tailored to meet the needs of local communities and the views of the residents. It also leaves space to be clear that some decisions remain strategic and must remain with the council’s traditional decision‐making processes. Our ambition is to maximise the range and significance of decisions where local flexibility of outcome can be allowed – and encouraged. So we are developing processes that give local people a real say in local decisions.
Critical in this will be the sharing of information. Most councils publish a wealth of information but too often it is authority‐wide, hard to access and understand. Where decisions are ripe for local variation information will have to be given which is relevant to the locality and will enable councillors, and the public, to engage with it and influence it at a meaningful level. Councillors are at the heart of these new processes. Their role is to ensure relevant information is shared with residents to help them gain a realistic understanding of the options available and help them make considered and representative choices. Wherever the legal decision is made, it must fall to the local councillor generally to advocate the community’s view – even if the councillor would have taken a different view.
For some councils and officers, this will present a considerable challenge. But true localism will develop only if the required changes in both attitude and behaviour are understood by the whole organisation and driven from the top by both Leader and Chief Executive.
With the next County Council elections taking place in 2013, Hertfordshire is already gearing up to induct a new set of councillors. Whilst it is hoped that the selection process will identify strong and motivated candidates the training and support offer will be designed to support councillors in delivering this new role. The County Council is currently testing out training supporting grass‐roots community activism with an event entitled “Enhancing councillors’ role as an ‘Indispensable Community Activist’ taking place in June 2012. Furthermore, in recognition of the common expectations of councillors within all tiers of local government, this training is being offered to district councillors.
The practicalities of being a councillor
The requirements of being a councillor will only increase with these heightened expectations. The challenge for candidate selection is however ‘selling’ the role to individuals who fit the new job description. The burden of time spent on delivering the work of a front‐line councillor, particularly at a top‐tier authority where the meetings and business are mainly conducted during the day, are significant. Anecdotal evidence suggests that councillors can easily spend 2‐3 days per week on council business. If councils are to be able to attract a wider range of individuals then remuneration and the attitude of employers to councillor duties need to be fundamentally addressed.
Localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods
Inevitably, central decision‐making will have to persist for some issues, but the ambition of a localist council has to be to maximise the range and significance of decisions where local flexibility of outcome can be allowed – and encouraged – and to develop processes that give local people a real say in local decisions.
Many councils have already made budgets available to local councillors to spend as they see fit in their patches. In Hertfordshire, county councillors are each been allocated £100,000 a year to spend in their communities. £10,000 is given as part of the Members’ Locality Budget Scheme, and £90,000 is given through the Highways Locality Budget Scheme.
With the Members’ Locality Budget Scheme, councillors are able to use the £10,000 to support local projects supporting economic, social and environmental well being. Applications are invited from community groups and local organisations, and a decision is made by the local councillor as to who the money should be given to. These decisions are shown on the councillor’s web pages
The Highways Locality Budget Scheme has been extended county‐wide following pilots in two districts. £90,000 of local road maintenance budgets has been devolved to individual members for local determination. Councillors are expected to consult with district, town and parish councillors as well as residents and community groups and their decisions are posted online, to ensure more direct accountability. The scheme allows local influence without compromising the county council’s ability to make and support strategic road maintenance programmes. While, at law, these decision about where to spend this money remains with the council, the recommendation of the local councillor is invariably accepted.
Both schemes require councillors to engage more actively with local residents, although this is without prescription, leaving the methods down to individuals to decide. Councillors have developed different solutions reflecting their local areas, for example, taking into account parished / unparished areas, or using existing community networks. In all cases the schemes provide real opportunities to begin a dialogue with the community which will form a foundation for the future.
Two tier working
The final point to be addressed relates to the nature of Hertfordshire as a two‐tier area. The Council’s cabinet portfolio holder for localism has set up a localism network, involving localism champions nominated from district councils across Hertfordshire. This group has been exploring the common ground that exists within the interpretation of localism that varies from authority to authority. One particular area of common ground relates to the role of councillors. Indeed the mandate of elected councillors as community advocates and activists resonates very strongly across all authorities. There is mutual interest in getting the right candidates and whilst the requirements (in terms of time) are relatively less for a district councillor the expectation about how they behave is shared. Councillors will share problems and help residents navigate the system to ensure they find solutions whether sponsored by county, district or by helping communities to help themselves.
The County Council would be more than happy to take up an opportunity to present more information on any of the aspects identified in this submission should the committee consider it would be useful.
May 2012
Written evidence from the Liz Richardson, University of Manchester (CC 13)
Executive summary
• The submission is based on a range of innovative and robust pieces of research in the previous five years. • For every barrier and problem identified in this submission, there are also ‘little gems’ of merging good practice which are starting to tackle these issues. • Many elected members find it hard to play stronger community leadership roles. Members need more help to ‘say no’ and challenge the community. • Members underestimate the degree of honesty and openness that the public will accept; residents appreciate honesty from councillors. • Current models of community leadership also mistakenly assume that community preferences are fixed. There is potential for members to deliberate with citizens to change or adapt public opinion. • Local authorities (officers) could play a bigger role in recruiting a more diverse pool of candidates through marketing and promotional work. • Skills, training and support for councillors is reinforced by assessing the benefits to the community of investment in member development – answering the ‘so what?’ question - and celebrating success. • Localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods can be managed in ways which promote inclusion. • Accusation and perceptions of ‘pork barrel politics’ are being addressed by agreeing resource allocation criteria jointly with communities, and making the criteria for allocation more transparent. • Sharing power presents a challenge where councillors see power as a ‘zero- sum’ rather than a ‘positive-sum’ game. • Oversight, facilitation and accountability needs better ways to manage risk, and share rewards with communities. Current ways of assessing risk levels are too often biased towards the worse-case scenario, and often do not take account in a more rounded way of the true costs, benefits and risks for neighbourhoods. • Some councils are doing creative risk management. • There is a major role for Scrutiny in maintaining accountability where services and responsibilities are spread to a wide range of partner and organisations.
Main messages
These arguments are based on a range of innovative and robust pieces of research in the previous five years.
This submission is based on six pieces of research conducted between 2007 and 2012. This ranges from a highly innovative ‘self-evaluation’ project where local councillors from over 30 local government organisations conducted their own research with support from the author, to ‘gold standard’ evaluation using Randomized Controlled Trials with community groups, and local elected members. Details of publications for the research are given at the end of this submission. The main messages and policy implications are synthesised and summarised into plain English, under the relevant topics given for the Inquiry.
The role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods could be made much stronger
There are good examples of where councillors have successfully played stronger community leadership roles, particularly in brokering difficult resource decisions and tensions between sections of communities. Lessons from where this has happened are: - Difficult or controversial issues need to be challenged head-on, using tried and tested techniques, e.g. mediation; - Residents appreciate local councillors being honest about what is possible, or acceptable; - Councillors sometimes need to resist demands from minority interest groups for special treatment, regardless of the electoral consequences; - Councillors can help to mobilise the community to respond to critical situations, with support from community networks such as faith organisations, voluntary groups, women’s groups, and community elders; and - Member learning & development helps elected members play a vital and strong community leadership role.
However, many elected members find it hard to play these roles. Often, they are unwilling because they see these as vote losing activities. This is a challenge that goes beyond simply developing members’ skills in community engagement. Members underestimate the degree of honesty and openness that the public will accept. Current models of community leadership also mistakenly assume that community preferences are fixed, and the role of members is to either accommodate to opinion or go against it. It is partly true that members’ are more likely to feel their role is to make the ultimate decision and communicate this to citizens; whereas citizens are more likely to feel councillors should agree with their views. One result of this difference in views is low levels of responsiveness to organised interest groups in the community, which means the potential for positive collaborative working between councillors and the community is not maximised.
There are limited understandings of members’ potential roles in deliberating with citizens to change or adapt public opinion, although there are isolated examples of where deliberative-style approaches have been used, and worked (including South Lakeland DC and Rossendale BC).
One practical issue is the need for more effective back-up systems and information flows from officers to elected members. In some councils like Bradford MDC, neighbourhood workers provide a conduit for getting information to members. Some councils such as Newcastle CC have also given councillors access to real-time electronic systems that track the progress of queries or jobs through the council system. This means councillors can be more effective at getting things done, chasing outstanding issues, and updating residents about progress. But at the other end of the extreme, members’ ability to prioritise responding to communities is undermined by a high volume of irrelevant correspondence from officers. Some members’ feel this is driven by officers ‘back covering’.
Recruitment and diversity of councillors – and the implications for representation and local democracy
There is already a body of work which makes recommendations for increasing the diversity of representation e.g. positive discrimination; active recruitment by parties, changes to allowances and childcare, times of meetings, time off from employers etc. Alongside this, one area for development is the role of local authorities in recruiting potential candidates. There is already a high level of activity by councils to support local democracy e.g. Democracy Weeks etc. In recent years, there have also been tentative moves towards active ‘marketing’ of becoming a councillor by councils, although these have suffered from a reluctance to talk about the roles for political parties. Despite all of this, there are still strong underlying objections by officers in authorities to intervening in recruitment which hinder more extensive promotional work. The Duty to Promote Democracy made strides in this direction before it was repealed.
• Skills, training and support for councillors is reinforced by assessing its community impacts and celebrating success
There has been significant progress on member learning and development in the last decade. Indications are that authorities are trying to protect investment in member development in the current financial settlement. However, investment in member learning and development is vulnerable to being seen as a luxury extra in hard times. There needs to be demonstrable outcomes for communities from member development for it to be valued and sustained. Elected members must also be directly involved in assessing community benefit of learning and training for them to find any evidence credible. The North West Member Development Charter (and variations such as ‘Charter Plus’ in other regions) offers a self-evaluation framework which accredits local government organisations for their learning and development. Accreditation is based on proof of the community impact of investment in skills development and learning. It answers the ‘so what’ question. The standards for proof are at ‘academic’
levels, and the evidence collection is overseen and delivered by councillors. An annual North West Celebration Event, organised by the Regional employers’ Organisation, rewards those authorities which have been awarded the Charter.
Examples include cost savings made by Scrutiny in Wyre BC as the result of an intensive member development process. Another example was improved relationships and renewed faith in local ,members from a previously hostile and angry community in a housing market renewal area in Hyndburn BC.
• Localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods can be managed in ways which promote inclusion
There are polarised views on localising decision-making. The worst case scenario is that decentralisation or devolution runs the risks that: neighbourhood interests are prioritised at the expense of wider area needs; unhealthy competition between places and groups is exacerbated; community tensions worsen; and strategic interests are undermined. However, the research used in this submission suggests that how far devolution leads to greater inclusion within and between neighbourhoods depends on facilitation, deliberation, brokering, and greater transparency. There are examples of positive outcomes from greater transparency, e.g. participatory budgeting and Neighbourhood Agreements across the country, work in Chorley, and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation ‘Working in Neighbourhoods’ Network in Bradford.
There is one key issue that is currently being avoided by many elected members and local authorities. When localised decisions are made by politically-controlled structures, they have been perceived by communities as politically biased and unfair. Perceptions of fairness (however this is defined) has been shown to affect other citizen attitudes including satisfaction with councils. Accusations of what the Americans call ‘pork barrel politics’ (where politicians use their control over the allocation of resources to favour their own interests) are made by citizens more frequently than is commonly admitted or addressed by councillors. Some councils are starting to address this by agreeing resource allocation criteria jointly with communities, and making the criteria for allocation more transparent. There are emerging examples such as in Tameside MBC, where there was a significant shift in how members saw their role, resulting in sharing power with communities. But sharing power presents a challenge where councillors see power as a ‘zero-sum’ rather than a ‘positive-sum’ game.
• Oversight, facilitation and accountability needs better ways to manage risk, and share rewards with communities
Localising decisions and encouraging more community contributions can mean transferring more control to communities. This spreads accountability in new ways, and demands different methods of oversight and facilitation than can be used when activities are in authorities’ direct control. It is understandable that
local councils and their elected members are cautious about transferring power to communities and neighbourhoods where they feel this would present a high level of risk. The local authority and its members have overall responsibility, and are answerable to citizens. Responses to this are too often to avoid risk, or even more narrowly to avoid legal liabilities. Across local councils, current ways of assessing risk levels are too often biased towards the worse-case scenario, and often do not take account in a more rounded way of the true costs, benefits and risks for neighbourhoods. However, some councils are also starting to create scope for more community action by creatively managing risk, for example through ‘Community PQQs’, and other approaches which could be spread further. Where accountability for services and community outcomes is shared with other partners, such as commissioned third sector organisations, or other public sector bodies, there are also some innovations taking place where members are getting more effective at ‘being in charge when you’re not in charge’. There is a major role here for Scrutiny.
May 2012
Publications referred to in this submission
Cotterill, S. and Richardson, L. (2011) Inspiring Democracy: community anchors and councillors, University of Manchester: Manchester
Evans, E., Gains, F., Goodwin M., John, J., Rao, N. and Richardson, L. (2007) Improving The Representativeness Of Councillors: learning from five high performing local authorities in England, CLG: London
John, P., Cotterill, S., Moseley, A., Richardson, L., Smith, G., Stoker, G., and Wales, C. (2011) Nudge, nudge, think, think: experimenting with ways to change civic behaviour, Bloomsbury Academic: London
North West Employers’ Organisation (NWEO) (2008) North West Charter Level Two on Elected Member Development: A toolkit about demonstrating community impact, NWEO: Manchester
Richardson, L. (2012) Working in neighbourhoods, active citizenship and localism: lesson for policy makers and practitioners, JRF: York
Richardson, L. and John, P. (2012) ‘Who listens to the grassroots? A field experiment on informational lobbying in the UK’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations
Written evidence from the Centre for Public Scrutiny (CfPS) (CC 14)
Introduction
The Centre for Public Scrutiny (CfPS), an independent charity, is the leading national organisation for ideas, thinking and the application and development of policy and practice to promote transparent, inclusive and accountable public services. We support individuals, organisations and communities to put our principles into practice in the design, delivery and monitoring of public services in ways that build knowledge, skills and trust so that effective solutions are identified together by decision-makers, practitioners and service users.
The Centre for Public Scrutiny is part-funded through a grant from the LGA to support and develop the overview and scrutiny functions of local authorities in England; we also work with local authorities in Wales in partnership with the Welsh Local Government Association.
We are submitting evidence to the Committee on the following points:
• Oversight, facilitation and accountability o Councillors’ general scrutiny role; o The role of politics; o The developing role of scrutiny relating to partnerships; o The developing role of scrutiny relating to sector self-regulation; o Links with councillors’ wider community leadership role • Strategic governance, leadership and responsibilities o The role of the backbench councillor in strategic governance and leadership; o Relationships between scrutiny and the executive.
Oversight, facilitation and accountability
Councillors’ general scrutiny role
Councillors’ role in oversight and accountability has developed strongly since the introduction of the executive/scrutiny split through the Local Government Act 2000. Prior to this time, debate and dialogue on council policies was carried out in service committees, where decision was generally reached, following debate and discussion, through public votes. Decisions are now made by Cabinet (collectively) and by individual cabinet members. Scrutiny’s role traditionally focuses backbench councillors on holding those cabinet members to account, although a substantial number of local authorities, and local councillors, view their scrutiny role as playing a part in policy development. In this role, the responsibilities of scrutiny functions in local authorities broadly reflect the “core tasks” agreed for Parliamentary Select Committees in 2002.
Most councillors in county, unitary and district councils are scrutiny councillors, but their scrutiny role is often neglected or forgotten. One of a regular series of surveys that we have carried out1 demonstrates that while 63% of councillors felt that scrutiny adds “a lot” or “a great deal” to the work of the authority, 45% of councillors still felt that their authority gave “a little” or “very little” value to the role that scrutiny carries out. This is reflected in anecdotal evidence that we have gathered through conversations with senior officers and cabinet members, who while often keen
1 “2010 Annual Survey of Overview and Scrutiny in Local Government” (CfPS, 2011) to talk in general terms about the value and benefits of scrutiny, are unwilling to act in a way that supports those views.
This is worrying, because it suggests in some authorities a culture of governance that does not recognise the vital role that scrutiny can play in two key areas – engaging with partners, and involvement with sector self regulation, both of which we discuss in the sections below. Both of these are areas where scrutiny’s powers and opportunities derive directly from the fact that the function is member led, relying on the unique perspective and independent-minded nature of backbench councillors:
Scrutiny councillors can carry out these roles in a variety of ways – by sitting in committee, or by carrying out work in “task and finish” groups. The inherent flexibility of scrutiny allows a huge amount of leeway to members to carry out work in the manner that they see fit. Again, however, we are concerned that in some councils, attempts have been made to compartmentalise scrutiny, and to treat it as a function of limited nature and value, with a role only (for example) in reviewing forthcoming cabinet-level decisions, or in reviewing the implementation of recent cabinet decisions. Independent scrutiny investigation of wide-ranging issues is seen by some as “pointless” – work that will never lead anywhere or accomplish anything of value. In some instances this is true, but the blame for such failure rests equally with those on the executive whose closed attitude to scrutiny is such that its recommendations, however forcefully expressed, could never result in real change. This is a wider corporate governance issue, not necessarily a failing of the scrutiny function itself.
The role of politics
Scrutiny is often said to be an apolitical function. There has been detailed research carried out on the role of politics in the scrutiny process2. There is, we feel, a distinction between the use of scrutiny as a forum for party political discussions – which we, along with other commentators, believe is inappropriate – and the use by scrutiny councillors of their political skills in scrutiny, recognising that those skills give them a unique perspective that enhances their role. Empowering members to work effectively on scrutiny should be about recognising and building on their existing skills and experience, rather than making the assumption that “apolitical” behaviour means the same as “behaving like an officer”. Scrutiny is, and should be, member-led. In being member-led, it brings something different and unique to the improvement process within the authority, and the area at large.
The developing role of scrutiny relating to partnerships
It is important to recognise the distinction between the “scrutiny of partners” or the “scrutiny of partnerships”, and the involvement of partners in the scrutiny of issues affecting local people. The latter presents the most effective way to carry out scrutiny, and provides the most significant opportunity for backbench councillors to engage productively in this work.
Decision-making in local government is becoming increasingly fragmented and diffuse. A range of different groups and organisations are responsible for delivering public services in local areas. Councils are only one of these. Increasingly, decisions are made at partnership level with little
2 Ewbank M, “The operation of political parties since the separation of power in English local government” (Doctoral thesis, University of Birmingham, 2010); see also Leach S, “Party politics and scrutiny in local government: clearing the hurdles” (CfPS, 2009)
oversight, or transparency3. Scrutiny has a role in recognising cross-cutting issues, delivered by a range of partners, to which it can add value by shedding light on decisions and the policy development process, and making recommendations accordingly. In doing this, councillors may want to work together with others involved in local accountability. This reflects the existence of what we have termed a “web of accountability” at local level, a concept that we consider will be increasingly important as decision-making becomes more partnership-based, moves which will need to be reflected in local accountability4. It presents a significant challenge, but a substantial opportunity, to local councillors, who could see their reach and influence increase as a result.
The developing role of scrutiny relating to sector self-regulation
The Audit Commission is being abolished, and central inspection systems such as the Comprehensive Area Assessment have been dismantled. Central Government has made it clear that managing performance, and bringing about improvement, will be a matter for individual councils, and for the sector at large. The LGA’s “Taking the Lead” policy recognises the role that scrutiny can play in this picture of sector self-regulation. In many councils, scrutiny has taken an active role in oversight of performance issues, challenging the implementation of policy and seeking to develop a culture of continuous improvement.
We discussed the role of scrutiny in driving improvement in a publication produced in 20105. This, and other research6, has suggested that through scrutiny, backbench members can have a significant impact by identifying potential causes for concern in the local area which relate to poor performance, and suggesting means of tackling them. This puts members at the centre of an improvement process which some perceive as being an “officer issue”, or something that it technocratic where non-cabinet members cannot feasibly have much of an impact.
Links with councillors’ wider community leadership role
As a variety of powers (such as the community right to bid, the community right to challenge, and powers on neighbourhood planning) are devolved to local level, there are opportunities for councillors’ scrutiny role to be more closely linked with their community leadership role7, to ensure that the council and its partners are fully attuned to the needs and aspirations of local people. Issues causing particular concern to certain areas can already be raised at overview and scrutiny committee using the (admittedly little-used) Councillor Call for Action procedures8.
We believe that councillors can have a role in “mediating”, as democratic representatives, the interests and aspirations of local people, acting as advocates for their communities within the council9. This has always been a role for councillors but in many councils, the systems do not necessarily exist to translate opinions expressed in local areas into concerted action at authority level. This relates directly to the increased trend for councils to think more seriously about the “community intelligence” that they have at their disposal, with the aim of developing greater “customer insight”10 and, by so doing, deliver services more efficiently, economically and effectively.
3 “Between a rock and a hard place” (CfPS, 2010), “Policy Briefing 9: The Big Society”, “Policy Briefing 10: shared services and commissioning” (both CfPS, 2012) 4 “Accountability Works” (CfPS, 2010) 5 “Green Light” (CfPS, 2010) 6 “A cunning plan” (CfPS, 2011), “On the money” (CfPS, 2nd edition 2011) 7 “Policy Briefing 14: update on new legislation” (CfPS, 2011) 8 “Action stations: the first six months of CCfA” (CfPS, 2009) 9 “Cabinet member for your ward” (Leadership Centre for Local Government, 2009) 10 “Between a rock and a hard place” (CfPS, 2010)
Equally, councillors themselves can capitalise on their unique community knowledge by bringing it to bear in the scrutiny work they carry out. This has the potential to provide a unique perspective to their investigations, making it more likely that they will be able to develop novel solutions that might not have been apparent to others (particularly officers).
Strategic governance, leadership and responsibilities
The role of the backbench councillor in strategic governance and leadership
We have touched above on the input that backbench councillors can make on strategic governance and leadership. Often the leadership role is considered to be limited to Cabinet members, but backbench members, through carrying out high quality scrutiny work that makes an impact on council and partner policies, can succeed in influencing that strategic direction.
In terms of strategic governance, scrutiny’s role is less apparent. Councils have tended in the past to look to audit, governance through management processes and central inspection as the key drivers in strategic governance11. While scrutiny has not necessarily been a bolt-on afterthought, it is often not treated as an integral element in governance as opposed to (for example) audit. For this reason, scrutiny can often find itself duplicating work being carried out elsewhere, or finding it difficult to engage with corporate processes whose timescales might be unreasonable or opaque12. This can make it difficult for scrutiny councillors to feel that they have a stake in strategic governance, particular when their involvement through other means are often limited to debates at Full Council.
We consider that embedding scrutiny more meaningfully in strategic governance and improvement arrangements would enhance the role that scrutiny councillors play in this area. What this means in practice is likely to vary from authority to authority.
Relationships between scrutiny and the executive
Some authorities benefit from a positive working relationship between scrutiny and the executive. This does not always relate to political control and the size of majorities13. More often it reflects positive attitudes derived from good work. When scrutiny is able to demonstrate its value by carrying out proportionate, timely and relevant work, which is useful in improving services, executives will be more inclined to develop a positive approach to working with it.
Conversely, in authorities where such relationships do not exist, it can be difficult to improve things. An approach of evolution – carrying out small pieces of work to build goodwill and change attitudes – rather than revolution can be better in persuading the executive and partners that scrutiny has a role to play. This is necessary because scrutiny’s powers are, in fact, quite limited in scope – while executive members and officers can be compelled to attend committee meetings, there is no compulsion on the executive to implement scrutiny recommendations, which means that scrutiny’s success is bound up with the respect in which it is held in the area at large. In the same way as commentators talk about parity of esteem between select committees and Government at Westminster, we consider that similar principles should apply in local government.
11 “Accountability Works” (CfPS, 2010) 12 “A cunning plan” (CfPS, 2011) 13 “2010 Annual Survey of Overview and Scrutiny in Local Government” (CfPS, 2011)
Conclusion
The ability for councillors to use scrutiny as a means to influence the authority’s strategic direction is as much down to organisational and political culture as it is an issue relating to the the structures and processes supporting the scrutiny function itself. While we have repeatedly said that more legislative powers for scrutiny would be valuable, these can only ever offer a foundation for local areas to build on – as witnessed by the very different way that backbench councillors choose to work on scrutiny.
May 2012
Written evidence from Staffordshire County Council (CC 15)
Executive Summary
Staffordshire County Council welcomes the opportunity to contribute to this inquiry into the role of councillors in their communities. The County Council’s agenda is driven by a commitment to responding to local needs and a customer insight led approach to leadership and service delivery that positions councillors as a key conduit for understanding, articulating and responding to those needs at a local level. We welcome recent legislation such as the Localism Act which reinforces the role of councillors whilst recognising the need to be both bold and decisive to the benefit of the communities we as local authorities serve. This submission highlights some of the decisive actions we have taken.
For councillors to retain their role and influence in local communities they have to be there on the ground showing leadership, building networks of influence and taking decisive and at times difficult decisions that deliver sustainable change beyond the lifetime of any one administration.
KEY POINTS
• Staffordshire’s Strategic Plan, key strategies and performance reporting framework places councillors at the heart of driving improvements for local communities. • Bold political leadership has led to significant external investment in the County, service redesign, improved services and costs savings without the need for austere cuts. • Councillors have direct influence of local prioritisation and have a range of support systems in place to facilitate local influence. • Funding given directly to County Councillors has directly levered in an additional £116,000 of match funding over the past year.
Introduction
The role of councillors as both strategic leaders and community champions is woven into the core principles of how Staffordshire County Council operates. Cabinet Members are at the heart of driving forward transformational change both within the Council but also more widely in respect of bringing together the local health economy, boosting jobs and prosperity regionally and transforming the way services are delivered to schools. Each of the Council’s key priorities has an Executive Member lead, as set out in the Strategic Plan, as does each of the Council’s significant transformation projects.
All Members are champions for their communities whether that be in their role on Cabinet or Overview and Scrutiny, through the distribution of the Local Community Funds or through engagement and working in partnership with local communities.
One of the Council’s key priorities is that Staffordshire’s people are involved in the shaping the delivery of public services. From the commissioning of services, how the
council interacts with local communities and how funding streams for local communities are prioritised, councillors in Staffordshire have a widely understood leadership role at each and every stage.
In June 2012 we will have agreed a policy framework around localism titled Unlocking Local Capacity. This is a means of co-ordinating all of our activities around the principles of:
• Community empowerment • Opening up public services • Social action
The framework sets out our ambitions for growing personal and social responsibility in our communities. Councillors have a fundamental role in us achieving these ambitions. Examples of this councillor leadership in their communities are highlighted in this submission.
The Council’s Operating Model sets out how services will be delivered in response to local needs. The model has been used to redefine how, through Councillor leadership; the Council will deliver improved services whilst ensuring value for money for the taxpayers of Staffordshire.
Councillors have a clear role as leaders within the Operating Model which is summarised below:
Strategy Customers
Cabinet set strategic priorities, strategies Councillors voice the needs of local and key commissioning intentions. communities directly with service areas, through Cabinet, Council and Scrutiny Cabinet instigate service transformation and through partnership forums and lead instigation and monitoring. Councillors ensure community voice is Scrutiny informs strategy and policy effectively reflected in Community Impact development and review existing policy Assessments prior to key decisions. and strategy. Championing the use of customer insight and effective customer services
Challenging the comprehensiveness of needs assessments that are used to inform commissioning decisions.
Localised scrutiny of community based issues
Councillor Call for Action and local petitions.
Outcomes People/ Place Delivery
Cabinet monitor and challenge delivery Cabinet review impact of key decisions and commissioning intentions Cabinet assess the performance of the organisation through performance Scrutiny challenge of delivery against the reporting arrangements strategic plan.
The scrutiny of business cases to ensure Councillors gaining feedback from their effective response to needs assessments local patch on the impact of Council decisions. Councillors communicating the work of the County Council to local communities. Cabinet fine tuning strategic direction based on feedback from customers/ citizens.
There are strong mechanisms of performance management, Member and officer dialogue and challenge and transparent governance to deliver against this cycle.
Leader of Communities and Neighbourhoods
There are a number of examples of where County Councillors in Staffordshire show clear leadership in their communities. These include the Local Priority Scheme, Local Community Fund, feeding into District Commissioning Plans, local petitions and actively voicing the concerns of local communities.
The Council has introduced the role of the District Commissioning Lead (DCLs) during the past 12 months. Their role is to provide local leadership of the commissioning of services in response to local need. The DCLs work directly with County Councillors, senior officers and partners to draw together locally responsive solutions and service delivery to improve outcomes for local communities.
The District Commissioning Leads are playing a significant role and bringing together local insight, Member’s knowledge of local priorities and analysis of local need into district based commissioning plans which will drive the commissioning of services at a local level. The DCLs are working closely with partners and County Councillors to ensure the County Council’s commissioning intentions provide a razor sharp local responsiveness to address the differing needs of the communities of Staffordshire.
Members are also directly supported by Community Partnership Officers. Working on a double district basis they provide direct support to County Councillors in identifying and escalating trends in community concerns and considering the policy implications of such trends.
The Local Priority Scheme is a structured system of quarterly meetings which brings together all County Councillors for a district/ borough and is led by the Community Partnership Officers. The meetings provide a means for officers and partners to consult with County Councillors about proposals that will affect those communities and to share local information, service plans and good practice.
Examples of successful use of these meetings has been where the local Police Inspector has met with County Councillors to consider and address operational successes and difficulties in a patch and an opportunity for the Inspector to take up ongoing concerns and to provide feedback. The events have also been used by the Children’s Commissioner to seek the views of County Councillors and to share their
local knowledge of facilities and services (voluntary and statutory) in their local area. This local knowledge can then be utilised by the officer to enable more appropriate and effective services to be delivered which reflect the needs of the community.
Highways Liaison meeting provide another means for County Councillors to directly influence service delivery at a local level. County Councillors are consulted on an annual programme of highways repair and maintenance priorities. County Councillors are able to directly influence which projects take priority following feedback from local communities in consultation with district and parish colleagues.
In addition County Councillors are also involved in prioritising the work of Neighbourhood Highways Teams. The teams deal with the high volume of small, non-safety related highway maintenance problems that are important to the appearance and environment of local communities. The work programme is designed in advance through discussions with local community representatives, often local parish councils. Devolving decision making in this way enables parish councils to work together with Staffordshire Highways to improve the effectiveness of this element of the Highway service.
The Local Community Fund gives each county councillor a budget of £10,000 to spend in their local division. The fund allows councillors to financially support local projects which meet the core values and priority outcomes of the County Council. The Fund has resulted in £615,000 of direct investment in community groups and activities by County Councillors during the past 12 months. The Fund is an example of resources being given directly to County Councillors to enable them to have a direct impact on local communities with the minimum of paperwork and bureaucracy. There are a number of examples of where a small contribution from the Fund has led to match funding from other sources. In total the funding provided by County Councillors through the scheme has generated a further £116,000 in match funding allocation. Examples of the successful use of the fund include support to an intergenerational social gardening project focused upon environmental improvements, healthy lifestyles and social cohesion. Another example is where all county councillors in an area came together to fund Speed Indication Devices to improve road safety.
The leadership role of councillors in their patch is currently being extended with the creation of Local Member Focus Events on a double district basis in Staffordshire. These events bring together all County Councillors (Executive and non Executive) with the remit of County Councillors influencing County Council delivery at a local level. The events are Member led and enable Councillors to bring round the table whoever they feel they need to resolve local issues. The intention of double district structures is to enable the sharing of good practice and innovation across the County. These have been aligned with Local Priority Meetings to provide a seamless means of local influence without generating large number of additional meetings for councillors.
A practical example of County Council leadership has been around the support to communities around HS2. HS2 will have a potentially significant impact on communities in Staffordshire. The County Council is clear that any potential business benefits of the Scheme for the County remain unproven and don’t outweigh the environmental and community impact on Staffordshire. The Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport has committed an initial £10,000 to aid County Councillors and local community groups to pro actively evidence and voice the impact the project will have on their communities.
Councillors regularly hand in petitions to Full Council as a means of ensuring local voice is heard and responded to. The Council’s Petitions Scheme has led to matters being referred to Overview and Scrutiny with one such petition leading to a household waste recycling site being retained for community use following a review by Cabinet.
Recruitment and Diversity of Councillors
The County Council promotes the opportunities and support available for councillors via a programme of candidate open days. Open days are held prior to elections to enable prospective candidates to gain an understanding of the County Council, what the role of a County Councillor entails and the range of support that is available to them. Existing Councillors, senior officers and Member and Democratic Services officers are on hand to provide a realistic glimpse of what is involved and to provide reassurance as to what support exists.
A buddy system is in place to support new Councillors. The system provides new Members with a buddy from the Member and Democratic Services Unit who the Councillor can call upon for advice and support for as long as is needed in terms of finding their way round the Council, its officer structure and systems and processes.
The County Council recognises that with an average age of a County Councillor currently being 63 that its membership doesn’t wholly reflect local demographics. The County Council would welcome support in promoting the work and value of local councillors.
Skills, Training and Support
Members recognise the importance of being up to date on the latest local and national developments and recognise the importance of Member development given the changing nature of the role of a local councillor. To this end the Council has a dedicated Member Development Officer, a Members Services Development Panel, a structured annual training programme and general one stop support to Members. The Administration has also implemented a programme of Member peer review and self assessment that is used to inform training and development needs within the majority group.
The Council has a dedicated Member Development Officer. Her role is to develop the agreed Member Development Strategy for the Authority and work directly with senior Members to plan and deliver training needs. The role has recently been transferred into Organisational Development to ensure political awareness and the implications of working in a political organisation are fed through all organisational development and training delivery.
The Member Development Officer supports the Member Services Development Panel which is made up of a group of Members from across the political make up of the Council. The Panel is Chaired by the Cabinet Member for Environment and Assets who is able to feed matters directly into Cabinet discussions and approve development proposals. It is an informal consultative forum at which Members are able to raise issues affecting their role as County Councillors and for officers to seek feedback and sign up to proposals.
The Council has a Member Development Strategy which sets out Member Development intentions on an annual basis. This is informed directly through peer 1:1’s with Members, priorities from the Leader, Cabinet and Scrutiny Members and input from officers in terms of national changes and local priorities. Any training is intentionally interactive and focussed around practical skills such as facilitation, understanding of local communities and raising Members awareness of key policy developments such as Public Health responsibilities transferring back to local authorities.
The Member and Democratic Services Team provide a one stop shop service for all Councillors ranging from a single point of access of councillor queries through to wider ICT and administrative support.
Practicalities of Being a Councillor
The time commitment for being a councillor is a significant and growing issue. Staffordshire is taking positive and pro active steps to minimise the unnecessary calls on councillors’ time. Steps include increasing use of social media and blogs, pro active management of meetings and a regular Member e-bulletin summarising key issues affecting Members.
The development of Local Member Focus Events provides a visible public means of councillors considering the impact of County Council decisions and services on local communities. As the council moves forward on local commissioning to meet local need then the forums provide an opportunity for true local dialogue that can directly influence commissioning decisions and service planning. These have been linked to Local Priority meetings which provide an informal means of addressing localised issues and concerns streamlining existing commitments and ensuring issues can be addressed and followed up.
Social media is being increasingly used by councillors as a means of keeping in touch with local communities and gaining insight into local concerns and issues. The Leader of the Council has a prominent blog for staff and the public and the majority of Cabinet Members also have a strong presence providing in time feedback on issues that affect local communities.
County Councillors receive a weekly bulletin which summarises key events, the outcome of key meetings and forthcoming events of interest. The Bulletin also brings together highways works in an area and other information into one place. The Bulletin is being used increasingly by officers in order to reduce the number of individual e–mails being sent by the Council to County Councillors to reduce the number of e-mails in their in box.
There is a central point for councillor queries which provides for matters to be chased if responses are not forthcoming. The Cabinet Member for Culture, Communities and Customers is also championing the development of electronic bulletin board system to enable Members to post good practice and common issues across County Councillors.
Remuneration is provided to all Councillors through a basic allowance with additional Special Responsibility Allowances provided for positions of authority. These allowances have been frozen for the past 3 years based on a clear political mandate of not taking allowance increases at a time when local communities are feeling the squeeze.
Oversight, Facilitation and Accountability
The County Council has a strongly embedded approach to Member oversight, facilitation and accountability. This includes named Executive responsibility for major transformational projects, clear Cabinet oversight of performance on a monthly and quarterly basis and effective accountability through overview and scrutiny and locality arrangements. Cabinet Members are accountable for the delivery of our priority outcomes as set out in the County Council’s Strategic Plan.
The key transformation projects each have a key Cabinet Member with leadership responsibility for those projects. This provides clear political direction and leadership. The Cabinet lead will Chair project board meetings, facilitate communication with other Councillors partners and the public and are accountable to Cabinet for progress against the project. Overall leadership of the Transformation Programme sits with the Deputy Leader who regularly accounts for progress to the Council’s overarching scrutiny committee (Corporate Review).
Cabinet Members have regular and structured briefings on performance. These include monthly strategic management sessions with senior officers within the portfolios that they are responsible for. Member/ Officer project teams have also been set up to track progress against many of the Council’s key strategic outcomes. Joint Cabinet and SLT sessions are held on a monthly basis with a performance scorecard used to track progress against key agreed measures of impact and success including reputation and customer insight issues.
On a quarterly basis a report is produced for Cabinet which integrates performance and financial reporting and is based around the key themes within the Strategic Plan which are Family, Community and Prosperity. The report is produced in a way that summarises key highlights both in terms of good performance but also the actions being taken to address areas of concern. These discussions have extended beyond simply how we are doing as an organisation but have resulted into more fundamental questions about whether the Council is doing the right things in the best and most cost effective way. This has in turn led to some of the bold decisions highlighted in the next section such as the Staffordshire Business Fund, Partnership NHS Trust and proposals around Educational Support Services.
Overview and Scrutiny Members have a strong focus on performance. A system of Cabinet Member Accountability Sessions has been working successfully for a number of years. Cabinet Members are held to account twice yearly for performance within their portfolios. The reports are framed around priorities chosen by Members based on either past performance or current areas of significance. The reports are then produced setting out the strengths and weaknesses of current performance in that area. These have led to further investigations by scrutiny or recommendations back to the Cabinet Member about overall progress. Challenge of this kind isn’t however restricted to twice yearly focussed sessions but rather supplement regular dialogue and challenge to Cabinet Members through the scrutiny process.
Facilitation is seen as one of the key roles of Councillors within Staffordshire. The liaison that was undertaken by the Leader and other Cabinet Members in respect of the Jaguar Land Rover deal between neighbouring Council’s, the Local Enterprise Partnership and other partners enabled the strongest case to be made in terms of a business case to attract the firm to Staffordshire. That liaison and partnership
continues following the deal with joint activity to ensure highways access, secondary manufacturing and employment opportunities benefit local people and communities.
The creation of Engaging Communities Staffordshire (ECS) is a prime example of the facilitation role of the County Council and in particular the Cabinet Member for Adults Wellbeing. ECS is a social enterprise that has the core ambition of making it as easy as possible for local people to raise issues and concerns around health and social care matters within Staffordshire, regardless of the body delivering those services. Beyond that it provides one organisation that is able to pull together a range of data and trends to provide an early warning system around possible failures in care and services that could raise a red flag to issues such as occurred at Stafford Hospital which resulted in such tragic consequences.
The Cabinet Member for Adults Wellbeing has been at the heart of ECS from creating the concept through to getting the organisation to the point where it has recently appointed its own Chairman and recruiting its own small staff team and is now potentially bidding for contracts including Health Watch.
Strategic Leadership, Governance and Responsibilities.
What Staffordshire can evidence in abundance is bold and decisive leadership by its Elected Members to ensure positive impact upon local communities. The following are a few examples which are attracting regional and national interest in terms of innovation and attracting inward investment into the County.
• The Staffordshire’s Business Support Fund is a hugely successful loans scheme set up by the County Council to help small businesses through the turbulent economic downturn The Scheme has seen an extra £1.5 million investment to support businesses in Staffordshire to stay afloat and to expand to create and protect jobs within the County. This Scheme was established by Cabinet in response to calls from small businesses that finance from banks was becoming increasingly difficult and was restricting growth and innovation. Over 60 loans have been made to small businesses across Staffordshire. To date the Scheme has generated 68 new jobs and has safeguarded 128 jobs and protected a wide diversity of local businesses within the County. • The choice of Jaguar Land Rover to choose Staffordshire as its base for a new engine plant was a significant triumph for the local economy and will directly and indirectly generate thousands of high end technology jobs. Working with South Staffordshire District Council, Wolverhampton City Council and the Local Enterprise Partnership the swift and decisive actions of the County Council’s Cabinet provided the reassurances around infrastructure, technical support and above all a commitment to breaking down any bureaucratic barriers that led to the choice of Staffordshire over and above other sites across the world. The whole of Cabinet devoted considerable time liaising with partners, Government Ministers and local MPs to ensure a watertight business case for Staffordshire. Since then a range of other well known companies have located new facilities in Staffordshire including Amazon, Nestle and APC Logistics. • County Councillors are now working with JLR towards the creation of a centre of excellence in engineering and advanced manufacturing training; maximising opportunities for skills and development through the I54 JLR inward investment.
• Cabinet recognised the need for investment for Superfast Broadband as a priority in order to secure business investment within the County and to support local communities especially in rural areas. Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent have taken the lead in ensuring broadband providers improve access across the County with a £7.4 million investment. • The creation of a Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub will support victims of domestic violence through the collection and utilisation of joint intelligence. The Hub brings together Staffordshire Police, Children’s Social Care and Adult Protection Officers to identify the early warning signs of domestic violence and ensure effective intervention and prevention. • Staffordshire Cares is receiving national attention. Recognising the needs of social care users and career to access information about services and support available to them the County Councils Cabinet Member for Adult Wellbeing and Cabinet have led on the development of an online market place to assist people in accessing services they need due to vulnerability or care needs. • The creation of the Stoke on Trent and Staffordshire Partnership NHS Trust sees the creation of the largest partnership Trust of its kind nationally bringing together over 1,000 social care and NHS staff to deliver joined up care to the most vulnerable people within the community leading to improved patient outcomes and significant cost savings. Again Cabinet have led the drive for this integration recognising the benefits of a seamless customer journey. • The Education Support Services project (ESS) is an ambitious transformation project. It will provide a unique opportunity for the Council to work in partnership with the private sector to create a new joint venture company. It will deliver enhanced services to schools and academies in Staffordshire and beyond whilst also bringing in major new investment into the education sector. The service will deliver a single point, end to end, support service for schools
Whilst this is going on the Council is on target to meet and exceed its savings targets for the year. It is also committed to a third year of Council Tax freeze.
Each of these projects has a prominent and passionate councillor lead that in some cases has driven the project from its inception. These examples are evidence of Councillors that have a strong private sector ethos in terms of innovation and bold decision making, recognition that standing still isn’t an option and that risks need to be taken if effectively quantified and mitigated. The increasing national recognition that the County is receiving is because of the focus the Council’s Cabinet and wider membership have on local communities and the need to find cost effective solutions to their needs.
May 2012
Written evidence from Dr Mark Ewbank (CC 16)
1. Executive Summary
1.1 This memorandum focuses on one major national survey undertaken with overview and scrutiny ‘backbench’ councillors across England in 2010. The research was undertaken as part of an investigation into how party groups and councillors operated within the Cabinet/ Leader and overview and scrutiny structure. The research undertaken and the results of both quantitative and qualitative investigation could provide useful background context to the role councillors play in their communities. This memorandum will focus upon a small selection of the quantitative output of the research.
2. Context
2.1 This research was conducted as part of a three-year ESRC doctoral research project at the Institute of Local Government Studies (INLOGOV) at the University of Birmingham. The chief focus of the research was upon the freedom of councillors to express themselves both in the public arena and private party group. Given that one of reasons behind the introduction of the cabinet system was to ensure that party groups no longer dominated the activity of councillors to such an extreme extent and ‘councils would be less able to operate behind closed doors without debate and review’ (1998, p.30),’ the research focused on whether the separation of powers had changed the approach of groups and thus councillors.
3. Background
3.1 The quantitative survey research was administered and returned in 2010. Only backbench councillors of the 332 eligible English local authorities who were members of at least one O&S committee, and a member of the Labour, Liberal Democrat or Conservative party were invited to take part in the survey research. The survey sample of 20% of the O&S councillor-population was constructed via probability sampling and composed of 1684 councillors, of which 52% returned survey scripts through the post or online, making it the largest backbench-only councillor survey since the introduction of the Local Government Act 2000. Where relevant, the research measures statistical significance to 95% (p < 0.05) and the sampling error is, at its largest, +/- 3.1%.
4. Councillors under control or discipline
4.1 Councillor Whipping One of the questions in the survey research (Q3.3) asked respondents if they had ever received directive pressure from their group leader or whip about things under consideration by an overview and scrutiny committee meeting. Given that the practice of whipping overview and scrutiny was expressly discouraged in the original guidance on the Local Government Act 2000, approximately 24% or almost 1 in 4 respondents reported this type of advisory whipping, through means of informal pressure, for respondents to act in a certain way in overview and scrutiny committees.
4.2 Q3.4 of the survey research asked respondents whether they had been subject to a strict and explicit party whip in overview and scrutiny. This results of this question showed that this type of whipping in committee meetings was experienced by 12% of respondents.
4.3 Group Meetings and Whipping When combining whipping and responses to questions about whether party group meetings were devoted or partly allocated to backbench operation on overview and scrutiny, the majority (62%) of respondents had either experienced specific party group meetings relating to O&S, devotion to O&S in regular party group meetings, advisory whipping or explicit whipping from the group in relation to function. Given the legislation’s intention to reduce the role of the group in the operation of councillors on authorities, the level of control over the actions of councillors was still very high, in comparison to previous research conducted with councillors within the committee system by Young and Davies (1990).
4.4 Councillor Time and Group Meetings One of the questions in the survey (Q4.1) asked whether there were more or fewer party group meetings since the introduction of the Local Government Act 2000. Respondents reported that group meetings have seemingly either remained at the same frequency or increased in frequency in 81% of cases, with relatively few respondents (20%) reporting a decrease in frequency.
4.5 Councillor-reported Group Control of Action Q4.4 was a conditional question to those councillors who had experience on local authorities before the introduction of the constitutional changes and asked respondents to self-report (on a scale) how much ‘control’ or preclusory organisation that respondents had experienced from their party group both under the former committee system and under the new arrangements.
4.4a - Before the Local Government Act 2000: ‘The Committee System’ 4.4b - Subsequent to the Local Government Act 2000: ‘Overview and Scrutiny’ [The scale ran from 1 meaning absolutely no control and 7 meaning absolute complete control]
The mean level of agreement for each question was extremely close between 4.4a and 4.4b, showing the mean agreement for the party control of the committee system to be only 0.21 higher than the mean level of agreement about the party control over overview and scrutiny (4.52 to 4.31). However the differences between the means demonstrated that the difference between the means was statistically significant (p = 0.001) and unlikely to have happened by chance. However the difference between the two reported levels of agreements was very small and both questions were negatively skewed (4.4a -0.223 & 4.4b - 0.229) meaning the responses were both more clustered towards higher levels of agreement – meaning that councillors felt more restricted and controlled by their group under both constitutional forms.
In a statistical significance test comparing the means, the political party served as an indicator only for question Q4.4a but not Q4.4b. Thus it was found that Labour respondents reported that the party group had had more control over the old committee system (5.12) than Conservative and Liberal Democrat respondents had believed had been the case (4.49 and 4.06 respectively), which was statistically significant and likely to hold in the population.
However, in relation to Q4.4b, the party did not have a statistically significant association and all parties reported party control relatively equally. The Liberal Democrat respondents provided a mean that was exactly the same in both Q4.4a and Q4.4b, indicating no change. Both Labour and Conservative respondents reported a higher mean level of agreement that the party group had more control over the committee system than under overview and scrutiny. In the Conservative case, this 0.1 agreement difference was almost negligible in contrast to the larger 0.67 difference in means reported by Labour.
4.6 Councillors Speaking in Public / Private Q3.7 and Q3.8 sought to discover whether respondents had criticised their group’s decisions in two different spheres; public (such as overview and scrutiny, full council et al.) and private (party or group meetings et al.). From figure 1.1, it is clear that the majority (approx. 75%) of respondents had not criticised the decisions made by their party in any public sphere, in contrast to figure 1.2 which shows that the majority of respondents (approx 65%) had criticised the decisions made by their party in private.
3.7 Since the introduction of the Local Government Act 2000, have you ever criticised the decisions made by your party in any public sphere; such as overview and scrutiny, full council or directly to the local, regional or national press?
3.8 Since the introduction of the Local Government Act 2000, have you ever criticised the decisions made by your party in any private sphere; such as in group or coalition meetings, the local party meetings, national party conferences et al.?
Figure 1.1: Bar chart showing responses to Q3.7, where respondents criticise the party group in public
Figure 1.2: Bar chart showing responses to Q3.8, where respondents criticise the party group in private
Unsurprisingly, from the distinction between the two, it is clear that respondents typically prefer to reserve any criticism about the party group to the confines of the private sphere of the party group rather than in public. However it is the difference between the two that could imply that there would be externalities prompting this type of dichotomy between the two, such as a fear of losing elections, fear of losing positions within the party or being disciplined by the party group et al. which was explored through other questioning in the survey (not explored here). In looking at the responses to these questions through the lens of political group, the affiliation was not statistically significant when looking at the response to Q3.7 (public criticism) (p > 0.05) and in relation to Q3.8 (private criticism) (p > 0.05).
Table 1.1: Public Criticism (Q3.7) according to party group
Figure 1.3: Cluster bar chart showing responses to Q3.7 (Public Criticism) according to party group
Figure 1.4: Cluster bar chart showing responses to Q3.8 (Private Criticism) according to party group
When testing public criticism with whether the respondent was a chair of an overview and scrutiny committee, there was a statistically significant relationship (Figure 1.5) that indicated that chairs were more willing to criticise their party group in public (p < 0.039), although 71% had never criticised their group. When factoring in chairs from only the majority party group (not within the table below), 69% reported that they had never criticised the decisions made by their party in public.
Figure 1.5: Public Criticism (Q3.7) according to chair vs. non-chair
4.7 Recommendations This memorandum would recommend to the Committee to ensure to consider the all-encompassing impact of the party groups on local authorities when considering the role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods, the recruitment and diversity of councillors and the implications for representation and local democracy. The group is also a factor in the practicalities of being a councillor – including time commitment. The party group is equally important when considering localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods.
May 2012
References DETR (1998) Modernising Local Government: Local Democracy and Community Leadership
Young, K & Davies, E.M (1990) The Politics of Local Government Since Widdicombe Written evidence from the District Councils’ Network (CC 17)
The District Councils’ Network welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the Committee’s investigation into the role of councillor and the community. District Councillors are at the centre of their communities and are key to the delivery of localism. They have excellent local knowledge of their communities needs and dedicate their time to advocating these. They are valuable community asset and often work tirelessly to ensure the services their communities receive are of the highest standard.
1. The role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods;
Councillors play a key role as leaders of their communities and neighbourhoods.
District Councillors are elected from within their local neighbourhoods and communities; in many cases their initial mandate is to address very local issues and challenges, which they and their community want to see improved or to influence specific decisions of local interest.
District Councillors often live, work and volunteer within their ward. Their children may have attended the local school and local clubs. They may be part of the local religious congregation; they are/have been school governors, scout leaders and football coaches. They have come from these positions to represent a community of which they are a part. From this position they know their communities inside and out and are able to lead, speak for, make relevant decisions and advocate for their needs.
Councillors have the mandate to be community leaders through the democratic process. District Councils in particular are at the heart of their communities and are best placed to demonstrate their local knowledge in the course of their decision making.
2. Recruitment and diversity of councillors – and the implications for representation and local democracy;
Recruitment for District Councillors is predominantly undertaken through local political offices. Some District Councils operate programmes to promote and assist local people in becoming a councillor and the Local Government Association operates a similar programme.
Many areas operate a youth council which encourages and supports young people getting involved from an early age and pursuing the interest further through a local political party as an adult. Encouraging younger people to get involved and to see the benefits of being a councillor is key to bringing new faces into the democratic process and ensuring a diverse range of people are represented.
There is a feeling among Councillors that the recruitment of new people will continue to be challenging for reasons such as:
• people are not willing to give the time and energy to go to meetings, make choices and then be criticised for the choices they have made in good faith • Influence is limited, as many services are statutory and still retain many central performance requirements • The unfortunate and often misleading reporting of the work of local councils in the media
The diversity of Councillors has long been a challenge and there is a tradition of Councillors being retired, white, middle class men. However, this is changing as communities settle and want to make a difference and influence the decisions made about their communities and neighbourhoods.
Diversity is important, but not as important as having good, committed Councillors willing to work hard to make a difference to their neighbourhood. Even within a single ward there can be many different types of community/interests and people view their communities in very different terms to traditional definitions. Indeed, they may belong to several different communities. What is important is that District Councillors have the tools to be flexible and serve the communities within their ward.
3. Skills, training and support for councillors;
At a district level there are excellent Councillors drawing on their experience from their professional and personal lives. The District Councils’ Network finds that Councillors often need support in understanding their role in different policies, legislation and initiatives.
Support is often needed to define how they can strategically lead and influence their council, where many services still operate within tight central performance and other requirements. Giving limited room for a local dynamic. In addition, it is often not financially viable to have services based on a single neighbourhood’s individual needs. However local pressures can require an individual approach to accessing services.
In general, there is a great deal of support for Councillors provided by both their district council and the Local Government Association.
4. The practicalities of being a councillor – including time commitment, time off work, casework and remuneration;
What is evident is that the time commitment can vary considerably between a backbench District Councillor and a Chairman of a committee or a cabinet member. Many District Leaders undertake their leadership role on a full time basis, having retired or taken a career break. E.g. induction programmes.
Amongst portfolio holders and other committee members, there is a mix of employed and retired personnel. Whilst many employers are respectful and supportive of a person’s role as a Councillor, there is no requirement to be given time off work. In the current business environment, many Councillors complete their case work, correspondence, surgeries and community leadership role during the evenings and weekends, as the role requires almost daily attention.
This approach is a positive one for communities. Councillors who are dedicated to their local neighbourhood and commit their time, energy, knowledge and expertise are valuable community assets.
Most district councillors do not stand for election for the money! Although it does help and support them to carry out the role, costs may vary from taking time of work, arranging child care cover, transport and travel to meetings.
A conscientious hard working councillor can easily see their role approaching a full time commitment for little reward. For the hours put in most District Councillors receive recompense equivalent to less than the minimum wage, so their cost to taxpayers is far less in money terms than the contribution to their communities!
5. Localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods;
Councillors have been elected by their local community and hold the democratic mandate to make decisions on behalf of that ward area. By localising to neighbourhoods, there is a danger of their losing that wider democratic mandate.
District Councils and Councillors do a lot to engage with their local communities; through engagement events, local partnership arrangements, community forums, surveys and Councillor surgeries. Councillors continue to be an even bigger part of their local community after they have been elected. Through these activities District Councillors are in the position to make informed decisions on behalf of an area.
The question must also be asked as to whether there is an appetite for local wards/neighbourhoods to take on decision making responsibilities. Any devolution of decision making would need to maintain the transparency and inclusivity, already practised by Councillors in the wider context.
Referendums; advocated as a form of localised decision making by the Government, maybe one way forward to localising decision making to a ward or neighbourhood. However, with low voter turn out for elections, there is little evidence that it will be a decision in which the whole community, or even a significant part of it, has been directly involved. With the cost of the process being high, often prohibitively.
It should be noted that District Councillors, being part of their communities, hearing local views, understanding local needs and representing the electorate fully. Therefore should not need a referendum to tell them something about
which they are most likely fully aware already should not be necessary. It is a view that as a form of decision making it would only be of practical use where an issue is highly contentious or divisive and the cost can be justified.
6. Oversight, facilitation and accountability;
Accountability can take a number of forms, but ultimately for all District Councillors, it is the ballot box. This gives a Councillor their mandate and makes them accountable for their actions and decisions.
Accountability can also be found through the local media. For many District Councillors, the local paper will challenge and question the big decisions made, often (but not always) taking on the role of ‘critical friend’.
Through sound governance structures, there can be clear oversight of a council’s actions and decisions. Through the Overview and Scrutiny process, Councillors can challenge decisions and hold decision-makers to account. The way District Councils and Councillors use the scrutiny process in making decisions does ensure that the main decisions have been subjected to thorough and robust challenge and review. Indeed, scrutiny also provides a valuable policy development function.
7. Strategic leadership, governance and responsibilities.
District Councils and Councillors are the strategic leaders for their localities. They must recognise the balance between representing their communities and seeing the bigger picture for the district. Through committees, scrutiny and other panels Councillors are involved in the leadership, governance and decision making processes of their District Council on behalf of their communities. Many District Councils have identified and published role profiles (job descriptions) for councillors and the various special responsibilities that are held.
Strategic Leadership for a Councillor can be defined differently. Backbench councillors will take on the strategic responsibilities/ representation of their ward/neighbourhood. Portfolio holders will take on the strategic leadership and responsibility of a service area for the whole District. Understanding how the needs of a District’s individual communities fit together and how to balance these within the legislative framework set by central government is a critical strategic leadership role expected from senior Councillors within the Council’s Political Administration.
The Leader of a District Council takes responsibility for the whole district. They are expected to and do represent their community’s needs and views within the district, to county council colleagues, to regional bodies and to national government, as well as to businesses and third sector who operate within or influence activity within the district. It is a very challenging role, but one which is of vital significance to improving the quality of life of the many people within the communities for which they have volunteered (and been elected) to be responsible.
Indeed local councillors are the foundation of the UK’s political system, and as such a key aspect to ensuring localism works in practice.
May 2012
Written evidence from Wiltshire Council (CC 18)
Summary of Key Points
This submission focuses chiefly on the aspects of the inquiry relating to the role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods; and localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods.
In Wiltshire, we are moving from ‘traditional’ local government to new ways of designing and delivering public services. It means putting real power and money in the hands of local communities. Councillors fulfil many roles: championing their area by representing their constituents; contributing to decision making; fulfilling responsibilities as a “corporate parent” for children and young people in the care of the local authority; and representing the council externally. Councillors in Wiltshire are also supported in their role as community leaders, creating effective partnerships and working with them to build strong and cohesive communities.
Wiltshire Council’s vision is to create stronger and more resilient communities. The Council wants to encourage and support local communities to get involved and work with the Council to strengthen their ability to deal with local challenges. This involves working closely with town and parish councils, voluntary groups, local people and other public sector organisations to establish community needs and to help meet those needs in the most effective way. Strong communities can cope with changing and challenging circumstances and they will often find their own solutions to many of the problems they face. These communities generally require less intervention from public services which is good for people and it reduces the pressure on increasingly scarce public resources.
Representative democracy is, of course, unique in the legitimacy it brings to the community leadership role of councillors. It is therefore essential for councillors to have the ability to control and influence local spending as far as possible (not just council spending) and to have the freedom to act to improve local wellbeing.
Recent government publications, such as the Open Public Services 2012 paper, have talked about developing a ‘national framework for schemes of local delegation’. This submission, however, highlights the innovative work already underway in Wiltshire to support councillors and to devolve more power to communities through working at a ‘community area’ level. This includes: delegating power to area boards; enabling community planning; providing community grants; service planning at community area level; and the development of community campuses to ‘hard wire’ the localisation of service delivery between the council and other public service providers. More detail on these and other aspects is set out below.
Key Points
• Community areas It is important that geographies have validity and are based on a sense of belonging. There must be a shared commitment across the public services to work co-terminously. In Wiltshire, community areas were identified by reference to geography, history, demographics and social patterns – see Dr John Chandler’s 1998 study A Sense of Belonging. These geographies are fully understood, owned and shared by local people and across all the public, voluntary and community sectors in Wiltshire. They have endured for over 15 years and are now the basis of service delivery within the County.
• Democratic governance Locally elected councillors have a pivotal role - through the effective operation of their community leadership role they facilitate and broker negotiations at local level. This can only happen effectively if good local governance arrangements are in place. In Wiltshire, we have 18 community area boards – conterminous with our community areas – which have delegated executive powers. Area Boards have multi agency membership, they are inclusive, informal and participative – a long way from traditional local government committees. These local governance arrangements increase democratic participation and public accountability. Hundreds of residents attend these meetings on a regular basis.
• Open data We need good quality information that enables communities to identify priorities. In Wiltshire, we have disaggregated data on outcomes to community area level and augmented that with public data from the other major service providers – to provide a local community profile. This facilitates comparison across the County and highlights issues that might not be readily identified through consultative processes.
• Community-led plans It is important that the views and aspirations of local people are at the heart of service design. The community-led planning process in Wiltshire ensures that consultation, inclusion and public participation are the foundation stone upon for this. In Wiltshire, this process is developed and led by volunteers through independent community area partnerships. Area Boards are invited to back the plans and support their implementation.
• Community grants The community based approach to social infrastructure in Wiltshire is already delivering results. The Council is currently investing £3.2 million over 4 years in building stronger and more resilient communities. This is money distributed by the Area Boards to fund local projects for the community area, informed by priorities in the community plan. The evidence is that by devolving budgets and resources to the community level, additional financial leverage is achieved. In the first year of operation, the Area Boards’ discretionary budgets helped to lever in an additional £1.4 million into community projects. Funding for youth projects or highways improvements has also been decided at local level.
• Area based service plans We are now requiring public services to produce area based costed operational plans that are agreed locally following consultation and negotiation. This enables local communities to shape services around local priorities. Wiltshire’s local highway plans are examples of how this is emerging. Area boards are empowered to decide the priorities for improvement works locally and prioritise the deployment of anti-speeding initiatives. Other services are currently being redesigned through system thinking reviews with an increased place based focus.
• Community Campuses Community Campuses are places that the local community are designing to co-locate public, voluntary and community sector services in one accessible location in each community area, to meet the community’s needs. Each campus includes core elements (reception, meeting space, crèche), service elements (such as indoor and outdoor leisure facilities, libraries, youth facilities) and community elements (such as community catering facilities, community ICT provision, skate parks) according to local need. Partnership working ensures not only that the use of existing assets is maximised but also hard wires the localisation of service delivery amongst partners. This community-led approach to local service delivery will contribute towards a longer term objective of developing some form of not-for-profit community led management solution to deliver local services, reporting directly to the local area board.
• Community volunteering strategies Council services have been maintained or expanded by providing appropriate support, training and supervision to volunteers. An example of this is the library service, where following consultation through Community Area Boards, over 600 volunteers now contribute their time to ensure facilities stay open. Similarly, 350 volunteers support a digital inclusion programme, enabling easier access to many council services. Community volunteering strategies (a specific framework for the engagement and management of volunteers) to support each campus are being developed alongside the new facilities to take this to the next level.
• Community Area (Spatial) Strategy Area Boards have helped to develop Community Area Strategies, which will be adopted as part of Wiltshire’s Core Strategy, in an approach that preceded the development of a legislative basis for neighbourhood planning. Each document sets out the scale of the service infrastructure challenge in the area (for example, improvements needed to electricity substations, FE colleges, childcare provision, GP surgeries, leisure) and the housing and economic development which will be contributing to meeting the challenge. Policy 3 of the Core Strategy will also mean that Area Boards have a say on how planning gain receipts are used to meet the infrastructure requirements identified by the community. This will lead to resources being allocated more effectively against local needs.
• Community-based Social Media Because there are different issues and different stories to tell in each Wiltshire community, we are developing ways to communicate at a local level. The council is developing ‘blogsites’ for every community area in Wiltshire. These sites will enable the council and its partners, local organisations and residents to publicise what is happening in their area and to have an online conversation about issues and ideas that are relevant to their community. Unlike more traditional websites, these blogsites will be fully interactive and local people will be able to post stories and have their say on what other people are talking about. They will also provide a free channel for local organisations to publicise community events. These blogsites are part of the council's innovation with social media to find additional ways to talk with local people about what matters to them. Social media is being used across a range of council services already, providing communities with information that's relevant, up to date and instant. The blogsites will inform councillors’ own work and provide another way of staying in touch with the views of residents. Currently, over 15,000 people have signed up to their online community area network so that they can continue to influence, shape and develop the plans for their area.
• Social Inclusion It is important that local budgets are not only influenced by the most articulate, organised and vociferous voices. Empowering communities to control local services depends upon the engagement of all sections of the community, on genuine Localism - not ‘Vocalism’. Local authorities have a key role to play in ensuring that the process is truly inclusive. In Wiltshire, this has involved the development of a new innovative narrative based approach to social inclusion and building empathy - Wiltshire Voices. The Wiltshire Voices project is engaging people from a wide diversity of backgrounds, from Army families and boaters to economic migrants (and 8 other seldom heard groups). The project highlights and celebrates good practice and spotlights the challenges and difficulties that exist for many people in Wiltshire. The work builds empathy and stimulates responses, ideas, projects and action at a local level to ensure that there is real improvement for the people and groups involved.
Conclusion
Ensuring that local resources are used to meet identified local needs builds resilience and means that councillors and communities are empowered to rise to the challenge far more effectively than through a top down approach. Community area working, as set out above, has increased councillors’ influence over a wide range of services and contributed to a 15% improvement in Wiltshire Council’s customer satisfaction ratings over the last 2 years. This is testament to the philosophy that people are happier, and money is better spent, when people are given the opportunity to do more for themselves and more influence on the decision making that affects them.
Other Points
Set out below are brief responses from Wiltshire Council on some of the other areas where the Committee is seeking evidence.
• recruitment and diversity of councillors – and the implications for representation and local democracy;
This remains an important issue for political parties to address. However, councils play an important role in supporting this even without the legislative ‘duty to promote democracy’, which has now been repealed.
In Wiltshire, as part of an approach to encourage more people to become councillors, the Councillor Development Group has produced a short film promoted at Area Board meetings, asking Do you have the X factor?
Involving children in democratic processes at an early stage can also help build understanding. In Wiltshire, Youth Advisory Groups, Schools, and participatory budgeting techniques all play a role in this.
Work has to be done to improve the image of local politics and national government can play a role in helping to address this and build understanding here. The key indicator of success will be improved voter turnout in local elections in the future.
• skills, training and support for councillors;
Councillors play a vital role in the achievement of the council’s vision to create stronger and more resilient communities. Wiltshire Council therefore has committed itself to improve and sustain the standards of councillor training and development. Councillor development and training is crucial to enhancing the individual performance of councillors and collectively the performance of the overall organisation.
Consequently, Wiltshire Council has recently been awarded Charter Status for Elected Councillor Development. A wide range of induction and training opportunities for councillors are provided across the whole term. In order to achieve Charter Status the council had to demonstrate that it has met all five of the following criteria:
1. Being fully committed to developing councillors in order to achieve the Council’s strategic objectives; 2. Adopting a councillor led strategic approach to councillor development; 3. Having a councillor learning and development plan in place that clearly identifies the difference that development activities will make; 4. Demonstrating that councillor learning and development is effective in building capacity; 5. Addressing wider development matters to promote work-life balance and citizenship In terms of support to councillors, efforts are made to take into account Member IT support needs, which are often outside normal working hours, and support is provided through Community Area Managers who can help resolve local service issues.
• the practicalities of being a councillor – including time commitment, time off work, casework and remuneration;
Many of these issues have been covered extensively in the report of the Commission on Councillors, the All-Party Parliamentary Group’s report, ‘The role of councillors’ (Dungey, 2007) and research commissioned by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, such as ‘Ward councillors and community leadership’ (James and Cox, 2007). Most of the issues highlighted are still relevant – for example, some employers continue to be very reluctant to allow or enable time off to facilitate work within local politics – and for other councillors and potential councillors childcare is a real issue.
Although the diagnosis of many of the issues in the reports remains relevant, many of the recommendations in these reports now appear to adopt a prescriptive approach slightly at odds with the current government’s localism agenda. The important thing is that councils are free to innovate to address barriers to becoming councillors, that good practice is shared and that appropriate and fair support is provided when people do become councillors.
Member Allowances in Wiltshire reflect the fact that the work of a councillor includes a substantial element of voluntary activity rather than constituting a formally paid job.
Too few wards or unrealistically large constituencies can hamper the work of a councillor. Wiltshire Council has nearly 100 councillors, which helps ensure constituency workloads are more manageable and that there is a clear and practical local focus. Councillors’ work is aided when the Council’s views on boundaries and community identity are fully considered by the Boundary Commission.
• oversight, facilitation and accountability; and strategic leadership, governance and responsibilities.
The Localism Act introduces some welcome flexibility in the governance arrangements for local authorities but restricts the size of the Cabinet in the Leader and Executive model to 10 members (or another number to be determined by the Secretary of State). The removal, or raising of, this limit would be welcome and could be one way to facilitate greater councillor involvement in countywide Executive decisions.
Strong scrutiny arrangements can be another way of ensuring greater councillor involvement in countywide Executive decisions, as well as strengthening the accountability of other service providers. This could be increasingly important in future and contribute to improved coordination of activity as different accountability frameworks are developed for different service providers – such as Police and Crime Commissioners, Clinical Commissioning Groups, Academies and Work Programme providers. Although much of the old onerous and wasteful performance framework has been dismantled, there is a risk that an overemphasis by central government on payment by results methodologies in too many areas could re-introduce this by the back door. Local accountability needs to rest with elected councillors as far as possible.
May 2012 Written evidence from Localis (CC19)
Summary of submission
• Localis is an independent think‐tank dedicated to issues related to local government and localism
• Of the seven areas that the Communities and Local Government Committee has invited submissions discussing the role of councillors in the community, there are four that Localis feels it is particularly well‐placed to comment on by drawing from the findings of its recent research:
1. The role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods 2. Strategic leadership, governance and responsibilities 3. Localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods 4. Oversight, facilitation and accountability
1. The role of councillors as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods
We believe that in an age of localism, councillors have an increasingly important role to play as leaders of communities that have been given greater powers and responsibilities for self‐governance. Councillors have a long‐established (through frequently under‐appreciated) role as leaders of communities and neighbourhoods. Whether campaigning for potholes to be fixed, being a vocal supporter of local services such as libraries and youth clubs, or organising the local Diamond Jubilee celebrations, councillors are often the first point of contact for residents. They can be representatives, champions, or bearers of bad news, and sometimes even all three. However, councillors are often portrayed negatively in the media: unavailable, uninterested, unimpressive. But, if given greater responsibilities and a more central role in the lives of communities, we hope they will find themselves receiving a more accurate portrayal in the media.
A recent Localis publication on local government’s role in the Big Society1 highlighted the importance of actively empowering councillors so that they can become effective leaders of local communities who can confidently liaise with both community groups and external partners. This is all the more important given the ongoing major shift in perspective regarding the nature of local authorities’ role in local communities – with councils moving from the old sole ‘service provider’ model, often prescriptive in their service delivery to the public, to a more collaborative model of ‘enablers’ of community‐led decisions concerning flexible service commissioning.
The recent implementation of the National Planning Policy Framework is an excellent example of an area where ward councillors will have a much enhanced role to play, with strong, locally‐rooted yet impartial leadership being vital in the creation of neighbourhood and local plans, and hence in the delivery of key local development projects. In our report, Power to the People, Localis also discussed how local authorities have a crucial leadership role to play in local development, including acting as ‘honest brokers’ between developer and resident interests, and providing an overarching strategic vision for delivering growth. In this case early engagement leads to better outcomes; we would argue it is essential that all parties should seek to capitalise on opportunities to trigger community involvement as soon as is feasible.
1 Policy Platform: Enabling Communities | Published: 08 March2011 http://www.localis.org.uk/images/Localis%20Policy%20Platform_Big%20Society.pdf 2. Strategic leadership, governance and responsibilities
The number one thing councillors are elected to do is to provide strategic leadership for their council. Experienced senior officers are of course essential in making sure things happen and working out how services can innovate, change, and improve. But councillors are the ones with a democratic mandate and it must be them that are responsible for taking the big decisions.
Localis believes that councillors should be key strategic leaders of localised democracy, acting as a confident interface between local communities and local authorities, and help them to collaboratively establish a set of local priorities. One area where this will be absolutely crucial is planning, as referred to above. Another sphere in which a leadership role can prove significant is in maintaining and improving the local environment. Localis’ report The Big Green Society looked at how councils can communicate key messages to communities more effectively by adapting their communication style, looking particularly at the power of ‘nudge’ techniques. We argue that councillors are perfectly placed within the community to disseminate key messages and drive change from within. If councils can begin to change the attitudes of residents towards litter for example, then cultural shifts will likely occur across the wider community fostering civic pride and a positive, responsible approach.
3. Localising decision making to divisions, wards and neighbourhoods
In a recent article exploring devolution2, Localis noted that the potential power of the localist movement is just beginning to be realised within local councils, but they need to carefully establish how best to localise power to the greatest extent. Councillors will be vital in helping councils establish what the future face of service delivery on a ward and even neighbourhood basis will look like; the essence of localism is realising that there is not a single solution to fit all local challenges, and councillors are the key people on the ground who know local areas, their communities and unique problems well enough to suggest tailor‐made solutions.
Localis outlined a specific example of how communities can be directly involved with important decisions in our recent report, Credit Where Credit’s Due, in which we recommend that neighbourhood councils and community groups could work collaboratively with local authorities and developers to establish key neighbourhood infrastructure priorities with a certain degree of control over local budgets, a procession which councillors would play a vital intermediary role.
We believe that localising council decisions to the greatest extent possible will encourage a much greater level of community engagement with local issues which have traditionally been seen as problems for councils to resolve. This would make a councillor’s role more vital than ever. By reinvigorating democratic involvement at the most local level, parish councils and neighbourhood groups will take charge of their locality, and newly‐granted powers will help them take up direct responsibility for their neighbourhood.
In our report, Total Neighbourhood, that detailed the findings of research into several community schemes such as the pilot Neighbourhood Area Agreements piloted by Birmingham City Council, we recommended that community budget funding mechanisms must be simplified as much as possible to prevent harmful ‘silo
2Let the local authority clamour for more devolved power begin by Steven Howell | Published: 03 May 2012 in the Guardian’s Public Leaders Network http://www.localis.org.uk/article/1057/Let‐the‐local‐authority‐clamour‐for‐more‐devolved‐power‐begin.htm
mentality’ so common in centralised administration from spreading into the local community. This would not only hinder improvements to local services but also isolate neighbourhoods from one another. Councillors can help to prevent this by acting as both spokespersons for individual wards and fully integrated members of councils as a whole, thus helping communities to become ‘Total Neighbourhoods’. In these ‘Total Neighbourhoods’, we recommended that communities should take direct responsibility for place‐based budget pots, and the facilitation of this would be greatly assisted by the guidance councillors can offer communities. In turn, the feedback councillors can then relay back to the local authority will create a harmonious consultation loop in which local residents directly influence the actions of local councils.
In general, we would argue that local authorities should encourage greater community engagement with local services by strengthening the responsibilities given directly to communities. For example, in The Big Green Society we suggested that local authorities could look to empower local residents and businesses who are eager to contribute to the maintenance and improvement of their local environment, not just through making official the work that they do, but also by providing the opportunity for residents to become local representatives or ‘go‐betweens’, enabling wider community involvement and engagement.
4. Oversight, facilitation and accountability
Despite all of the many changes the local government sector faces in coming years, ultimately local government will retain responsibility for the oversight of new relationships and roles. Councillors have a vital part to play here, given their more direct connection to their communities and role as brokers. The collective energy, experience and wisdom of our councillors is a priceless resource to be made the most of in the new localist environment. Councillors provide leadership that is accountable to their electorate through local elections and their accountability to the local press. Their manifesto sets the tone for four years and if the electorate is not convinced, unlike central agencies, councils who act against a community’s wishes can be held accountable through the ballot box. Councils should relish this opportunity (and the associated risk), not flee from it.
While researching for our report, Can Localism Deliver?, Localis surveyed 694 local councillors. The results of the survey showed that most councillors who believed greater accountability could be achieved thought it would occur though engaging communities more closely in the democratic process and by devolving power. This would happen through the use of more effective communication techniques and by increasing communities’ input into decisions: for example, by increasing opportunities to vote on local issues and by granting more power to those affected by local decisions. The survey responses also suggest that a key step in enhancing local accountability is improving communities’ awareness of the councils’ work and responsibilities, as well as the work of the public sector. Increasing the visibility of local leadership makes the council subject to more thorough scrutiny by a better informed public.
Therefore, communication channels should be strengthened to facilitate a two‐way conversation between communities and councils, another recommendation from The Big Green Society. Making it easier for residents to report problems and for councils to express their intentions and activities bolsters local government’s accountability. We suggest that councillors should act as key communicators and take into account the significance of residents as messengers.
May 2012
Note The recommendations made above are based on the findings of several of Localis’ recent research reports.
The key reports used are:
Power to the People: The Future of Planning in a Localist Landscape http://www.localis.org.uk/images/LOC_Planning_A5_web.pdf
Credit Where Credit’s Due http://www.localis.org.uk/images/LOC1358_Infrastructure_report_WEB.pdf
The Big Green Society http://www.localis.org.uk/images/LOC_Big_Green_Society_Report_WEBfinal.pdf
Total Neighbourhood: Placing power back into the community http://www.localis.org.uk/images/Localis_Birmingham_report_web.pdf
Can Localism Deliver? Lessons from Manchester http://www.localis.org.uk/images/articles/Can%20Localism%20Deliver_Localis%20&%20Policy%20Exchange.pdf
Enabling Communities: Local Government’s Role in the Big Society http://www.localis.org.uk/images/Localis%20Policy%20Platform_Big%20Society.pdf
Written evidence from Friends, Families and Travellers (CC 20)
1. Friends, Families and Travellers is a national charity which works on behalf of all Gypsies and Travellers regardless of ethnicity, culture or background. Its aim is to end racism and discrimination against Gypsies and Travellers and to protect the right to a nomadic way of life.
2. It is not known how many Gypsies and Travellers there are in the UK as, until the 2011 Census, they had not been systematically included in any monitoring statistics, but best estimates suggest that they could number around 300,000 (excluding newly arrived European Roma whose numbers may far exceed this figure). On this basis we might suggest, roughly speaking, that Gypsies and Travellers represent around 0.5% of the total population i.e. one person in about 200 is a Gypsy or Traveller.
3. Most authorities now agree that Gypsies and Travellers experience some of the poorest life outcomes of any minority ethnic group within UK society today with health and education outcomes significantly worse than for any other group. Racism against Gypsies and Travellers continues to thrive unpunished within the media and elsewhere, the most recent example being the advertising campaign for the Channel 4 ‘Big Fat Gypsy Wedding’ series which portrayed negative images of Travellers with the caption ‘Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier.’ This was regarded as extremely offensive by Gypsy and Traveller individuals and communities but, despite nearly 400 objections the Advertising Standards Authority initially declined even to investigate the complaints.
4. Many agencies however now recognise the extent of the inequalities faced by Gypsies and Travellers as part and parcel of their everyday experience and there is evidence of a degree of commitment among some (but by no means all) public sector agencies to address these inequalities through various initiatives.
5. Our concern, and this is the main point of these representations to the Committee, is that Gypsies and Travellers are still very much regarded as passive recipients of decisions made about them by others, rather than as an integral part of our community. As a case in point we would cite a presentation made by the ACPO lead on Gypsies and Travellers to the Annual Conference of the Irish Traveller Movement in Britain a few years ago. His presentation was about policing Gypsies and Travellers and whilst he made some valid points the tone of his presentation was all about ‘us’ policing ‘them’. Our view is that until Gypsies and Travellers are properly represented within all parts of the public sector – the police and criminal justice services, local authorities, the NHS etc – and, crucially, at all levels within democratic processes – we will never achieve the fair, equal and cohesive society to which we all aspire.
6. At the present time Gypsies and Travellers are seriously under- represented in all walks of public life. We are not aware of any Member of Parliament who is from a Gypsy/Traveller background and, of the 40,000 or so local authority Councillors at County, District and Borough levels we are only aware of three from a Gypsy/Traveller background. When one considers that around one person in 200 is a Gypsy or Traveller this is a massive under-representation.
7. We accept that some people in public life may not wish to disclose their ethnicity as a Gypsy or Traveller, but this is itself can be considered to be an indication of the racism and prejudice that still exists against these communities.
8. We believe that this under-representation should be officially recognised and acknowledged in the same way that the under-representation of women or Black & Asian communities has been recognised and acknowledged. In respect of these latter groups there have been various targeted and funded initiatives to attract and recruit more of their members into public life, but we are aware of no such initiatives having been tried for Gypsies and Travellers. We recognise that Gypsies and Travellers come from a very low base of democratic engagement; a recent survey that we have carried out in Surrey showed that many Gypsies and Travellers have never voted and indeed have only the vaguest of notions what the electoral process is all about. Because of this low base of engagement it will be necessary to spend time, money and resources in order to recruit, mentor and train people from the travelling communities to have the confidence to enter into public life. But unless we do this and tackle the issue head on we will be forever consigning Gypsies and Travellers to the margins of society with decisions being made about them but never by them.
9. We hope that the Committee will take due note of this brief representation and we would be pleased to have the opportunity to elaborate on any of the points made or to give oral evidence to the Committee if this would be of assistance to its work.
June 2012 Written evidence from Robin Potter, Dorchester Town Councillor and West Dorset District Councillor (CC 21)
Why be a councillor?
I stand for my local councils because I think they are the vital provider of services to the community and I want to try and ensure that the right services are provided at the right cost.
I first became active in politics many years ago when I attended a live broadcast of “Any questions?” from the school where I taught. I found myself often in agreement with John Pardoe of the Liberal Party, joined soon after and have stood for elections many times since, thankfully winning several times, but losing on others.
I am now Town and District councillor for Dorchester South Ward.
To persuade people to offer themselves for election to councils requires several things: 1. They must be helped to realise how important local government is and how local things can be affected by local councils. A much clearer understanding by the general public of which layer of government does what is necessary. 2. An all‐party campaign to sing the praises (or castigate where necessary, but NOT on party lines, please), of local councils and local councillors of all party persuasions and, perhaps especially, of those of no national party. The low turnout in the overwhelming majority of local elections is a scandal which needs to be addressed by those with the ear of the media. 3. There must be reasoned public debate on issues at national and local levels. The image of the House of Commons as portrayed in the media fills me with loathing and despair, with its emphasis on point‐scoring rather than persuasion (the recent reaction by the Labour party to the ‘pasty tax’ is all too typical ‐ rather than take the credit for persuading a correct change of mind, they gloat about U‐turns) . This point‐scoring obsession is also too present in local government. 4. Some form of PR is necessary so that votes are not considered wasted. Dorchester is an excellent example of the problems that can arise when one group is well entrenched: at the last town council elections (fought over 4 wards with 5 seats in each), the Lib Dems put up 18 candidates, all of whom were elected, Conservatives and Labour only put up 5 each, with 3 Independents, perhaps evidence of a lack of hope. [Of course, I claim that this is because the LD controlling group is so excellent!] At the district elections held at the same time, the provision of new offices for West Dorset district Council in Dorchester was a big issue. All successful candidates in Dorchester opposed these new offices, but those elected from the wider district overruled them, the leader of the District claiming he ‘had a mandate’ from the voters of West Dorset. As a consequence, many Dorchester voters are even more disenchanted than before! 5. Local election campaigns and results should be as divorced as possible from national party politics. The recent travails of the Liberal Democrats, and the previous ups and downs suffered by all parties has had far too much to do with national matters. Whether Liverpool is run by Labour or Lib Dems, or West Dorset by Conservatives or Lib Dems should be much more to do with the local council than how their national party is doing. 6. A way must be found to make government more accessible to those other than the white, middle‐class retired. All our District Council meetings are held at 2.15 and public participation is difficult at best and often actively discouraged. This cannot be helpful. Town Council meetings are at 7.00, but in truth this seldom helps generate a vast audience! June 2012
Written evidence from the Community Council of Staffordshire (CC 22)
I am particularly pleased to see that the Committee is looking into the reasons why individuals stand or do not stand for election.
We here at the Community Council of Staffordshire, have been keen to explore whether communities that have a wealth of community development activity and very active community groups show an increased involvement in the democratic process , either through more people standing for election or a greater turn out at local elections .
We were particularly interested to see if people who were making a difference in their community through their involvement with voluntary groups and activities felt that 1) they were more effective in their community in this voluntary (and action based) capacity than being elected or 2) they felt they could do more with their new found skills and knowledge if they moved on and stood for election.
Approximately 4 years ago we were keen to do some simple research around this subject comparing small and large rural villages and small and large urban communities and did do some very simple background work on the various levels of engagement in the democratic process in preparation for a funding bid to allow us to spend the time exploring the situation further. It was interesting for us to discover in this background work that in the Stafford Borough Council area approximately 90% of the parish council seats were not contested but the turnout for election was about 28%. Similar figures occurred in Staffordshire Moorlands district.
We would like to believe that in those communities where community development and capacity building has taken place, there has been an increase in individual's involvement in the democratic process. However taking the above information some areas in Staffordshire Moorlands area have received significant amounts of community development support and it wouldn't on face value appear that it has had an impact on their involvement. Without some well constructed research in the area it would be difficult to make any judgements.
Unfortunately all our efforts to obtain resources for this piece of work came to nought despite the support and encouragement from a number of partners and key individuals e.g. local MP .
We shall watch your committees progress with keen interest and if they should like to discuss any aspect of the situation with us I am sure we would be happy to provide what little information and views we have. And of course if they had any resources to help us undertake our research that would of course be even more well received.
June 2012
Written evidence from Jenny Lawrence (CC 23)
I have twice been a local councillor but chose not to stand again for the following reasons‐
1. Not having any power to substantially change anything within the community. I was on a council for a community of 1800 with a precept of around £48,000. The majority of our budget was spent on salaries for the clerk and handyman and the grass cutting contract. The small amount remaining was insufficient to enable us to fund any projects.
2. We would be asked by the District Council for comments on planning applications but they took little notice of our response. Planning Officers appear to be straight from university with little experience of life and are more concerned with letting applications go through then the impact on the local community such as parking and the lack of infrastructure.
3. The time commitments are quite large even for a small council and working people find it difficult to attend meetings in the day or straight after work especially if they work shifts.
4. Quite frankly the views of local councillors are not heeded by Government and it is a waste of time attending council meetings which are dominated by mundane items such as dog fouling and parking issues.
5. When the council wishes to upgrade, for instance the local play area, and apply for grants the amount of work necessary to complete the necessary application forms is enormous and requires someone with experience of ‘working the system’ to complete the forms. Match funding is usually required and small councils just do not have the money to put forward.
June 2012
Written evidence from the Centre for Women & Democracy (CC 24)
Executive Summary
ES1 The level of women councillors currently stands at 31%, and has been more or less static for the last 10 years.
ES2 Women face a series of barriers to their entering public life; these include economic, social and political factors, many of which were outlined in the Councillors’ Commission Report published in 2007. The Centre for Women & Democracy (CFWD) contributed evidence to this, and whilst we do not agree with all its findings, we believe that they very comprehensively covered most of the issues.
ES3 The political parties are the gatekeepers to public office, and the electorate still overwhelmingly votes for candidates from one of the main three parties (94% of councillors elected in 2012 were either Conservative, Labour or Liberal Democrat). The actions of the parties in recruiting and retaining a diverse range of candidates and councillors are therefore of considerable importance.
ES4 Women are often interested in local public office, but feel under1qualified for it. Better training and support for both men and women would therefore be an advantage.
ES5 Political parties need to examine their selection procedures to ensure that they are fair, open, transparent and effective. They should also take steps to make sure that information on how to become a candidate is freely and easily available.
ES6 Women are significantly less likely than men to lead local authorities, or to work on strategic portfolios. As a result women lack role models and do not view local government as an activity which has much relevance to them as determiners, rather than consumers of services (or as payers of taxes). Political parties should therefore take steps to ensure that this is rectified.
ES7 The Labour Party has had some success in increasing the numbers of both candidates and councillors by using positive action measures. Similar schemes should be considered by other parties.
ES8 Political parties exist to win elections, and whilst all are committed to increasing diversity, none have it as their primary objective. Consideration should be given to the establishment of an independently administered fund to assist parties with their responsibilities in candidate development, and could be lined to diversity requirements.
ES9 Currently, the average age of councillors is 60 and rising. As a result it is unattractive to younger people, and it is also harder for new candidates to find seats. Consideration should be given to the introduction of an upper age limit for councillors as there is for magistrates.
ES10 The hours and commitments expected of councillors are very high, and not always geared to the needs of people who work or who have caring responsibilities. Councils should give active consideration to their working practices, and, in particular, to the level of ‘professionalisation’ that they are introducing.
ES11 Women are often particularly concerned about physical security, especially where they are working alone. Councils should make sure that proper arrangements are in place, and that women are reassured that they will not be put at risk.
Submission
1. The Centre for Women & Democracy
1.1 The Centre for Women & Democracy (CFWD) was established in 2007 to work on and campaign for women’s representation, presence and voice in public decision- making roles, as well as on aspects of democratic practice. We are a non-profit organisation based in Leeds. We have researched and published annual reports on elections and women in leadership roles, as well as studies of issues such as the impact of government legislation and the history of women in politics. We also provide training for women as well as advice to organisations.
1.2 Together with the Electoral Reform Society, the Fawcett Society, Unlock Democracy and the Hansard Society, CFWD is a founder member of the Counting Women In Campaign.
1.3 Our website can be found at www.cfwd.org.uk
2. Introduction and Background
2.1 Women’s involvement in local government at various levels pre-dates their access to Parliament by some decades; they were present as Poor Law Guardians from 1869, on School Boards from 1890, on Parish and District Councils from 1894 and on County and County Borough Councils from 1907.
2.2 Traditionally, local government was seen very much as the province of middle and upper class women, with working class women more likely to be active through trade unions or in community-based campaigns. As a result the representation of women on local councils was very variable, with the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats generally more successful than Labour in recruiting and securing the election of women.
2.3 In 2004, Labour introduced positive action measures for the selection of local government candidates, and since then that Party’s ability to secure the election of women has significantly improved. In 2012, 40% of Labour candidates were women, and 40% of Labour councillors elected. 2.4 CFWD’s interim report on the 2012 Local Elections is attached as Appendix A1.
2.5 Despite this, however, the level of women councillors has remained more or less static and currently stands at 31%. The good performance of women candidates in the 2012 local elections does not necessarily feed through into increased numbers of women councillors since in many cases women elected were not additional (e.g., where women candidates of one party defeated women candidates of another).
2.6 CFWD’s work on the 2012 elections is ongoing, and, in particular, we are about to start work on retention rates for both men and women councillors, and the reasons for any disparity that there may be.
2.7 The Committee will doubtless be aware of the 2007 Councillors’ Commission Report, which investigated many of the relevant issues and made recommendations for change and improvement. CFWD agreed with many, though not all, of these.
3. Issues and Proposals
3.1 The barriers to women’s participation have been rehearsed many times, and it is not there for proposed to dwell on them at any length here. However, there are some broad areas which bear restating.
3.2 For many women, the need to manage both family commitments and a job is already demanding, and the addition of public life simply makes it impossible. 40% of women and 47% of men councillors are also in employment of one kind or another, whilst 30% of women and 22% of men have caring responsibilities for children or adult relatives2. The hours that councillors are expected to work, combined with the intrusion into family and personal life that this inevitably produces, are not very attractive for women who already struggle to balance all the various areas of their lives. Many women also find the idea of being ‘on call’ 24 hours a day, combined with personal details such as their homes addresses being public, rather worrying. This is particularly true for women who are living alone, or living alone with children
3.3 There is a general perception that support for political parties is declining; however, in 2012 94% of councillors elected represented one of the main three political parties, and this is a marginal increase on the outcomes in recent years. The political parties are the gatekeepers to public office at all levels, and they are all are predominantly male in character, particularly at local level. There is ample evidence to demonstrate that women are less likely than men to join political parties, less likely to be active in them, and less likely to stand for public office on their behalf. In addition, whilst local and community-based work is generally seen as appropriate for women, this is less the case for political activity. For instance, only 37% of
1 Page 12 onwards of this document. 2 LGA Census of Local Councillors 2010 women identify themselves as being interested in politics (as opposed to 49% of men)3.
3.4 It has also often been noted that members of political parties tend to be more socially conservative in their views than the wider electorate in some areas, and that they may have less confidence in the ‘electability’ of women candidates. There is no evidence at all that the electorate does not wish to vote for women or in any way discriminates against them; sadly, some members of all political parties mistakenly believe that women are an electoral liability, and select candidates accordingly.
3.5 It is repeatedly asserted that there are insufficient women wishing to stand as councillors, and that as a result parties are compelled to stand men. This may be true in so far as the supply of candidates generally is concerned – all parties report problems with finding enough candidates, particularly in some types of seat – but it is not as true in relation to women as is sometimes suggested. The experience of both the Labour Party, the Green Party and the Liberal Democrats, (who this year fielded 41%, 36% and 34% women candidates respectively) suggest that where there is an awareness of the issues women candidates can be found, and, in the case of the Labour Party, that where there is an element of compulsion that task becomes cumulatively less problematic. This issue will be expanded upon further below.
3.6 It should be noted that, although women are, as we have seen, less likely to be involved in politics generally, the numbers of both candidates and councillors that are being sought, fielded or elected at any one time are minute compared to the general population.
3.7 From time to time various solutions to the problem of the lack of women councillors have been proposed. Many of these were included in the Councillors’ Commission Report, and although some are more practicable (in political as well as other terms) than others, they are all worthy of consideration.
3.8 CFWD made an extensive submission to that inquiry, and our views have not changed in any substantive way since. The paragraphs below therefore reflect the views included in our remarks to the Commission five years ago.
3.9 Although all three parties are keen at national level to see the number of women representing them increase, they have failed to convince members at a local level that women candidates are as likely to be successful as men, and, given the resistance and resentment that attempts to influence or control local selections can provoke, parties nationally are reluctant to force the issue beyond a certain point. This is despite the fact that most grassroots members of all parties would consider themselves to be fair-minded – and often are – and relatively few would say that they are actively against diversity. However, there is an incontrovertible gap between theory and practice, and even for the Labour Party, which has been most successful
3 Hansard Audit of Political Engagement 2012 in getting women selected and elected through their positive action process, far too many wards exists for which all the councillors are male.
3.10 It is also the case that some people who agree with the wider case for diversity will nevertheless still cite local or other factors as reasons it not being possible for their local party in particular to select a female candidate – a sort of political ‘nimbyism’ which is difficult to overcome. This makes it even more important that political parties as well as campaigners should be able to marshal, make and win arguments in favour of enabling a diverse range of candidates to stand in seats in which they have a reasonable chance of succeeding.
3.11 All political parties have internal procedures for identifying, screening and selecting candidates, and it is recognised that this is both reasonable and necessary. Every party is entitled to take steps to ensure that candidates standing under its banner represent its core beliefs, achieve certain core competencies and can be trusted to act collectively and with a degree of loyalty. Indeed, given the electorate’s clear preference for candidates from one or other of the main parties this is essential – apart from anything else people think that they know what they are getting with each party’s candidate, and for the parties to blur that by accepting as candidates people with little or no connection with them or loyalty to them would not be helpful in the wider context.
3.12 However, parties could do a great deal more to recruit suitable persons as members, to identify suitable members to bring forwards, to provide them with training, support, and mentoring schemes, and to ensure that candidate selection procedures are open and transparent.
3.13 Women are particularly likely to take the view that, before taking on the commitments of public office, they should get some training. This is sometimes viewed as a weakness or a sign of lack of confidence; in fact, given the complexities of modern local government and the enormous sums of public money involved, it is more of a strength, and political parties should all be doing more to try to meet this need (for men as well as for women; women are simply more likely to articulate it).
3.14 Whatever their good intentions, however, the parties nationally can have little effect on the recruitment process other than to encourage and support it. By far the best people to do this work are local members themselves, who understand their communities, know individuals in it, and have a direct and personal interest in electoral success. Any strategy for developing better recruitment and support systems, therefore, will need to ensure that local party organisations – which are all entirely made up of voluntary members, workers and activists – are better resourced and incentivised to spend time on it. They will need to be convinced of the value of doing it, and they will need to be supported in terms of training and materials. This has a cost implication for parties nationally and some proposals for how this might be dealt with further on in this submission. 3.15 There is then the issue of succession planning. Local councillors and their parties often wish to do more of this, but find that the procedures or cultures within their parties as a whole are inimical to it. Of course, this varies from party to party, with the Liberal Democrats having much looser structures and more scope for local action than either the Conservative or Labour parties, but in all three cases more could be done to encourage and incentivise long-term planning which could (and should) include provision for the bringing forward of potential women candidates from all communities.
3.16 Parties are understandably keen to make sure that their procedures ensure the selection of the best possible candidate for the seat, and that they are seen to be fair and above board. They also wish every aspirant candidate to have a fair chance, and in some quarters may argue that succession planning could militate against this. However, it needs to be recognised that many women (and other people from under-represented groups) regard the current procedures as anything but open and fair, and an increasing tendency to assume that there are wards which ‘belong’ to given groups (one of the commonest of which is that wards with significant South Asian populations can only be represented by South Asian men) means that in fact selections across the board have become subject to a variety of opaque practices which go directly against what any of the parties wishes to achieve.
3.17 Local members of all parties making selections should be given much more support to ensure both that the process is fair, and that sensible and open succession planning takes place. It will be argued that political parties are not currently resourced to do this, and proposals to rectify this are outlined further on.
3.18 Political parties should make it as easy as possible for members to find out about what being a councillor would involve, and how they could go about becoming one – all three of the main parties need to make this information much more accessible on their websites. This includes details of mentoring and shadowing schemes, training and other candidate support and succession planning measures.
3.19 One of the reasons that women ‘choose not to stand’ is that they do not regard being a councillor as something relevant to them. Women tend to respond well to role models, and local government does not provide many. CFWD publishes regular analyses of the diversity of local government leadership; at present only 14% of council leaders are women, 2 (out of 13) elected mayors, and 27% of portfolio- holders. Having women in leadership roles seems in itself to produce more women in senior jobs; 36% of women leaders have cabinets at least half of whose members are women, but only 19% of male leaders. 55% of cabinets led by women are 30% or above female, and 37% of cabinets led by men4.
4 These figures and those in 2.20 below are taken from CFWD research on leadership undertaken in 2010/11 3.20 There are also differences in the types of portfolios men and women are likely to hold; 73% of leaders, for instance, held the economic regeneration portfolio prior to becoming leader, but only 13% of councillors holding this portfolio are women. on the other hand, 25% of education and children’s services portfolios are held by women, but just 13% of leaders have held it during their careers.
3.21 As a result of this, women rarely see other women in strategic or corporate leadership positions in local government, and when they do it is likely to be with responsibility for traditional ‘women’s’ areas. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with women leading on children’s services or the environment – merely that the concentration of women in certain types of portfolio results in a lack of balance. The lack of diversity across the board of service provision is therefore likely to be discouraging to women whose fields of expertise are finance, the economy or housing.
3.22 Political parties could help to improve the overall position by establishing requirements for numbers of women in cabinets, and by ensuring that they are enforced. They could also ensure that women councillors are encouraged to go on leadership courses, and that they are visible in senior roles across the board of service delivery.
3.23 Whilst it is accepted that persuasion would be by far the best method of achieving gender parity in local government, it is also the case that at the present rate of progress it will be 2035 at the earliest before it is achieved. As has been demonstrated above, the problem does not lie with the electorate, but with the supply and selection of women candidates by the parties. The Labour Party already has a positive action policy, which has clearly delivered results – in 2003 only 23% of Labour’s candidates were women, whereas in 2012 this figure had risen to 41%. This has been achieved very largely by the cumulative effect of positive action measures introduced in 2004. The Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties have both rejected positive action for the time being at least, and their proportion of women candidates has remained more or less unchanged over the same period.
3.24 It is not suggested that the Labour Party’s model is the only one available – indeed, it should be reviewed and adjusted at regular intervals – but all three of the parties should consider the introduction of a scheme appropriate to them, supported by measures to identify and train women aspirants, even if only as a last resort if other methods of securing improvements fail.
3.25 If we are serious about improving the diversity of public representatives, and if as a society we choose (as we do) to continue to elect candidates from the main parties, then it follows that what the parties do – or do not – do in order to achieve diversity is a matter of public interest.
3.26 Political parties are funded very differently, and at different levels at different times, and must in any case regard elections themselves as the priority for their expenditure. This means that, as things stand at present, they are very unlikely to divert major funding into diversity work, and neither would it really be reasonable to expect them to do so. They are not charged by government or anyone else with the delivery of a diversity programme, nor were they set up for that purpose. They have an in-principle commitment to it, and have all made efforts to achieve it, but it is not now, nor will it be in the foreseeable future, at the top of their list of priorities for scarce resources.
3.27 However, if a fund were to be set up to which parties reaching a certain level of representation or vote could apply, there would be the incentive for them to be much more proactive. The fund could be held and administered independently and parties would need to be able to ring-fence – and to demonstrate that they had ring-fenced – the expenditure. They would also need to provide evidence of how it had been spent.
Amongst the things which could be funded through this mechanism are:
• diversity officers to work with local parties;
• the development and implementation of mentoring and shadowing schemes;
• training for prospective local government candidates;
• information and training for local members (especially on recruitment and selection issues);
• active succession planning;
• childcare for prospective candidates;
• the development and production of good advice and training materials;
• effective monitoring.
3.28 Clearly, the fund would not be large, and parties would need to be innovative about the schemes they developed, but they would also then be in a position in which they were not effectively being expected to carry the whole burden of increasing diversity without any real support to do so, and would also have fewer excuses for not being proactive.
3.29 The current legislative framework permits parties to take positive action, but does not compel them to. There are no national targets or quotas for the representation of women, and the political parties all have different processes for achieving greater diversity. As demonstrated above, these have varying levels of success.
3.30 It is our view that diversity in public life will not be achieved without an element of compulsion to back up persuasion. As outlined above, it would be greatly preferable to persuade party activists and selectorates of both the justice of the case for parity and the electoral advantages of it, but experience suggests that this needs to be backed up by an enforceable requirement at some stage.
3.31 Amongst the options to consider for how this might be achieved are:
• make continuation of any grants referred to above dependent on a demonstrable increase in the number of women councillors
• set a clear national target for the achievement of gender parity in local government elected members
• require parties to stand quotas of women in local government elections. This is easier where there are list systems, but still possible in all-out first-past-the-post elections since each party effectively has a ‘list’ of candidates across the authority. The quota would need to take into account the relative winnability of seats and the gender break-down of incumbent councillors standing again. It is also accepted that this would be more difficult to implement effectively where councils come up for election by thirds.
• ensure that elections for any new bodies or authorities which come into being have provision for positive action.
• ensure that provisions for elections following boundary reviews include positive action requirements
3.32 There are some issues which may appear social, but which can also be regarded as political; for instance, the average age of councillors is now 60 and rising, and whilst 19% of all councillors are over the age of 70, only 7.5% are under 405. This imbalance creates the impression that local government is unrepresentative of the population at large and is not relevant either to younger people or to a more diverse range of people.
3.33 There is at present no retirement age for local councillors. On one level, there is some logic to this, since it is appropriate that the whole of the population should be represented in public bodies, but on another it causes a number of problems, particularly in relation to diversity.
3.34 There is currently a mandatory retirement age for magistrates of 70. The concept of a retirement age is therefore not in itself a novel one for public life. Obviously, the introduction of any retirement age for councillors would need to be consulted upon and legislated for, but should not be discounted as a valid possibility.
3.35 Another possibility which might be looked at is that councillors should retire at the end of the term of office in which they reach 75 – this would enable there to be some flexibility of retirement age but would also enable some movement to be created.
5 LGA Census of Local Councillor 2010 3.36 In addition, it might be worth investigating a scheme introduced some years ago in Scotland in which councillors were recompensed for standing down in order to create new opportunities. We have not looked in detail at the outcomes of this scheme, but believe that it would bear further investigation.
3.37 On the other hand, the skills and experiences of long-serving councillors who still have much to contribute should not be lost if at all possible. There is currently a (mainly) ceremonial position of Alderman – this could be expanded and given the function of mentoring new and aspirant councillors. Unlike serving councillors, aldermen would have the time to give to this, and would also have an interest and investment in the future of local government as well as the past. Training and support could be provided, and it could be developed into a senior role of value rather than a full stop to activity.
3.38 There are some issues which councils themselves need to examine, and about which there needs to be some public discussion. The role of a local councillor is extremely demanding; the average councillor spends 23 hours a week on council and those in senior roles spend much more. Members have to balance ward work with constituents and communities with meetings in the town hall, and many have to juggle jobs and family responsibilities as well.
3.39 Councils across the board need to think about changing the way in which they work in order to accommodate the challenges and pace of modern life, but communities also need to be much clearer about what it is that they want their councillor to do. There are some good arguments to be made in favour of a professionalised elected tier in local government, but there is also a great deal to be said for maintaining the part-time, community-based aspect of the job.
3.40 One issue which particularly concerns women is that of security, particularly for women who are on their own. The expectation that councillors will always be available to talk to constituents means that there are risks, particularly for women whose home addresses and phone numbers are published, or who find themselves doing casework surgeries on their own. Councils should ensure that there are proper arrangements in place to take account of these risks, and that women should be reassured that they will not find themselves in dangerous situations. 4. Conclusion
4.1 This submission looks at a relatively small number of key areas, and certainly does not contain the complete answer to the problem. However, it is our view that, whilst there are some relatively small things which can be done to increase diversity, we also need to take some adventurous and innovative steps if we are to develop a truly inclusive democracy.
June 2012
Written evidence from Paul Wheeler, Director of Political Skills Forum (CC 25)
1 Overview
I welcome the opportunity to give evidence and assist the work of the Select Committee. I have been involved with the development and support of local councilors for over 20 years. I established the Member Development service at the Improvement and Development Agency in 1999 which was responsible for a number of well regarded initiative including the Leadership Academy and the Charter for Member Development endorsed by all political parties. I am currently the Director of the Political Skills Forum which exist to promote the importance of local democracy.
It probably is worth noting at the beginning that many of the issues that prevent a greater range of people to consider standing as local councillors relate to wider issues about how, we as a society, value local democracy and the ability of local communities to actively influence their own futures. These concerns are being discussed by a number of agencies and I think that the Select Committee is very timely in being able to take a wider perspective on both the barriers and incentives to undertake the elected role at a local level.
I would like to focus my evidence on how we can persuade those in the age range of 25-50 to consider taking up the role of local councillor. It is this group who are often the ‘community builders’ in many localities who are the ‘missing generation’ from many council chambers.
As I have indicated that there some deep seated issues as to how we have arrived at the current composition of the councillor population I wanted to deal with some basic principles;
2 Principle One - ‘It’s good to be elected’
There are two related issues.
Firstly a large and increasing number of people do not understand the role of local councillors. Secondly we have created a whole range of organizations where it seems more can be achieved by being nominated rather than by being elected.
I think we need to be much clearer that elections at a local level confer status and responsibility. Anyone who has visited European cities such as Barcelona and Milan will be aware of the respect accorded to the local Town Hall and its representatives. Apart from the Corporation of London we seem to have largely forgotten that tradition.
If we are to reverse this trend I think we need to have a ‘mission to inform’ the wider population of the roles and responsibilities of elected office. I have outlined a number of these in my open letter to your Chair (see attached).
I also think we need to create more ‘pathways’ to stand for elected office. It is often said we have fewer elected councillors per capita than any other Western Democracy. We also tend to have more councillors on fewer institutions – a pattern accentuated by the move to larger unitary councils.
We should regard a new range of neighbourhood councils (incorporating existing town and parish councils) as the building blocks of local democracy and clear powers of persuasion and percept. It is interesting that we have recently had the first vote to elect a town council in London in Queen Park, North Westminster.
In addition every secondary school should be encouraged to have elected school councils (with some of the excitement transferred across from the United States) and the small number of Young Mayors be considerably expanded.
3 Principle Two - ‘Local Politics is a Team Sport’
We need to stress that most sustained change and improvement at a local level is as a result of a ‘team approach’
So far in England the vast majority of these ‘teams’ tend to be from the three main political parties. However as events in both Northern Ireland and Scotland indicate these teams can change in terms of popular support and connection with local issues. As a matter of interest the Electoral Commission currently have over 300 political teams registered. In the 2010 ‘Independants for Frome’ gained control of a large town council in Somerset from established parties..
There are other aspects to the team aspect of local politics that need to be recognized. Whilst we do need to profile and promote the role of local councillors we also need to acknowledge that most local councillors are part of a wider team of active local citizens and organizations. The ability for local councillors to act as role models and advocates for this wider group will be a powerful influence in attracting a greater range of people into the councillor role.
The final aspect of the team role is how local political leaders act in concert to advocate for greater profile and responsibilities. Too often a blind loyalty to national parties can prevent strong regional and local coalitions emerging. The American City Mayors’ Alliance regularly attracts the interest of Presidents and presidential candidates. A serving Prime Minister has yet to address the Local Government Conference.
4 Principle Three - ‘The ability to make a difference’
I understand and accept that the Select Committee is reluctant to comment on the existing structure, funding and powers of local government. However it is impossible not to acknowledge that the limited extent of councillors to influence and co-ordinate the local public spend in their localities is a major barrier to the recruitment of capable and committed councillors.
An excellent council like Kent has direct responsibility for just £1 billion of the £10 billion of public monies spent in the county. The many hundreds of new district councillors have yet to be told that they are responsible for less than 5% of the public monies spent in their localities.
It may be neither possible or desirable to return the bulk of this local spend to the discretion of local councils . However I do think there are real opportunities for councils, especially first tier councils, to exercise more influence over the priorities of the organisations represented on local strategic partnerships. At present there are few opportunities for local initiative and creative thinking around the delivery of public services. The current pilots on community budgeting in Essex, Greater Manchester, Chester and Cheshire West and the tri-boroughs of Westminster, Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham may have considerable implications
5 Principle Four - Encouraging rather than prescribing change
All political organizations are voluntary organizations and as such generally adverse to policy prescription. As an alternative we should be looking at ways that we can encourage more inclusive processes of recruitment and selection.
However before we do so we do need to look at some supply side issues in regard to the missing generation of 25-50 year olds.
I understand the issues regarding remuneration and the move to a fulltime councillor role but it also an area where there is probably little consensus between the needs of local councillors and the views of the wider electorate and local media. It would also be counter- productive and possibly create new barriers to entry if we insisted on a full time role for all councillors. It is certainly true that the demands in larger councils especially at Leader/Executive level may well mean we move to a de-facto full time role. However we may also have to accept that to gain the required ‘living wage political groups may have to accept a reduction of the number of councillors at that executive level.
It is perhaps also necessary to acknowledge that some councilors do the bare minimum of work but because they represent safe wards they are immune from electoral pressure and can act as political bed-blockers’. I think we do need to think of ‘performance pressures’ i.e. some measures of performance which are understood by party members and the wider public that can be used to define effective performance by councillors at all levels. Currently the only performance measure is the obligation to attend one council meeting every three months.
However just as important is how we can encourage councillors of working age to regard service as councillors as both short term (up to two terms) and a career developer. In terms of profiling the role of councilors and the opportunity to gain transferable skills we need to win the hearts and minds of employers. Some employers such as Unilever and BAE Systems are very supportive of their staff becoming local councilors but this is not consistent. In the past the LGA supported a Good Employer Award to acknowledge the role of good employers and it may be appropriate in re-launch this award. The issue of the support provided to councilors by their councils is also critical to encouraging councilors in employment to take up senior positions. The London Borough of Westminster has a executive of which nearly all are in employment. This is achieved by providing an extensive team of personal assistants and researchers that work directly to them. Unfortunately this remains the exception rather than the rule.
If we can increase the supply of interested candidates we need to return to the question of encouraging good behaviour amongst political organizations.
All the available evidence suggests that where political organizations openly recruit and have a transparent and understandable selection process they are able to attract a more diverse group of candidates. The problem is that this process is largely confined to London Boroughs and other metropolitan areas such as Manchester and Liverpool and so far is not widely taken up nationally and across parties.
The challenge is to encourage a more wider take-up of open recruitment and here we need to think of peer challenge and support. It may be slower than policy prescriptions but it has the merit of gaining ownership within the parties, encourages innovation and allows a competitive choice for the electorate. An example of the scope for self improvement is the ‘Be a Councillor’ initiative by the LGA which has gained considerable success in the last two years.
6 Next Steps
A major factor in the preservation of the existing status quo is the fact there is no consistent advocate for change.
Most of the national parties have a passing interest in local elections and councillor selection. As the General Elections approaches it tends to become much fainter. At the same time local government and most of their agencies assume that the selection process is the distinct prerogative of political parties.
If we are to disturb this equilibrium of inactivity we need to think about creating an advocate for local democracy that can address some of the complex issues involved in promoting and profiling the local elected role. Models do exist such as Industry and Parliament Trust which is supported by a large number of commercial organizations to encourage those with business experience to stand as MPs (a similar role is undertake by Trades Unions but currently restricted to one party). Equally the Hansard Society has a mission to promote parliamentary democracy and the work of Parliament. On an international level the Westminster Foundation encourages best practice and innovation amongst political parties in emerging democracies.
A Local Democracy Foundation could replicate the beneficial features of all these organizations for the specific promotion of local democracy in England. It could be funded from existing funds designated for leadership improvement and capacity building in local government.
At the same time we should; be encouraging the main political parties to establish arms- length organizations for their councillors (and potential councillors) which can more clearly articulate local policies and recruitment strategies within their respective party structures.
I would be happy to discuss any of these suggestions with the Select Committee as appropriate.
June 2012 Supplementary written evidence from Paul Wheeler, Director of Political Skills Forum (CC 25a)
I was conscious that there were a couple of questions where some additional information was needed.
In terms of’ performance measurement’ of councillors it is very important that this does not become some kind of rigid or overly bureaucratic system. I think it is much more a way of providing more information to party members (for those who represent political parties) and the wider public for all councillors. Oldham Council has produced an annual report form for councillors (not published yet) which will be made publically available on the web-site. With this information the party members and wider audience at the selection and election stage can decide if their existing councillors have reached appropriate levels of performance and activity.
One issue that the Committee may wish to consider is whether the current requirement for councillor activity (one committee meeting per cycle) before disqualification is sufficient.
The additional issue is the role and purpose of a Local Democracy Advocacy Organisation. This can encourage more people to consider standing for election as elected representatives at all levels (schools/colleges, town/parish/neighbourhood and local councils etc). It could take over and expand the current LGA ‘Be a Councillor Programme’
Finally my observation is that in the UK we often have too many councillors on too few councils (eg Cornwall has over 120 councillors on one single unitary council). We do need to encourage more local town councils. If we do so we should accept that the existing unitary/district and county councils could comfortably see a reduction in their councillor numbers.
October 2012
Written evidence from Alfred Murphy (CC 26)
There are three major items that I believe should be put to the Select Committee.
1 In 1997 when the Labour Government was elected under the premiership of Mr.Tony Blair the Labour Party set out a programme of building homes for the whole of the UK. The responsibility was given to the Deputy Prime Minister – John Prescott now (Lord Prescott). He decided through planning advisors that over 65,000 dwellings should be built in the old Mid Beds District Council and South Bedfordshire Council. This figure was much higher than places like Essex and Norfolk, bearing in mind that Bedfordshire is one of the smallest Counties in the UK.
I as Chairman of Hulcote & Salford Parish Council opposed this figure and set set up a group of Parish and Town Councils in Bedfordshire to oppose this figure. We are called the Bedfordshire's Councils Planning Consortium. Through the help of our previous Member of Parliament for Mid-Bedfordshire, we delivered a petition to No.10 Downing Street. I also gave evidence at the Select Committee on Sustainable Communities.
My group and I have met with many Members of Parliament and also with members of the House of Lords. I have been given a great deal of help from these politicians. We highlighted that any development that took place should have infrastructure in place, roads. Schools, places of worship, transport etc.
It was also agreed by the Government of the day that 60% of development would take place on brownfield sites and 40% on green land.
Bearing in mind that the old Mid-Bedfordshire is very rural and that the employment in this area is very poor. To find work you would have to commute to London, Milton Keynes or Luton & Dunstable. At the same time we were told that employment would be found in local communities and that the car should not be used as transport to go to your place of employment.
2 Hulcote & Salford Parish Council.
Being a Parish Councillor and Chairman of the above, my aims were to ensure above all else that our residents enjoyed a way of life that a rural community could give them. We are a very small community with a population of 180 residents. A small village such as ours can present it's own problems and challenges.
In Broughton Road, Salford we had a 60mph speed limit which I and my fellow Councillors thought was dangerous in such a small village and needed to be reduced to 30mph in the centre of the village. I am pleased that we achieved our aim. We have also put in place in Broughton Road, Wavenden Road and Cranfield Road – Salford, 6 Gateways and 4 Police Speed Watch signs that are beneficial to our residents. We have notice a marked improvement in the reduction of speed. since all these additions were put in place. In Salford Rd. Hulcote two of my fellow councillors dedicated a piece of their land for a bridleway so that horse riders could enjoy their way of life.
My Vice Chairman recently through a 106 Agreement on his land, has donated £10,000 to have the speed limit reduced from 60mph to 40mph. And we also have two gateways erected in Salford Road Hulcote. I believe that this shows that our Parish Council works for our residents and we listen to their concerns. Being a Parish Councillor we are not paid for the work we do and I would personally not accept payment as I feel that being a Parish Councillor is a job that you want to do and that you do it to try and make things better just not for the village you live in but to help residents also.
I would like to thank my Member of Parliament, my Unitary Council, the Bedfordshire Police Authority, the Assistant Director of Highways for CBC and the Police Road Traffic Management Team for all their help and advice they have given me over the years, with which I could not have achieved any of the excellent facilities that we have gained but for their co-operation.
3 Localism Bill/Neighbourhood Plan
The Secretary of State will be helping many Parish Councils to have more say in the way their villages are run. It will protect green belt land, places of natural beauty and wildlife etc. Following meetings with civil servants at the DCLG my Parish Council will be pursuing the Neighbourhood Plan/Rural Exemption Sites for a few affordable homes. This will be under the leadership of my Vice Chairman.
I believe that I have highlighted the work that my Parish Council and I do for the benefit of the young, the sick and elderly residents of our community which is how it should be. My aim for the next few years as Chairman of this Parish Council would be to ensure that our lovely village with it's two wonderful and old churches remain rural and not concreted over as I feel that there are very few villages safe from development.
My Vice Chairman and I would be happy to give evidence to the Select Committee.
June 2012
Written evidence from the Elections Centre, Plymouth University (CC 27)
Obtaining information about the social characteristics of people who stand for local election is a key feature of the annual candidate surveys. In 2012 the survey was conducted online with candidates randomly selected from all those standing. A one in two sample was drawn with each candidate sent a letter to the address given on their nomination forms. The letter, timed to arrive shortly after the elections on May 3, explained the purpose of the survey and provided instructions for online completion. Those candidates that did not wish to complete their survey online were given the opportunity to undertake a postal questionnaire.
The data collected from the 2012 candidates broadly confirm the pattern of previous surveys undertaken since 2006.
Table 1 shows that candidates are mostly men, more than half are aged 61 years or more and a large majority are of white ethnic origin. The under-representation of women, younger people and Black, Asian and other minority ethnic groups is as prevalent amongst candidates as it is amongst councillors.
A majority, 59%, of people that stand hold a university degree or its equivalent qualification; many have higher degree also. They are overwhelmingly drawn from professional and managerial occupations. It is unsurprising that 28% are retired from work given the age profile. Candidates are asked whether they are currently resident in the ward that they fought in the local election. The 2012 figures show that 53% were resident but 47% lived outside the ward boundaries although some of these did report that they had once lived within the ward. These data are in line with other surveys with the exception of the London boroughs where the proportions were reversed with most candidates living outside the ward.
Table 1: Social characteristics of candidates contesting 2012 local elections
Count Column N % gender male 752 72.2% female 290 27.8% Total 1042 100.0% age 35 yrs and under 179 18.2% 36-45 yrs 101 10.3% 51-55 yrs 199 20.3% 61-65 yrs 295 30.1% 66 yrs and over 207 21.1% Total 981 100.0% ethnicity White 1004 96.3% Non-white 39 3.7% Total 1043 100.0% education No qualification 51 5.2% GCSE or A level 351 35.9% degree 577 58.9% Total 979 100.0% occupation Professional 465 49.6% Managerial/ technical 244 26.0% Other 229 24.4% Total 938 100.0% employment Full/Part-time 381 38.8% employment Self employed 152 15.5% Retired 276 28.1% Other 172 17.5% Total 981 100.0% ward resident? Yes 550 53.3% No 481 46.7% Total 1031 100.0%
It is theoretically possible for a large-scale change in the social composition of council benches if we assume that all incumbents are defeated by rival candidates. One method for examining this possibility is to divide respondents into one of four categories, viz., those standing for the first time, incumbents seeking re-election; former councillors and a final category reserved for people that have stood on more than one election but are never elected.
Table 2 describes social characteristics within these four candidate categories. Currently under-represented groups (women, younger people, BME) are more likely to feature as first time candidates but with the exception of younger candidates the differences are rather small.
Table 2: Social characteristics by elective status
First-time Incumbent Former Serial but candidate councillor, never non- elected incumbent candidate Column N Column N Column N Column N % % % % gender male 68.3% 74.2% 74.4% 75.8% female 31.7% 25.8% 25.6% 24.2% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% age 35 yrs and 26.4% 9.2% 1.2% 18.4% under 36-45 yrs 12.5% 4.9% 7.3% 11.0% 51-55 yrs 17.8% 19.7% 29.3% 20.7% 61-65 yrs 26.6% 36.6% 32.9% 30.3% 66 yrs and 16.7% 29.6% 29.3% 19.6% over Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ethnicity White 95.9% 100.0% 96.5% 95.1% Non-white 4.1% 0.0% 3.5% 4.9% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% education No 5.0% 4.2% 2.5% 5.7% qualification GCSE or A 41.4% 38.0% 35.8% 29.6% level degree 53.7% 57.7% 61.7% 64.7% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% occupation Professional 47.8% 50.4% 56.8% 49.1% Managerial/ 25.0% 28.8% 22.2% 27.4% technical Other 27.2% 20.9% 21.0% 23.5% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% employment Full/Part-time 38.2% 39.4% 36.6% 39.9% employment Self employed 16.8% 10.6% 18.3% 15.8% Retired 21.7% 40.1% 34.1% 28.2% Other 23.3% 9.9% 11.0% 16.1% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ward Yes 53.0% 60.0% 50.0% 51.7% resident? No 47.0% 40.0% 50.0% 48.3% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
What motivates people to stand as candidates?
Each year we ask candidates about the first time they stood for local election. Had they made that decision to stand or were they persuaded to stand by someone else in the first instance?
Almost four in ten of our respondents stated that the decision to stand for the first time was entirely of their own making while six in ten stood after being asked to stand.
For those people that took their own decision some 62% did so because they believed that by standing they could make a difference. This choice was a long way in front of two others – “an important step in political career” and “general volunteering reasons”, each of which was chosen by 18% of respondents. The least popular option was “knew someone else on the council”, selected by just 3% of our respondents.
Among those that were approached to stand the two clear leading chosen options were a fellow party member (61%) and a serving councillor (26%) while other sources were barely mentioned – just 3%, for example, stood after being asked by a member of a local community group.
Why were they selected?
Candidates are presented a range of options and asked to select those that applied to their own selection as a candidate in 2012. One in eight believed that they were selected because they were the incumbent councillor seeking re-election. Slightly more, 17% thought that previously being a councillor played a part in their selection. Just over a quarter, 26%, felt they were chosen because they were likely to win. The most selected options were “local resident” (46%) and “good reputation” (55%) but it may also be worth noting that 28% were chosen because they were the only volunteer and 36% because they had agreed to be a paper candidate only. These data are similar to those in previous surveys.
Why don’t others stand?
Finding answers to why some people stand but others, equally capable of doing so, do not stand. In previous research we have tried to tap into this “eligibility pool”, attempting to seek out those people that might but don’t stand. This research failed because we could not elicit sufficient responses from our targeted group to generate a meaningful sample; those that don’t stand also don’t participate in surveys!
Nevertheless, local candidates are a useful resource for tapping into those factors that might discourage some people from standing. A series of possible explanations are presented to candidates with options ranging between strongly agree to strongly disagree (Table 3).
Table 3: Possible explanations for why more people don’t stand for election
Column N % Being a councillor is too time consuming Strongly 17.6% Agree Agree 47.5% Neutral 18.6% Disagree 14.1% Strongly 2.1% Disagree Total 100.0% Councillors don't have the power to make a Strongly 6.1% difference Agree Agree 22.9% Neutral 17.3% Disagree 40.7% Strongly 12.9% Disagree Total 100.0% Councillors are insufficiently paid Strongly 7.2% Agree Agree 21.1% Neutral 29.7% Disagree 31.8% Strongly 10.1% Disagree Total 100.0% Intrusive media coverage of personal life Strongly 10.5% may discourage some people from standing Agree Agree 45.0% Neutral 20.9% Disagree 20.6% Strongly 3.1% Disagree Total 100.0% Political parties dominate local government Strongly 19.2% and this discourages people who don't want Agree a party allegiance Agree 41.5% Neutral 17.1% Disagree 18.0% Strongly 4.3% Disagree Total 100.0%
A clear majority think that the image of being a councillor discourages people from standing – almost two-thirds agree/strongly agree that the job is too time-consuming. But the power of councillors is not the issue – more than half disagree that a lack of power is a factor while more than four in ten don’t think that remuneration is the issue. There is rather more support for the idea that being a public figure and the attention that attracts may suppress people’s ambitions; 56% think that people are put off by the potential for media intrusion into their private lives.
Despite the evidence that political party members do much of the candidate recruitment already there is a clear ambivalence towards their role. When asked whether people were dissuaded from standing because local government was dominated by local parties, one in five strongly agreed with a further 42% agreeing with this statement. By contrast, fewer than one in twenty strongly disagreed. And yet, when it was suggested that one way of improving recruitment would be for parties to select candidates that were not party members only one in four agreed/strongly agreed with this suggestion but the proportion disagreeing was more than one in every two candidates; parties are seen as part of the problem but not part of the solution.
June 2012
Written evidence from L E Horne (CC 28)
I am a member of the Royal Antediluvian Order of Buffaloes who are a worldwide charitable organisation. We deal not only with our local communities by raising money for local causes, but we also deal with causes in the whole of Great Britain and in the rest of the world. I am myself the Provincial Grand Secretary of the Doncaster and District Provincial Grand Lodge and deal with all finances and charitable funds from the nine lodges in our area. I have thought about putting up for local council elections but find that there is no information how to proceed. To stand as a labour candidate you must be a member of the labour party. So when you join as a new member you cannot command the votes that older members have so you never get nominated and are kept in limbo. I feel that it would be fairer if there was some method of getting information on the subject of standing for local councils perhaps more people may then get involved in not only local politics maybe general politics. As it stands at the moment it seems to the outsiders it is a closed shop and the only way in is to agree with one of the main parties and become a member. So people with their own ideas and principles are stifled by the major parties. In this country I thought we had freedom of speech however if you join one of the main political parties this freedom is taken away as you have to comply with the parties ideas even if you do not agree this to me is undemocratic everyone should have their own opinion on matters. After attending a WEA course on politics and listening to some of the political speakers I am not surprised this country is in such a mess. Listening to an MEP who came to give us a talk on the European Parliament, I was appalled that she had not prepared for the briefing and we were told if we needed information to go on the European Parliaments website. This makes me think politicians are not listening to the ordinary people and dismiss us as dim. This applies to all the main parties. This country is in such a mess because all the major parties are trying to bring the other parties to their knees would it not be better for them to pull together and try and get this country out of turmoil. We here time and time again no matter who comes in to power they blame the last Government for all the mess left behind. I think it is time they stopped acting like spoilt children in a playground and got on with the job they were elected to do perhaps then more people will take an interest in politics.
June 2012 Written evidence from Bharti Boyle (CC 29)
As a past WEA student it has been suggested that I might like to make a comment on “YBacouncillor”.
I am an Indian female who serves as a business governor for a very successful College of Further Education. I am also an active member of my local Save The Children organisation.
I'm afraid that I think that we simply have too many layers of government. In particular I think the tertiary level (my local council) adds very little value. This is for several reasons the most important of which is that the local government employees effectively decide what will happen on most major issues with elected councillors having little influence in practice.
Another problem is that if we must have local government then local councillors should reflect local issues and opinions and not be driven by blind adherence to national party policy.
Also in my experience the general calibre of councilors is quite poor which leads to ineffectual councils, which leads to a downward spiral.
I do not think that there are any circumstances under which I would stand for election to 3rd or 4th tier government. I believe I add far more value to my local community through my voluntary activities.
July 2012
Written evidence from Cllr Norman Plumpton Walsh (CC 30)
Councillors elected within the last three years
To answer the question posed in parts
1. What made them stand? I have been involved in both local and national political campaigns for circa 16 years. Indeed, I stood in my now seat three times before being successful at the 2011 local elections. My reasons for standing were two-fold. The first is that I now strive to be a hard working, responsive Councillor in the community where I reside. The second reason, (and more long-term), is that since graduating with a degree in Politics in 2008, I have found it difficult to gain policy related employment, although through no fault of trying. To this end, I will soon be utilising my Councillor role as the main component of a Work-Based Masters degree, concentrating on Public Policy.
Whether the experience has so far live up to expectations? The experience thus far has exceeded my expectations. In my authority of Halton Borough Council much emphasis is placed on elected member development through training and seminars. This training, now ILM (Institute of Leadership and Management) accredited, concentrates on the many skills a Councillor needs to be effective. This is from safety at advice surgeries, working with the media, to time and case management. To date, I am finding this invaluable, both in my role as a Councillor and to aid my further study, and hopefully into a future career.
Whether (or not) they intend to stand for re-election? Only a year into my four year term of office, I would hope to re-stand for election in 2015.
July 2012
Written evidence from George McManus (CC 31)
I am currently a Band C Benefit Fraud Investigator at DWP, a job I've been doing for 3 years. I joined the Department in 2002 as a Band B in the Pension Service, got my Band C in 2003 and resigned to stand for Parliament in 2005.
I've been a Labour activist all my life and am an elected member of the Party's National Policy Forum. When I joined the DWP in 2002, I was a sitting Parish Councillor in Pocklington East Yorkshire and in 2004 I was elected Mayor.
From starting in DWP, I have been classified as belonging to the Intermediate Group of civil servants and have stuck to the letter and spirit of the Code of Conduct for Civil Servants. This included attending courses at the National School of Government on the Code and its purpose.
In 2005 I resigned to stand for the Parliamentary seat of Beverley and Holderness. Before I resigned I was told by my local HR officer, a senior Tory in the local Party, that if I was unsuccessful then I would be barred from applying for reinstatement. Having failed to win my election campaign I applied for reinstatement but was refused. I appealed through one of my local Labour MPs and following the intervention of Sir Gus O'Donnell, I was reinstated. I was offered a post in London, 200 miles from home, and told that if I accepted it would be at my own expense.
I duly took up the post in 2006 and in 2007 accepted a secondment at Band D, to the Foreign Office in Whitehall working in the Minister for Europe's team. On the completion of my secondment I was offered a post in DWP Fraud at home in Yorkshire and have been here for the least 3 years.
On my return home in 2009, I was elected as Chairman of my Constituency Labour Party and in February 2011, the Party asked me to run as a Councillor for the East Riding of Yorkshire Council. In keeping with my Intermediate status I asked for my Line Manager's permission. At this point my Line Manager was told I was now in a 'sensitive' post because 'I had face to face contact with at least 3 members of the public per week'. I was not therefore permitted to stand. I argued my case and in March 2011, the advice given to my Line Manager was reversed and he was told that I should be regarded as being in the Intermediate Group and was therefore allowed to stand, but only on the provision that the ward in which I was standing was remote from my place of work. The East Riding Council covers about 500 square miles. Instead of being able to stand for a winnable seat in Beverley, I stood for a non-winnable seat in Bridlington and was unsuccessful.
In April 2011 I got a new Line Manager and in June 2011 I was told that I was indeed in a 'sensitive' post with the restrictions that this entailed. The previous permission I had been given was a mistake. I am now in discussions with the Department to again have this reversed.
Should the Department not reverse its advice it will not only have implications for me but for 80,000 public facing members of staff in DWP. My experience has caused me considerable stress and family difficulties. Following the General Election of 2005, I was out of work for 10 months and only survived because of my wife and family's support. Between 2006 and 2009 I met all expenses for travel and accommodation from my own resources.
In my experience, it's no wonder that people don't want to stand as councillors. I have a number of friends, of different political persuasions, who would willingly become School Governors, volunteers at the CAB and councillors, but are worried about contravening the rules. My Department gives the impression that we want to encourage public service and community engagement but then puts insurmountable barriers in place to deter potential candidates.
But the good news is, that if they work for DWP and they're successfully elected, they'll be given loads of Special Leave to discharge their responsibilities, a contradiction if ever there was one.
July 2012
Written evidence from Edward Houlton (CC 32)
I stood for Council and was elected for one term. I continue to attend all the meeting in the community I did for a simple reason. The majority of elected officials are not able to do their job so I make up the difference.
If you people actually cared, there would not be homeless people.
Shame on you.
July 2012
Written evidence from Nigel Carter (CC 33)
What made me stand as a councillor? The possibility that I might make a difference and do a better job than others as an elected member.
To what extent has experience lived up to expectations? As an independent, capacity to effect real change is limited due to an overwhelming majority held by the lead group. What a shame that dogma stands in the way of common sense in so many cases.
Will I stand for re‐election? Yes, but with a majority of 14 votes, I’m not optimistic.
July 2012 Written evidence from Cllr Mike Jordan (CC 34)
You ask an interesting and regularly asked question about why only certain groups of people stand as Cllrs. There are 2 simple answers to this---cost and time!!
Had I got children around, were I in a minority group, were I disabled, I would simply not be able to go to all the meetings, get support of my peers, dash around from different meetings either in Selby or County, or attend these during the evening (at Selby) and during the day (at County). I am lucky in that I work shifts. I am even luckier because I am just about sorted with my finances and have handed my notice in (Ind Chemist on £45k/year) just so I can concentrate on Council duties. My wife works, I enjoy the tasks, but I would not have a cat in hells chance in any other circumstance. There is a huge amount going on at the moment with sorting houses out for people, dealing with families with debts, trying to get support for different groups and most local cllrs, certainly were I sit, are up to their eyes in it!! The MPs, bless you all, make rules etc in London and we have to implement them somehow some way, in our own time!!!!
If you want better representation then make it easier for these groups to stand, provide the service they and we need and we will all get on with it---to quote the ex cllr I took over locally from--'if you have no car and can't drive you cannot do the role'.
June 2012
Written evidence from Robina Iqbal (CC 35)
If you have wanted to be a candidate:
• Why did you want to stand for election? • What, if any, specific barriers prevented you from standing?
I am a community worker and have worked in the community in a job aswell as a volunteer for the past 20 years.. I work in an area where there is a high population of Pakistani muslims and somalian. The area also is one of high deprivation and faces many challenges on many social,economic and education fronts. I have and still do work with mostly muslim women and girls to educate and empower them so that they can be active citizens and also be informed parents so that they can help their children.
I have been asked to stand many times as a councillor and have had my reservations. These are:
• There is not enough guidance or training offered by the govt or the parties to prepare you before you even begin to think about starting. It is important to offer workshops/training before so that we are all aware of the requirements like time commitment , work loads, salary etc • Lack of support if you do decide to stand. It seems to be all down to you and if you have the resources like manpower, finance, contacts. I do feel that there should be a starter package that would help you . • Mentoring by other older candidates that have stood successfully before. • Full support by the party/govt in case of threats,abuse and victimisation. • There should be a shared resource by the party of printing and media support. • For women there should be someone with her when she goes out campaigning
July 2012
Written evidence from Cllr Richard Kemp (CC 36)
I am writing in response to your current review of training and support for councillors.
For the past year I have been leading an operation internal to the Liberal Democrats helping councillors responds to both the challenges and opportunities of the Localism Act and other Acts such as the Health and Police Acts which localise some elements of decision making.
This work has been funded by the Leadership Centre for Local Government and similar work has been instigated inside the Tory and Labour parties. It has been undertaken, in our case, by experienced councillors working on a regional basis with council groups, MPs and Constituency parties.
Most of this work has been done with Lib Dem councillors but in some cases we have been doing whole council training or working in other cross party ways.
Our overall impression is that councillors need substantial help if they are to take advantage of new opportunities for localism. The Localism Act in particular will make massive new demands on councillors if it is to work effectively. There are three problems:
1. That in many areas officers are digging in and doing their best to resist the Localism Act because it transfers power away from officers back to councillors and even more importantly to communities.
2. That the quality of training being provided by councils and other bodies into the opportunities of the Act are dire.
3. That many councillors will need help with the development of new and enhanced skills.
Typically our role as councillors has been Town hall dominated. We took up a problem and asked an officer to do something about it; we asked a question in council; put forward a motion in council; helped develop new council wide strategies. All that can and should be done. But the Localism Act means that we can do a lot more beside.
To do more or to do the same amount more effectively involves three things:
1. Councillors moving to a position where they think that their ward is a place in which to do something rather than from somewhere to do something;
2. Councils freeing up resources to ensure that councillors can be the local community champion or as I describe it become the ‘cabinet member for their ward.
3. Councillors being supported into the new skills needed to do the new work
The help that they require is not technical descriptions of yet another Act of Parliament but support to develop a new set of skills such as:
• Facilitation • Advocacy • Mediation
It is now our job using the various parts of the Localism Act to bring together people from within our wards from across disciplines and professions and across organisations to focus on how to deliver council wide strategies effectively in their own area.
Some people will say that nothing has really changed and that some councillors have always had these skills and one these things. Correct. But not enough of them have done this and many who wanted to have given up because of the increased centralisation of the system over 40 years.
Now is the time that ward councillors can come into their own. They along with town and parish councils can pull down power from the centre and ensure that truly local decisions are taken which will provide good value for money and good local outputs.
This is a once in a generation opportunity to make fundamental change but it will only happen if the Government champions localism and provides a reasonable resource for up skilling those of us at the front line of governance and delivery.
Cllr Richard Kemp CBE Director, Winning with Localism Operation July 2012
Written evidence from Leeds City Council/Commission on the Future of Local Government (CC 37)
Leeds City Council led the Commission on the Future of Local Government, launched on 3rd July 2012. Throughout the process of meeting, calling for evidence and writing the final report, the role of Councillors within the sector and the wider community was at the forefront of our work and thinking. We have attached a copy of our final report to our submission email, though this can also be found on the website: www.civicenterpriseuk.org.
The Commission concluded that local democracy needs to be revitalised and a new social contract devised to make local government and its councillors fit for the 21st century. The Commission has committed to produce a piece of work with INLOGOV (The University of Birmingham) around Member Development to put our ideas into practice.
Having read the previous submissions to the Inquiry, we do not feel it necessary to submit a detailed and lengthy memorandum. Instead we wish to add our voice to those already heard by endorsing the views of, for example, Sunderland City Council, the LGA and the CfPS.
In summary, from our experience of the evidence submitted to the Commission on the Future of Local Governments we believe there are several things the Inquiry needs to take into account:
The image of local government: the media often portrays local government in a somewhat negative way, despite polls showing that it is more trusted than central government.1 This can lead people to believe that councils and councillors are not efficient and do not have a positive role to play in their communities, when the exact opposite is true. Councillors often work tirelessly on behalf of their communities and for vulnerable people and service users, often with very little recognition.
The many examples and stories of excellent public service need to be told, including by using new forms of more personalised and direct communications, to restore public faith in local government and democracy. Instead of being seen as the problem, local government and local politicians can be part of the solution to some of the big challenges facing the UK.
However, given the ‘perfect storm’ we face (of reduced budgets, rising demand and expectations, a crisis in confidence of politicians) there is a need and opportunity for councils and councillors to be more entrepreneurial and positive in their approach. Councillors can create opportunities for local communities and be visible, forceful, influential leaders who bring communities together to champion their voice and
1 See recent polls by Ipsos MORI and YouGov.
needs. Councillors should also act as ‘door openers’ to services and other community actors, such as GPs, schools, businesses and third sector organisations.
Complexity of the role and need for support: councillors need to be adequately supported both by their local authorities and by their political parties. Their role is multi-layered and complex, with councillors having to be effective communicators and strategic thinkers and switch roles almost constantly. Councils, and councillors, will need new approaches to be successful at utilising less formal social networks, participatory democracy, better engagement with young people and undertaking broader influencing role, rather than relying on the more formal, traditional structures we associate with the public sector and local government in particular.
Leeds has excellent and comprehensive member support and development service, which we hope to learn from and build on in the Commission’s work with INLOGOV (the University of Birmingham), to create a bespoke member Development programme.
Devolving more power can also reinforce the value and role of all councillors and the different functions that they fulfil. Civic enterprise is a way of reconnecting, in particular, backbench councillors with their communities, allowing local citizens to better engage in the concept of a social contract with local government. We can do this by offering them choice and control over how services are designed and delivered, in return for an increased sense of personal responsibility and independence. Authorities should consider devolving powers (and budgets) around, for example, street cleansing and refuse, planning and housing to the local level, as Leeds has started to do with their Area Committees as a way of energising local democracy.
Legitimacy of local government – participation and engagement: councillors hold the local democratic mandate and this is fundamental to the legitimacy of local government as a voice for the whole of the place they serve and represent. Local ward councillors must reclaim their leadership role as the accepted and mandated voice of citizens who enable all sectors to take action together in campaigns to improve people’s lives. Local government, through the democratic mandate, has a legitimate interest and role in holding to account and leading other local public organisations (such as health services), local businesses and civil society.
We know that participation in traditional democratic processes, most significantly, voting in elections is declining. We can work to increase this, but have to recognise that it simply may not happen at least in the short term, in which case, we need to think about how we retain and strengthen this democratic legitimacy in other ways, including via better, more representative and ongoing engagement programmes.
In conclusion, the Commission recognises the importance of councillors’ roles and suggests that there is a pressing need to strengthen both the image of local government and its councillors and their role in community life and decision making and to revitalise local democracy. At the same time, councillors must be enabled to fulfil their complex roles through adequate support and development.
The Commission on the Future of Local Government along with Leeds City Council is committed to this agenda and looks forward to the findings of the Select Committee. We would be happy also to take part in any of the planned discussions.
July 2012
Written evidence from Timothy J.Oates (CC 38)
Former councillors who chose not to seek re-election
I became a Town Councillor in Abingdon in the local elections of 2007. My wife had stood for election in 2003 and became Mayor of Abingdon in 2007 and I was successful in joining her. The following four years until 2011 were an educational experience but I chose not to repeat if for reasons set out below:
1) Disenchantment with the political process at local level. Meetings controlled by an 'inner core' with the rest of us merely being used as "lobby fodder" in order to "rubber stamp" decisions. (sound familiar to you?) 2) Further, private meetings, not minuted, being held between Council officers and the "inner core" to which the rest of us were not privy. 3) Council officers choosing to do their own thing in their own time without regard to the wishes of the Councillors. 4) Failure to oversee council decisions and check progress on decisions previously taken. 5) Before standing in 2007 I was assured that there would be no more than 3 or 4 meetings a year! This turned out to be slightly "economical with the actualite' , more like 3 or 4 meetings a week depending on how many committees and outside bodies you were on! 6) I finally came to the conclusion that for a parsimonious allowance of £750 per year this was not sufficient recompense for my time expenditure, especially as I was still in full time employment until 2008.
Summary : Local government seems to me to be a bastion for "jobsworths" and people who have done nothing more risky than 'crossing the road'. Having worked in the military for twelve years and subsequently pursued a career entirely within the private sector, I am unimpressed. In the private sector you either get results in the time/budget set or you get out and without any payoff for failure either. Local government seems to be immune from these pressures with Councillors merely providing a 'fig leaf of democratic acccountability'.
Conclusions: Of course the tone set in local government is replicated at national level. I cannot let my submission pass without giving my thoughts on the national picture. Over the last 30 years, the political elite in this country have been captured by business and global corporations, leaving the electorate with the "bill" of paying for it, whether they approve or not! Politicians seem to think they have a sense of entitlement as the MP's expenses scandal showed. The recent furore over Barclays and the so called 'grilling' of Bob Diamond by MP's shows how mediocre our political elite are. The political process should be opened up so 'every man and his dog' should be able to stand for election. There should be open primaries at every level with no artificial restrictions or meetings of the 'great and the good' behind closed doors, selecting candidates. If not, interest will continue to wane whilst the "rotten/corrupt fruit" at the top will continue to prosper at the expense of the rest who are paying for it! My response at the next election, if matters don't improve will be to spoil my ballot paper with "none of the above"!
July 2012
Written evidence from Desmond Jaddoo (CC 39)
I was a supporter and also intended to stand for elected Mayor of Birmingham, however the proposal was rejected.
During the campaign, various issues concerning the engagement, voter apathy, lack of understanding, image, and distancing between the people and Local Government were clearly highlighted.
Over the past few years the between the Local Councillor and many Local Communities have become detached.
The Issue
Local Government Elections indeed lacks inspirational political engagement. This was demonstrated at the last local election here in Birmingham in May 2012 when the turnout was a derisory 29% and some actual ward turnouts were as low as 16%.
This may start to answer the questions as to why people are not standing for Councillors. Local Government is perceived to be an exclusive Club, for the Local elite to lead without any real mention of transparency or accountability to its local electorate.
This lack of engagement demonstrates the disinterest in Local Politics. The whole idea of Local Government is uninspirational, owing the lack of new blood entering into the process of Governance.
Indeed there are barriers which actually commence with the political parties. Birmingham commissioned a response to the McPherson report in 1999 and it was published in 2001.
The need for better engagement of minority Communities was highlighted along with Political Parties ensuring that their local party selections demonstrate reflective governance. Furthermore, the need to actually ensure that the demographic make is also taken into consideration when selecting candidates is key in order to maintain interest from various diverse communities. One must take into consideration that Political engagement in many cities today, is based upon individuals as well a political parties. The two factors go together.
One must understand that local Political figures are seen as role models and should many of them and just thrust onto the electorate and hence leads to the disconnection and the continued apathy, which leads to the lack of representation.
In Birmingham where we are always told we have the most diverse population in the Country and we should celebrate this; appears in my opinion to only be lip service from individuals that are attempting to be politically correct.
Current Councillors are desperate to cling onto power in many cases until they cannot physically move, then are seen as a waste of time as they are unable to serve their communities effectively or even understand the needs and anxieties of the Citizens, in their greed to cling onto their local power.
There are established Party workers that are unable to attract their own party support as there appears to be an apparent closed shop when it comes to selection of candidates.
The whole idea of local governance is not just to provide services and manage the local economy but also to connect with the people in order to inspire them as to what Local Government and indeed what being a Local Councillor is all about.
Many people are unable to even name their local Councillor and many don’t even know the location of their Council House or Town Hall.
I believe the problem is not contained in any one specific issue.
Many people don’t know the role of their local Council yet alone the role of their local Councillor. Apathy has also set in as there is no real new blood from Communities and the failing of Parties to correctly address the demographic make up of area is causing major barriers in terms of engagement, involvement and representation.
Some Councillors having been in post for over 30 years in some cases is just making local politics stale are they feel the need to cling on and mentor younger people in order to replace them in good time that reflect an ever changing society.
Political Party selection processes I many cases have too many barriers and on occasions appear to be secretive to the public. The lack of transparency and accountable in demonstrating in how candidates are selected does not help to inspire the electorate either.
One must remember especially in the case of Local Councillors, this is the opportunity for local people to get onto the political ladder. Even if one looks at the Independent route, the financial barriers for campaigning cost in comparison the major political parties are their structures are a major barrier. Indeed people can ruin themselves financially in their quest to run for public office.
There is also an element of trust. In my opinion and from talking to many people, there is a mistrust of Politicians both locally and nationally, and if one aspires to public service in life, many people rather go by way of faith and community groups as these, offer more credibility, in comparative terms.
What Can Be Done
In order to tackle this issue in my opinion, there needs to be local political engagement, by way of going out into the Community and educating people of the role of local Government, ensuring that all people are registered to vote and indeed that they use their, vote.
Encourage and advise individuals that they need not be Members of a Political Party but they can stand as Independents, although they start off at a disadvantage owing to the financial muscle of the established Political Parties.
I believe in order to encourage new blood into Local Government a cap of 3-4for terms must be placed on Councillors and then they must stand down from reselection for at least one year before being reconsidered. This will demonstrate their effectiveness, as if they are good they should then be reselected.
Political Parties need to make their selection process more transparent to the Public.
Local Councils such as Birmingham must demonstrate reflective governance and not just talk about celebrating diversity, as observers do not understanding the make up of the various cultures that exist in Birmingham and many opinions are still based upon stereotypes, such the West Indian Community is reggae music and jerk chicken and the Sikh Community Bhangra Music etc.
The local press also only support what appears to be the norm, which is actually turning off engagement.
This issue is one of image, no-one sees the real or importance of Local Government and the whole concept and structure needs to be revisited and made more transparent and accountable and not the apparent old boys closed shop which is there for the chosen few.
We must take action now to re-engage the public with Local Government which will go towards in my view developing their interest in then serving their Communities.
As a result of this I have commenced Community Activation of the Black Community in Birmingham initially, which will remind everyone of their role in local governance and also of the opportunity for them to become representatives. Currently there are 8 Black Councillors out of 120. Over the next 5 years we intend to work to increase this to 20 through Community Activation, also seek to get at least one Member of Parliament.
Furthermore, once engagement is building, it is envisaged that this can be taken into the other communities in Birmingham including the white community which has also become disaffected, and the common age group of 18-25 are just not interested in politics and this needs to be addressed.
July 2012
Written evidence from Janet Atkinson (CC 40)
It was when the youngest of our 6 children started school that I had time to consider what I was going to do next – part time teaching plus some voluntary work – but thought s of being a Councillor did not cross my mind: and that has remained the case.
My husband became a councillor at County and then Borough level, and found the work both fulfilling (being of use to people) and occasionally maddening (knee-jerk politicking).
My chief voluntary activities have been as a Samaritan, a magistrate (Deputy Chair of a large urban bench), an active member in the governance of the Church of England at local, regional and national level – and of course the WEA, also at all levels, plus an unexpected invitation to become involved in one of the newly established Colleges in Stockton, as offshoots of Durham University, as a personal tutor, a member of the College Council and finally having just been elected President of the Senior Common Room. All these experiences have been rewarding in terms of working with a variety of colleagues, learning new skills, growing into new responsibilities. I have been very fortunate – so no regrets about not being a local councillor.
I did not feel any barriers, have many friends who are councillors, and am interested in their work and am quite proud of my town. I do think however that my alternative use of my time was the right one for me.
July 2012 Written evidence from Simon Killane (CC 41)
I am delighted that you are showing an interest in my role as a councillor. I love the job and am very popular with residents etc. It is probably the best job that anyone could imagine!
Sadly the process of selection, party politics, support both financial and system is nothing short of appalling!!!!!!!!! I am a married man with a wife and three young children. I am a Unitary Councillor.
The council is dominated by rich old party political men. There are only a handful of councillors with young children. It is clear that if you have time on your hands, have lots of money or are obsessed with party politics then you’re welcome. I don’t even understand why you would need to do a survey on a system that is so utterly dysfunctional. I often call it a “shamocracy”.
I am not going to rant on and on about why it is such a rubbish system. Instead I would like to offer you a challenge. Come down to Malmesbury and witness the conditions that an ordinary working family man has to endure to survive mentally and financially in a system that is so rubbish. See how popular I am with the townspeople and the ground breaking things that are happening in our town.
Try to match the profile that I have in Malmesbury with the complete frustration that I feel about a local government system that is so utterly unfair, undemocratic, elitist, prejudiced and discriminatory!!
July 2012
Written evidence from Cllr Rowan J Draper (CC 42)
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Councillor R J Draper was elected to Stafford Borough Council by the Littleworth ward with 1043 votes on a turnout of 43% in the ward, and 45.93% borough-wide, in May 2011 for the Labour Party as a first-time candidate. He currently serves on the following committees: Community Services Scrutiny Committee, Audit and Accounts Committee, Member Facilities working group, Stafford Borough Twinning Organisation and Stafford Borough Horticultural Committee.
He was locally schooled at Blessed William Howard R.C High School followed by study at Stafford College. He attended Newman University College, Birmingham and graduated with an upper second class honours degree in Drama. Whilst studying for his degree he was twice elected to Newman Students’ Union as Sports Development Officer and had leading roles in sports teams and activity groups including Co- Director of the University’s music and drama society.
He joined the Labour Party following the results of the 2010 General Election and has since served as Youth and Students’ Officer (2011-2012) for Stafford’s constituency Labour Party and Secretary for Staffordshire Young Labour (2011- 2012).
RECOMMENDATIONS • That the committee looks at a way of standardising the allowances paid to councillors throughout the country based on common factors: electorate size, service provision, expected hourly contribution (be it in council meetings or otherwise), management of work / council schedule.
Introduction
I attended Blessed William Howard, a Catholic comprehensive High School serving the Stafford and district area in the Archdiocese of Birmingham, during 1996-2001. Following GCSE study I enrolled at Stafford College until 2004 where I completed BTEC First and National Diploma’s in Performing Arts.
Prior to higher education study, during 2003-2007, I was employed in the public house industry and disillusioned with politics. Life was focused on working enough hours on the national minimum wage to support a rented property, living a typical early 20s lifestyle and trying to gain opportunity for promotion, and developing a career with vocational study including a foundation modern apprenticeship in bar service.
During my undergraduate study my interest within government, the politics of higher education and public service progressively changed. Inspired by the commitment I had made to students of Newman University College as their union’s executive officer for sport. This opportunity opened a number of doors to organisations such as the National Union of Students, the British Universities Colleges Sport, and the Students’ Rugby Football Union; all of which enhanced my education and professional skill set.
These experiences culminated in my decision to join a political party in the aftermath of the 2010 General Election.
1. What made you stand for election to the council?
1.1 I first thought about standing for election to the local council after I had graduated from University, and before I had been involved with my local party. When I considered it I thought it would be incredibly difficult to get selected, finance a campaign and even tougher to get a message across to the electorate. After this consideration I put it to the back of my mind.
1.2 As the selection process neared I started to consider it again and the following factors influenced my decision to stand for election:
1.3 University Experience: My time at Newman University College broadened my horizons sufficiently and enabled me to develop in countless ways. One of them was through instilling a public service ethic and helping others, which I built on as a Students’ Union officer, that it just seemed like the right next step in my own personal development.
1.3 Party Relationship: Being a new member to the local party I wanted to make as full and robust a contribution as possible and to show that I was capable of being considered a viable council candidate in the future. Being selected for a Conservative held seat, with the potential to be a close marginal, looked like a great opportunity to learn ‘the ropes’ of canvassing, running a campaign and being an election candidate with no expectation to win the seat.
1.4 Government Mid-Terms: Previous council elections in 2003 and 2007 had displayed the full-force of the anti-government sentiment against Labour. With the introduction of a Conservative-led government, and many Liberal Democrats breaking their personal pledges to students on tuition fees, it was obvious that this election would be a good opportunity for any Labour candidate with the will and desire to get elected.
1.5 Representing the Community: The average age of Councillors in local government at the time I stood for election was 57 and increased to 59 after my election. My local authority has a majority of retired members of the community as councillors, and very few under 30, and my local party had even less. Whilst it was not an overwhelming factor in my decision to stand it did however play an influential part in justifying my candidacy with the electorate during the campaign on their doorstep. When deciding to stand I wanted to show my section of the community that we could have an influence over the community and local government.
1.6 Making a difference: Stephen Frears wrote for the Gordon Brown character in his 2003 film ‘The Deal’ the dialogue that, when talking to the Tony Blair character after refusing a promotion in the Scottish office, “Isn’t that what we came into politics for … deep down we won’t be able to change the world until we have the big job” and I believe that this is an influential maxim on members of the councillor community. We get involved because we want to be involved and able to make a difference.
1.7 Do you want to be an MP? Many young people involved with party politics find themselves being asked whether they want to go on to become an MP, especially young councillors, and the evidence supports the notion that many become Councillors because it enables them to gain a grounding or foundation in skills and experiences relevant to standing to become a Member of Parliament later on:
1.7.1 46% (or 305) of all sitting MPs (see Appendix 1) have previously served in Local Government either as Councillors for Parish, Town, Community, Borough, District, County or members of the London Assembly.
1.7.2 38% of current Conservative MPs have served a minimum of one year as a Councillor or Assembly Member as opposed to 53% for Labour and 57% for the Liberal Democrats.
1.7.3 Members of minor parties and those members who serve Parliament through the Speaker’s Office having served in local government totals 54%.
1.7.4 Eric Pickles (Bradford), Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith & Fulham), Henry Smith (West Sussex County), David Blunkett (Sheffield), Brandon Lewis (Brentwood), Clive Betts (Sheffield), Kris Hopkins (Bradford), Alan Whitehead (Southampton) also show a symbolic trend of leaders in local government going on to become members of Parliament.
1.8 It stands to reason that with a convention as high as 53% of parliamentary Labour Party members having served in local government that any individual who wanted to pursue that path would be well-served by becoming a local councillor so that they could pursue the option later in life, if they so chose.
2. To what extent has your experience so far lived up to your expectations?
2.1 Being an elected representative of the community is unlike any experience I have had previously and unlikely to be matched by any other I have in the immediate future. However I can’t say it’s fully lived up to expectations when you consider that many expectations will have been influenced by the The West Wing, Borgen, The Thick of It, Yes Minister and House of Cards. The drama, tension and action for many of the characters aren’t the same for being a backbench opposition member of local government outside of a major city.
2.2 Making the transition from a Students’ Union Executive Officer to party political councillor has been quite a leap of differing expectations to the way I approach meetings, preparations and building relationships with fellow members. I think that all of the skills I have learnt from this have lived up to expectations and was one of the reasons I stood – to learn more about politics in practice.
2.3 Though I think that there should be more standardised induction procedures attached to new councillors, perhaps delivered by an independent body or the local government association, able to deliver a structured programme of education over the various roles and powers of being a successful councillor (without the focus being on local government leaders).
2.4 Many of the party specific events I was invited to were delivered at short notice or based in London and both of these factors contributed to my being unable to attend. Many of the local authority delivered sessions were for combined political groups and combined experience levels so weren’t fully able to address all of the questions and queries I had.
2.5 I have also seen some best practice I will be proposing to my local authority from Tameside Council where they held a mock Council meeting for first-time members to learn the ropes before entering into their first Council meeting. These kinds of initiatives can help detoxify the political imagery that councils and political parties give to local government because the status of the member is given more preference than the needs or desires of the group to educate in only their traditions.
2.6 The decision to host this inquiry, and a recent discussion I took part in (on attracting more young councillors to local government on the guardian website), shows that there is more to do to attract and keep young councillors in local government. One issue that always props up in conversation is members allowances. Many colleagues I have spoken to are disappointed that their authority, because of the political sensitivity of the issue, are not recompensed as effectively as colleagues elsewhere in carrying out their work.
2.7 My local authority raised its allowances this municipal year to approximately £3600 per annum basic allowance. The neighbouring County Council’s allowances are approximately £8000 per annum basic allowance. The difference allocated for a basic councillor can mean the difference between being able to take on the role of a councillor and not. None of us, I hope, are in local government for the money but allowances should be set a reasonable standard for councillors. I would hope that one recommendation coming out of this inquiry is that the committee looks at a way of standardising the allowances paid to councillors based on common factors: electorate size, service provision, expected hourly contribution (be it in council meetings or otherwise), management of work / council schedule.
2.8 Being able to meet and network with other young Labour councillors has greatly influenced my experience of local government. This was facilitated through followers on twitter, the local government association and its young councillor’s training weekend conference in November 2011. The people I met their have been great confidants to me over the last year and have helped support me through the high’s and low’s of being a councillor. We need more of this to support young councillors because whilst local government continues to be an arena for the retired, or closed to retired, we will need avenues for young councillors to share and support each other. 2.9 Out of this came a group we unofficially dubbed ‘Councillors on Tour’ – the Young Labour Councillors Support Network – an idea we have launched on facebook, twitter, delivered a website and setup an email list to be able to support and network with other young councillors within our party.
2.10 My experience has instilled a belief in me that local authorities should not only be a place where retired professionals gather to govern the city but should be living, breathing and accountable organisations that reflect their community. For many in local government we are too quick to explain away why students, manual labourers, single mum’s and self-employed members of our community don’t take an active role in our Council’s rather than facing up to why they aren’t involved and why there is a pre-conceived bias towards retirees making up the bulk of local government benches.
3. Do you think you will stand for re-election? Why/why not?
3.1 Before standing for re-election I will be influenced by a number of different factors that include the following 7 areas that I would wish to have addressed in a satisfactory manner:
• Employment Status • Career Prospects • Council Responsibilities • Work – Life Balance • Financial Position • Relationship Status • Family Life
3.1.1 Employment status: Am I employed? If so, what type of contract am I serving? How many hours am I expected to work? How flexible would my employer be? How understanding are they, or would they be?
3.1.2 Career Prospects: Where am I employed? Does it have suitable stability for the next 48 months? Does it look like a promotion is on the cards within the next 12- 24 months?
3.1.3 Council responsibilities: What is the likelihood of my party taking control of the council’s administration? If it is foreseeable, what is the likely duties I can expect to take on? Am I within 12-24 months of being selected to serve in the cabinet or shadow cabinet? Am I within 12-24 months of being selected to chair a scrutiny or regulatory committee?
3.1.4 Work - Life Balance: Do I have a reasonable standard of living outside of employment? Am I socialising enough? Do I have enough extra-curricular activities already being pursued? Am I renting? Do I own my own home? What is the likelihood of achieving owning my own home within the next 60 months?
3.1.5 Financial position: Do I have the money to support being a councillor? Does the authority have the budget requisite to support my time and contribution through their allowance scheme?
3.1.6 Relationship status: Am I in a relationship? If I am in a relationship, how long for? Is my partner accepting and/or supportive of time spent serving as a Councillor? If I am single, what is the likelihood of a permanent relationship in the next 12-24 months? If the likelihood is great, what is the potential for a partner to be accepting or supportive of a partner involved within party politics?
3.1.7 Family Life: If I am in a relationship and have had a reasonable amount of longevity within it, am I in a position to see having children as on the horizon? Are my partner and I looking to have children within the next 12-24 months?
3.2 If these elements did not indicate what I had anticipated by 2015 then I would have to re-consider standing again but that I hasten to add that it would not preclude me from re-standing later on in life once those features had been fulfilled.
3.3 Should the answers to these questions indicate a stable living position, with the opportunity to continue council commitments, and supportive of a committed relationship with children on the horizon I would strongly consider re-standing for election in 2015.
APPENDIX 1: Former Councillors now serving as Members of Parliament
Conservative Labour (135/253) Liberal Democrat (118/305) (33/57) Peter Aldous Diane Abbott Norman Baker David Amess Bob Ainsworth Alan Beith Stuart Andrew Heidi Alexander Gordon Birtwistle James Arbuthnot Ian Austin Tom Brake Gavin Barwell Adrian Bailey Annette Brooke Richard Benyon Hugh Bayley Paul Burstow Paul Beresford Stuart Bell Lorely Burt Andrew Bingham Hilary Benn Vincent Cable Brian Binley Joe Benton Tim Farron Bob Blackman Clive Betts Lynne Featherstone Nick Boles Roberta Blackman-Woods Don Foster Peter Bone Hazel Blears Steve Gilbert Angie Bray (AM) David Blunkett Mike Hancock Fiona Bruce Kevin Brennan David Heath Robert Buckland Lyn Brown John Hemming Aidan Burley Nick Brown Martin Horwood Conor Burns Russell Brown Julian Huppert David Burrowes Chris Bryant Norman Lamb Alistair Burt Karen Buck John Leech Neil Carmichael Ronnie Campbell Greg Mulholland Rehman Chisti Martin Caton John Pugh Christopher Chope Jenny Chapman Alain Reid Therese Coffey Tom Clarke John Rogerson Greg Clark Vernon Coaker Bob Russell Glyn Davies Anne Coffey Adrian Sanders Caroline Dinenage Michael Connarty Robert Smith Johnathan Djanogly Rosie Cooper Andrew Stunnell Phillip Dunne Jeremy Corbyn Sarah Teather Michael Ellis David Crausby David Ward Jane Ellison Mary Creagh Roger Williams Tobias Ellwood Stella Creasy Stephen Williams Charlie Elphicke Alex Cunningham Jenny Willott Graham Evans Jim Cunningham Simon Wright – 33 David Evennett Tony Cunningham Mark Field Nic Dakin Mark Francois Simon Danczuk Mike Freer Alistair Darling Lorraine Fullbrook Wayne David Mark Garnier Ian Davidson Richard Graham Geraint Davies Chris Grayling John Denham Justine Greening Jim Dobbin Dominic Grieve Frank Dobson Robert Halfon Jim Dowd Stephen Hammond Clive Efford Greg Hands Louise Ellman Rebecca Harris Bill Esterson John Hayes Frank Field Gordon Henderson Robert Flello George Hollingberry Paul Flynn Phillip Hollobone Yvonne Fovargue Kris Hopkins Barry Gardiner Gerald Howarth Sheila Gilmore John Howell Mary Glindon Mark Hunter Roger Godsiff Stuart Jackson Paul Goggins Margot James Nia Griffith Gareth Johnson Andrew Gwynne Andrew Johnson David Hamilton Marcus Jones Fabian Hamilton Simon Kirby David Hands Greg Knight Mark Hendrick Mark Lancaster Stephen Hepburn Pauline Latham David Heyes Andrea Leadsom Meg Hillier Phillip Lee Margaret Hodge Jeremy Lefroy Kate Hoey Edward Leigh Jim Hood Brandon Lewis Kelvin Hopkins Iain Liddell Grainger George Howarth Jack Lopresti Sian James Johnathan Lord Diana Johnson Karen Lumley Graham Johnson Francis Maude Helen Jones Teresa May Kevan Jones Karl McCartney Susan Elan Jones Patrick McLoughlin Tessa Jowell Nigel Mills Barbara Keeley Anne Milton Sadiq Khan Anne Marie Morris David Lammy (AM) Stephen Mosley Ian Lavery David Mowatt Mark Lazarowicz David Mundell Chris Leslie Sheryll Murray Ivan Lewis Robert Neill Tony Lloyd Sarah Newton Andy Love Caroline Nokes Ian Lucas David Nuttall Fiona Mactaggart Matthew Offord Khalid Mahmood Eric Ollerenshaw John Mann Guy Opperman Steve McCabe Jim Paice Michael Mann Neil Parish Kerry McCarthy Mark Pawsey Siobhain McDonagh Eric Pickles John McDonnell Daniel Poulter Alison McGovern Mark Pritchard Jim McGovern Mark Reckless Anne McGuire John Redwood Iain McKenzie Malcolm Rifkind Alan Meale Andrew Robathan Ian Mearns Andrew Rosindell Alun Michael Lee Scott Madeleine Moon Alec Shelbrooke Graeme Morrice Mark Simmonds Graeme Morris Henry Smith George Mudie Mark Spencer Meg Munn Andrew Stephenson Paul Murphy John Stevenson Ian Murray Iain Stewart Lisa Nandy Gary Streeter Fiona O’Donnell Graham Stuart Sandra Osborne Julian Sturdy Albert Owen Robert Syms Teresa Pearce Justin Tomlinson Toby Perkins Elizabeth Truss Stephen Pound Andrew Turner Nick Raynsford Martin Vickers Jonathan Reynolds Charles Walker Linda Riordan SNP (1/6) Angela Watkinson Steve Rotheram Mike Weir Mike Weatherley Chris Ruane Sinn Fein (2/5) Heather Wheeler Virendra Sharma Paul Maskey Chris White Barry Sheerman Conor Murphy Craig Whittaker Jim Sheridan Plaid Cymru (1/3) Gavin Williamson Dennis Skinner Johnathan Edwards Rob Wilson Andy Slaughter Green (1/1) George Young Andrew Smith Caroline Lucas Nadhim Zahawi – 118 Angela Smith Alliance (1/1) Nick Smith Naomi Long Jack Straw SDLP (3 / 3) Graham Stringer Mark Durkan Gerry Sutcliffe Alasdair McDonnell Gareth Thomas Margaret Ritchie Stephen Timms DUP (6 / 8) John Trickett Gregory Campbell Derek Twigg Nigel Dodds Stephen Twigg William McCrea Valerie Vaz Jim Shannon Joan Walley David Simpson Dave Watts Sammy Wilson Alan Whitehead Speaker of the House Chris Williamson John Bercow David Winnick Nigel Evans Mike Wood Lindsay Hoyle David Wright – 135 Dawn Primarolo
Conservative Total Labour Total Lib Dem Other Total Total 118 135 33 19 118 (305) = 38% 127 (253) = 53% 28 (57) = 17 (35) = 57% 54% 305 / 650 = 46% of all MPs have been Councillors
July 2012 Written evidence from Workers’ Educational Association, York Participate Pilot (CC 43)
Note about Contributors: The author is a WEA volunteer and tutor. He was previously a consultant, former Director and Chair of the Institute of Economic Development, Assistant Chief Executive and Director in local government. As well as working in local authorities he has also acted as chair, secretary etc. in a wide range of community and partnership organisations. The Participate learners are a diverse group consisting of retired professionals, people employed in high education, residents associations members, political party members, former council candidates and people who just want to know more about how decisions are made.
1 Introduction
1.1 The Workers’ Educational Association1 has just started a pilot course – (Participate) - in partnership with City of York Council, to promote active citizenship. There are similar pilots scheduled early next year with Sheffield and East Riding councils. This initiative encourages people to be more active citizens by helping to provide the motivation, knowledge and confidence they need. The York brochure is attached as an addendum for information. An Appendix provides more information about the Participate Programme.
1.2 The range of learners is wide, including retired professionals, employees in higher education, residents’ association members, political party members, and people who just want to know more. In all cases they are already active in their local communities, including some who have stood as candidates for council, others who are contemplating it, but all have decided that they want to engage more effectively with the local council by better understanding how it works.
1.3 The course is presented by providing a series of briefing factsheets on each topic before the session, but it also partly involves getting people from the different topic areas e.g. health, education, voluntary sector, including local councillors, to talk to the Learners’ Group.
1.4 In response to the Committee call for evidence, and in view of previous sessions on understanding local government, the Learners’ Group decided to hold a discussion and submit its collective views on the reasons people decide to stand or not to stand at local elections.
1.5 It should be noted that the views expressed are solely those of the Participate Learners’ Group (PLG) and not necessarily those of the WEA or the City of York Council.
1 The Workers’ Educational Association - also known as the WEA - is UK’s largest voluntary-sector provider of adult education. We were founded in 1903, in order to support the educational needs of working men and women who could not afford to access further or higher education. Today we provide courses for all kinds of adults but we maintain our special mission to provide educational opportunities to adults facing social and economic disadvantage. We run over 10,000 part-time adult education courses each year. Our 110,000 students reflect all ages and interests, and come to us from all walks of life. We are one of the UK’s biggest charities, and operate at local, regional and national levels through our regional offices and volunteer-led branches. Our courses are created and delivered in response to local need, often in partnership with local community groups and organisations. More information @ www.wea.org.uk/ 2 Why People Stand for Council
2.1 To make a difference or get things done – This was the biggest factor which would motivate members of the PLG to stand, the ability to contribute to their community by improving some aspect of life for their fellow citizens. In this sense there could be a clear difference between those standing for office or those staffing public services. The latter seek to “run things”, the former “to do things”.
2.2 As a political career move – It was recognised that standing for local office is an important step in seeking a political career and that this is a significant motivation for some people. Ultimately, standing may not lead to such a career, but it can be an effective way to develop political skills and test commitment and abilities. It was felt that this traditional route to higher office might provide a more down to earth grounding than the increasingly common routes through think tanks and acting as political advisors.
2.3 Having the time available for council work – It was recognised that this was an increasingly important factor as many people had more pressurised careers or had to work longer hours. This unfortunately tends to restrict those with the option to stand to those with private incomes or the retired or unemployed.
2.4 Self-employed or flexible employment – If not retired or economically inactive, then it was likely that potential candidates would fall into one of these two categories.
2.5 To achieve a moderate income – While allowances for local council work are moderate, they still provide a regular source of income for those with aspirations as activists or seeking a political career.
2.6 To exercise power – Perhaps this is a less worthy description of 2.1, in the sense that some people are attracted by the apparent ability to exercise power within their local communities. Reference was also being made to the ability to “be in the know” as the information provided to councillors is a sort of power within local communities.
2.7 To achieve a certain level of status within the community – In common with most traditional community leaders, councillors have probably suffered a loss of respect and status, due in part to the loss of deference and increase in cynicism among the general public. Nevertheless, in most communities being the local councillor does still convey a significant status, not least as a “local worthy” and source of information.
2.8 Because politics or public service is a family tradition – It was felt that coming from a “political family” was still one of the major factors that influenced people to stand for election. Conversely, those who did not have such a background were aware that they might be considered strange or even “above themselves” if they sought public office.
2.9 To advance a community interest – The kind of motivation indicated in 2.1 and 2.6 essentially sprang from a belief that the individual could make a contribution to their local community. There is however also a motivation that springs from wanting to advance or have recognised a particular community interest. In such cases people decide to stand because it is felt that existing candidates do not adequately acknowledge or represent their interests or are perhaps at odds with them over particular issues, such as proposed developments, closure of local facilities etc.
2.10 Out of a sense of civic responsibility – Although this may be a diminishing factor, and is partly covered in some other headings, it was felt by the PLG that is it still remains a significant motivation for some.
3 Why People Do Not Stand
3.1 Not convinced that they can make a difference or get things done – These are probably the main reasons that deter people from standing. They divide into two main aspects • Lack of conviction that councils can deliver change – Given the amount of central control or direction, which is exacerbated by current expenditure restrictions, there is scepticism that local councillors will be able to achieve much for their areas.
• Lack of conviction that you as an individual have the capacity to make a difference – Individuals might often be modest about their abilities, and this is reflected in 3.11, 3.15 etc., but there is also a feeling that in today’s challenging circumstances, and with a sceptical public, you need to be have exceptional ability to make a difference.
3.2 Bad for your job prospects – Many people believe that their job prospects will be damaged by commitments such as standing for council. This is especially the case where long hours are required or where the demands of work can themselves require flexibility. Nor is it seen as a way of indicating the appropriate commitment to enhance promotion and job prospects.
3.3 Employer not supportive or inflexible job – While a few employers might value the skills and profile of a councillor, it was felt that the majority would not. Even where they were not actively hostile, then many jobs would find it difficult to accommodate the time and flexibility required for council work.
3.4 Runs own business or self-employed, but cannot afford or take time off – While small businesses and the self-employed have traditionally contributed a large number of council candidates, it was felt that in the current financial climate this is not practical for many people.
3.5 Lack of experience and/or confidence – PLG felt that lack of confidence and perceived relevant experience was a major deterrent. This was in part because standing for office and serving on a local council seemed significantly different from other forms of local participation, such as voluntary sector activity. It seemed to require an all or nothing commitment, compared to other participation where roles could gradually expand as confidence and experience grew.
3.6 Family commitments – Many people who might be interested could not contemplate standing as they could not combine it with caring for children or dependent adults.
3.7 Independently minded or not a member of a political party – While the main parties often ensure that candidates are found for many places, there are some people who do not stand because they do not want to join a party but feel they have little hope as an independent.
3.8 Do not have enough knowledge of local community/or have not lived there long enough – Political parties often nominate “paper candidates” in unwinnable seats irrespective of their place of residence. The PLG felt however that a lack of detailed local knowledge and residence was a major factor which would prevent them from standing either at all or certainly outside their home area.
3.9 Too much work involved – More than most jobs and certainly more than most volunteering or other civic participation, it is felt that to stand and serve as a conscientious councillor is an almost totally open-ended commitment.
3.10 Lack of knowledge about local government – With the largest local authorities in Europe and probably the most complex structures it is not surprising that those in the PLG felt that they many people lacked sufficient knowledge to stand. This is not helped by councils often using concepts such as outputs, outcomes, community cohesion, inclusion etc. which are not in general use. Decision-making also appears to be complex and tortuous.
3.11 Lack of confidence about own abilities – This is similar to 3.5, but it is combined with a lack of clarity about what are the appropriate abilities for a candidate or councillor are, and a view that these are rarely articulated.
3.12 Lack of status – public hostility – Despite the comments in 2.7 some are undoubtedly put off standing because of increasing public hostility to politics and politicians.
3.13 Do not know other councillors or candidates – Those in PLG who have stood or are considering standing have often been influenced by knowing existing candidates or councillors, but conversely if you do not know anyone who has taken this step, then it is unlikely that you will feel able to do so.
3.14 Lack of family interest in politics – In view of likely impact on family it is a real disincentive to stand if they are unlikely to be interested in such things and equally likely to be unsympathetic to the demands it will make.
3.15 Fear that educational level may not be sufficient to do the job – Although this partly relates to other comments, such as 3.10 and 3.11, it also represents as perception that local government has become a technocratic activity for professionals, rather than a forum for representing community views.
3.16 Too big a commitment – This is a similar commemt to 3.9, but it also represents the idea that unlike say a parish council, school governor or involvement in a community group, you have to commit to be a virtually full time councillor for four years – it is not possible to try it for six months or on a temporary or part-time basis.
3.17 Not sure that local authorities will be supportive of anyone with disability or health issues – Although local authorities are perceived as good employers for people with disabilities or heath issues, there was scepticism about whether they could be similarly accommodating to elected members.
4 What can be done to address these issues?
4.1 PLG had little time to spend on considering how more could be done to increase the number of people standing, but there are a few observations, that have arisen and these might be divided into broadly three categories – • fundamental, that require major structural change • opening up, measures that could be taken mainly by local authorities • de-mystifying which involves doing more or less the same things, but in a way which makes them more accessible
Fundamental 4.2 Some potential candidates are clearly deterred by the view that local authorities are lacking in the power to deliver real change due to their lack of autonomy and resources. Compared to their historic roles and other, similar countries, then English local government is at low ebb. This contrasts with the increased autonomy apparent in the rest of the UK and is reinforced by the need to reduce public expenditure.
4.3 In the long term many additional candidates may only be attracted by more power at the local level and by Whitehall leaving major issues to be settled locally, as they have in the devolved parts of the UK.
Opening Up 4.4 As so many local agendas are controlled or heavily influenced by the centre, it is not surprising that sometimes local people feel they do not have a great influence. In this situation it is especially important that councils are being seen to open themselves up to dialogue, not least as this will engage people in a way which encourages them to stand for office. This always needs to be led by local councillors as it loses much force when it is officers providing the link.
4.5 Standing for office seems to be such as big step that it is necessary to use existing local forums – parish councils, residents associations, neighbourhood committees etc. as a stepping stone to involvement. This needs to be cross-party (and non- party), and locally it could build on the work of the Local Government Association and of the information provided by the DirectGov website – 4.6 • www.beacouncillor.org.uk/default.htm • www.direct.gov.uk/en/governmentcitizensandrights/ukgovernment/localgover nment/dg_073312 It is important that this should be on-going, rather than occasional, especially where elections are only every four years. When specific powers or resources can be devolved to such groups (even if these are very limited) then this will be especially useful as a stepping stone to potential candidacy.
4.7 Among those who have long term experience of dealing with councils there was a belief that the adoption of executive systems of leaders, cabinets etc. have led to less transparency in decision-making. The traditional committee system may have had its faults, but it is felt that it allowed a more open debate and encouraged cross party dialogue on issues. Councils will of course soon be able to elect return to the traditional system if they so wish.
4.8 Co-option to committees (in a non-voting role) was fairly common to the previous committee system, but was mainly confined to experts. This might however be considered as a way of breaking down barriers onto existing committees as non- voting members. Alternatively, shadowing of existing councillors for short periods of time might prove to be a popular initiative for potential candidates.
De-Mystifying 4.9 While most councils try to use plain English in their public documents it is clear that many struggle to transact their business in a manner that is readily intelligible to most citizens! This, ironically, is partly because IT and the internet have made such a wealth of information available. Understandably, it is often easier to produce massive strategies, reports and agendas rather than brief and accessible documents.
4.10 While local authorities have limited time and resources for better PR it is important that they concentrate on developing the skills of existing staff, and appropriate procedures to ensure that all major initiatives are simply and accessibly presented.
5 Supplementary Information about the Participate Programme
5.1 Participate promotes active citizenship, by which we mean – ¾ taking an interest ¾ having your say ¾ influencing decisions ¾ making things happen ¾ challenging people in power
5.2 Being an active citizen might involve taking an interest in local issues, such as proposed changes to public services or helping a community organisation, but equally it might be about campaigning about national and global issues, such as the future of the NHS or climate change. It might involve lobbying the council or other government agencies to change or improve services or alternatively helping to provide services or facilities by self-help initiatives, such as running a village hall. Sometimes it might simply involve participation in consultations or providing time or other support to a charity or local services.
5.3 It might involve short term commitments or something more open-ended, such as deciding to join or participate in a pressure group, political party, trade union or other interest group. The overall objective of Participate is to leave learners with the motivation and knowledge to become more active citizens in local communities.
Context 5.4 Since the “Community Development” initiatives of the 1960s2 there has been 50 years of varied attempts to encourage more active citizenship – mainly directed at deprived or marginalised communities or groups. Attempts to engage the wider community in the political process (with the exception of young people) have been more sporadic. While measuring success is complex, it is questionable how much progress has been made. For example, recent NCVO research concluded: Despite consistent efforts by the last government to get more people involved in public participation and volunteering, only 4 per cent of people are involved in their local services and the number of people volunteering has remained stagnant for the past ten years.3
5.5 Indeed in terms of conventional political participation – voting, membership of political parties, trade unions etc. the position is depressing. For example, membership of the main political parties has fallen from over 4 million in the early 1950s to around 500,000 or less than 1% of the population4. Applying any kind of rigorous
2 A useful short guide can be found at http://www.infed.org/community/b-comwrk.htm 3 See NCVO, Participation: trends, facts and figures: An NCVO Almanac 2011 4 Membership of UK political parties, John Marshal House of Commons Briefing Paper, 17 August 2009 assessment of active citizenship, it is unlikely that more 5% of the population could regularly be included in this category.
5.6 To provide a more balanced picture, it should be noted that pressure group membership has increased steadily over the last 30 years, and international comparisons5 show that the UK is somewhere in the middle of the league table of participatory, advanced democracies. Moreover, such hard evidence6 as does exist suggests that people are just as interested in politics now as they were in the 1970s, even if they are much more cynical about politicians, professionals and for that matter most other traditional community leaders.
The Big & Good Society 5.7 The Government’s “Big Society” initiative has been criticised because it comes at a time of austerity, public expenditure cuts and consequent reductions in the resources of the Community and Voluntary Sector. Nevertheless, it is major attempt at increasing active citizenship. There are three key parts to this agenda according to the Government: • Community empowerment: giving local councils and neighbourhoods more power to take decisions and shape their area. • Opening up public services: our public service reforms will enable charities, social enterprises, private companies and employee-owned co-operatives to compete to offer people high quality services. • Social action: encouraging and enabling people to play a more active part in society.7
5.8 Some Labour critics have claimed that much of this agenda originated in the Blair years.8 Still further criticism has been levelled at both New Labour and Government articulations as being inadequate to foster a true civic and community revival.9
5.9 Leaving these disputes on one side however, it is apparent that there is much common ground on the need for a civic revival to generate active citizenship. This is noted in a recent analysis by the Local Government Group Big Society Taskforce (LGGBST), specifically in a local government setting: There is an unexpected political consensus around the need for a ‘bigger society’ be it labelled as ‘co-operative’ or ‘civic’ or anything else that party politics dictates.
It’s not just about the need to save money, though this is undoubtedly a driving force, it is about the need to recognise that society is changing with a more connected population demanding greater participation in shaping the lives of their communities.10
5.10 While the evidence base that people are “demanding greater participation” can be disputed, there is a much clearer idea of what people expect from public services. For example, recent RSA research concludes that the public:
5 Measuring Active Citizenship through the Development of a Composite Indicator, Bryony L. Hoskins and Massimiliano Mascherini, Social Indicators Research, Volume 90, No.3, July 2008 6 For example http://m-workers.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2427&view=wide 7 http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/content/big-society-overview 8 Ed Miliband rehearses 'good society' guru's lines in conference speech, The Guardian, Tuesday 28 September 2010 9 Labour’s Good Society, Jonathan Rutherford, Social Europe Journal, 28/10/2010 10 Doing something Big: Building a better society together Local Government Group Big Society Task Force, June 2011, page 5 • want public services to be based on notions of the public good, rather than just what’s good for me; • understand the public good largely in terms of universalism, with equality of access to benefits; • are prepared, with prompting, to consider types of equality that relate to outcomes rather than access; • see more potential in playing a strong adult role in public service development locally rather than nationally; and • struggle to see a compelling or urgent case for reforming public services to cope with economic pressures and social changes, and divide evenly on whether to support service cuts or tax rises.11
Take Part Programme 5.11 This national Take Part Programme was funded by the Department for Communities and Local Government and managed by the Community Development Foundation to develop and promote means of increasing community empowerment and engagement, especially in deprived communities. It ended on 31 March 2011 and has a number of important lessons, especially for the LGG aspirations. These are described in detail in the final evaluation and on the independent Take Part website but in this context the key recommendations are: • The impact of Take Part in encouraging local action and stimulating civil society offers important learning for the Big Society agenda and other future empowerment initiatives. • Ongoing support for citizens’ engagement practices must be sustained to ensure that the benefits do not begin to diminish. • A balance is needed between accountability and freedom for local people to target resources effectively. • Meaningful partnerships can enhance active citizenship in times of austerity.12
5.12 Between 2009 and 2011, the WEA in this region played its part in this programme by organising “Regional Take Part Champions”, working with many local partners to pilot different approaches to active citizenship and community empowerment. The twelve initiatives provide a wide range of lessons and some useful contacts that will be utilised in this proposal. Participate also partly addresses a major issue identified in the evaluation – A key issue with short term funded projects is how they can achieve further impact and longer term sustainability. This question is especially relevant during the current period of reductions in public spending13
Potential Learner groups 5.13 Participate has potential to recruit a wide range of participants, which will help the prospect of sustainability and increase the richness of learning. Similar initiatives have tended to target deprived communities or difficult to reach groups, such as young people or ethnic minorities. While learners from such groups would be very welcome, we expect to attract a larger number of people from the 60-70% of those who are interested in politics and public services, but where less than 10% are “active citizens”.
5.14 A very significant opportunity is provided by public service restructuring. This is illustrated by the LGG Taskforce and similar publications. The ability to understand and work across sectors will be a key skill for activists and professionals alike, but
11 What do people want, need and expect from public services? RSA, March 2010, page 4 12 http://www.cdf.org.uk/web/guest/publication?id=475814 13 Empowering communities Regional Take Part Champions: Final Report, April 2011 the training resources of organisations and the time they allow for this is at an all-time low. • In 2009/10 the median gross training expenditure (GTE) was £185 per employee, the lowest level since 2003; looking forwards to the financial year 2010/11, over three fifths of authorities (64 per cent) thought that gross training expenditure would decrease. • GTE per member (at £185) is now at a lower level than in 2003 (at £193 per member).14
5.15 It is clear that community leaders, professionals and politicians alike will increasingly have to rely on self-help to improve their knowledge and skills at a time when they are being asked to respond to fundamental change. There is then the prospect of attracting junior and middle rank officers from local government, NHS, and other public services to such a course, especially if it is officially sanctioned or supported.
The Political Deficit 5.16 Similar courses to the one proposed have been delivered from time to time, these have however mainly concentrated on briefings for the community or CVS activist and have not tended to engage directly with the political system. Participate will engage the main Political Parties, who may in turn be prepared to endorse and provide both learners and speakers.
July 2012
14 Local Government Workforce Survey 2010 England: Main report, LGA Written evidence from Alycia James (CC 44)
• Deciding to stand to be elected as a Councillor for the first time • The multiple of roles of Councillors: fixer, facilitator and community leader • Support (or lack of support) from Councils for newly elected councillors. • What more could be done to prepare councillors for their role. • The choice between full involvement and a full‐time job and the financial implications of being a councillor. • Overloading of councillors with paperwork and a possible role for caseworkers • The importance of recognising the roles and skills of Councillors, especially by employeers • How do we get the next generation involved? • Cabinet versus Backbench and Controlling Group versus Opposition • Deciding to stand for re‐election • How do we make things better and encourage more people to get involved?
I was elected for the first time in 2011 for the ward of Warton on Lancaster City Council at the age of 29. Shortly afterwards I was elected Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group, the second biggest group on our Council. I serve on a number of committees and been Chairman and Vice‐Chairman of three separate committees within the last year. Originally I studied medicine in London as well as History of Medicine and following on from I entered the business world where I have worked for companies ranging from a small family run business to large mutli‐nationals. I’m still in business trying to balance work, being a Voice for Pancreatic Cancer UK as well as being a Councillor.
People often ask why I decided to stand at the local elections to become a Councillor and I cannot answer that in one sentence but a few of my reasons are echoed by many who also serve their communities. Quite simply, I wanted to ‘make a difference,’ you hear that phrased bounded around but still it is true. I wanted to help make some people’s lives a little bit better, to have a positive impact on the area I hoped to represent. It certainly wasn’t for the money; in local government politicians rarely do the role for the money as to be completely honest the remuneration is terrible. I also felt that I could do a better job than the previous councillor, who nearly had to go to by‐election due to non‐attendance of meetings. I thought the community deserved better. The other reason why I stood was that I was inspired by a young councillor and friend, who showed me what I could do to help my community and helped me gain the confidence to stand. I needed someone who could see my potential, to encourage me. Only 6 months before the election I said that I could never put myself forward, as to do so seemed a very scary thing to do, to put yourself out there to be judged by thousands of people but the encouragement he gave me helped me overcome my fears. I wonder how many other people out there, who would make excellent councillors, lack the confidence to put their names forward and what we can all do to help.
Councillors fulfil many roles not least that of leaders of communities and facilitators. Many confuse leadership with doing everything yourself, at first I too fell into this trap. We cannot take on the running of every single project in the area, we as leaders, need to help guide the community, help give them the tools and overall be facilitators. Sometimes you are needed just to get the ball rolling, an odd letter to this organisation or in order to help a project move along, to co‐ordinate between the council and community groups. The perfect example in my ward is about allotments, a community group has been trying for some time to get the project moving and a few questions of officers, a challenging question to a cabinet member in council and that little bit of guidance has moved the project on that bit more, given greater motivation to get things done and hopefully I can help keep the momentum up. The residents can gain a sense of achievement for themselves in a project such as this as well as creating a great asset for the whole area which will last for many years to come.
We are quite lucky in our council that we have councillors who range from teenagers through to, I suspect, early eighties and a good ratio of male to female. Overall though, there are a lot of councillors in the over 50s age group and very few councillors from ethnically diverse backgrounds however this may actually be a reflection the very low percentage of people from a BME background who live within the district. i
The question is whether we, as a council, will be able to retain this mixture and balance over the years to come as there are a number challenges it will face, for example, will the students stay on, if the choice between Council and a full‐time job comes along, what will they choose?
I don’t think that the council can prepare you properly for your role and I’ve spoken to many other new councillors who have felt the same. When you first get elected you are bombarded with briefings about what departments do but a simple list of what is the responsibility of a parish council, city council and county council would have been ideal. Many new councillors I feel overwhelmed when they first start, myself included, not knowing completely where the lines are drawn, which council and even which department does what. The amount of information is vast, you soon get overloaded but it still does not prepare you. Ideally, the situation would be that you shadow the councillor you’re taking over from for a while before, allowing as smooth a transition as possible for residents, however when you take the seat from a different political party you know this is unlikely to happen. Within a few weeks of being elected I was faced with a particularly unpleasant resident who was very threatening to me, to the extent of me having regular contact with the police about him, the council had no methods to deal with such behaviour and thus provided no support at all. A greater mentoring scheme for new councillors I feel would be most welcome, many experienced councillors have gone through a multitude of the things we start to come across and could help the new ones grow into their roles feeling more supported. I was relatively lucky, outside my group I made friends with councillors all over the country, through the Local Government Association (LGA) and Conservative Councillors Association (CCA) and I even was given a mentor, who I am still in contact with. Many councillors don’t use these organisations and I myself found them a valuable lifeline in learning my new roles.
Being a councillor is not easy though. The amount of time which I commit to the roles I hold is extensive, time off work is very difficult for me to get , if I don’t work then I don’t get paid. I have had to make a choice between my involvement and a properly paid full time job. I now have 2 part‐time jobs which are poorly paid but are willing to be more flexible around my council duties. This is a necessity to me as my council allowance, like many other councils, doesn't equate to anything like a part‐time salary despite the hours, in fact what I get is far below minimum wage. Between casework, meetings, writing speeches, investigating various matters, knocking on doors and the many other things we do as councillors, for me I know the hours I put in regularly exceed that which I did in my previous full‐time job. It is exceptionally difficult in our council to have a full‐time job and fully participate on council with various committees, especially as many as still, ridiculously held during weekdays with very few meetings out of the 9am‐5pm timeframe.
A significant problem which also needs addressed is in regards to the paperwork. There is so much at times it is hard to read it all, especially if you have a job as well, how are you supposed to contribute properly and make decisions in these circumstances when you may not know all the facts? I myself know the paperwork is excessive and I wonder if at times what could be put in 50 words is made in to 500. When you get to a meeting they can often be rubber stamping decisions and may seem pointless to some people. So you may have struggled to wade through many hundreds of pages, taken time off work to attend the meeting to feel that it was all a waste of time.
I’ve heard of a suggestion about the potential role for caseworkers. I think it is a great idea although the case work is my favorite part and indeed most of the time the most rewarding part of being a councillor but perhaps they could have a part to play in future.
To many young councillors it appears that a large number of employers don't recognize how great being a councillor truly is. The knowledge and skills which I've learnt in the last year are probably greater than all my years at university. Sadly, last year when I was looking for a new job I was encouraged to actually play down my role as councillor as it may prevent me from getting a job. I’d become Deputy Leader of the second biggest party on council, I was Vice‐chairman of two committees (Personnel and Budget & Performance) and the Chairman of another (The Joint Consultative Committee). I’ve gained in confidence and capability in public speaking and presentations, I’ve learned huge amounts about personnel issues, budget issues and many more. I’ve had to sit down and make some tough decisions over the last year, decisions which affect many other people’s lives and think strategically about the best use of a multi‐million pound budget. Despite all this, my achievements were seen by many employers as a negative rather than a positive thing, many were concerned that I would not be able to commit fully to their company. That’s when you face the dilemma of continuing on and in some cases facing financial hardship doing what you were elected to do, and in my case, love, or pursue a potentially less fulfilling but financially rewarding career.
Sadly, it is still hard to engage certain groups within communities such as young people. Many are not interested in politics and don’t trust politicians which makes it very difficult to get them to engage with us. I’ve tried so many approaches from Question Time panels, Local Democracy Days, and a number of other things as simple as just talking to them in the street or at events. In part I wish we had ward budgets like some other councils which could be used in part to help reach out to these parts of our communities. Another downside is which applies to both backbench and opposition councillors is that most decisions made are made by cabinet with some going to full council. Being in opposition can mean that you end up having little say about what happens in my own ward at times. In addition to this, a lot of people still get confused between which council does what. In both cases you can find yourself being blamed for actions of other councillors or councils, decisions which were not your own and you could have little or no involvement with.
My experience as a councillor has so far lived exceeded my expectations for the most part. I often get letters or emails thanking me from residents but I know that many other councillors here don’t. A survey within our council revealed that many councillors didn’t feel that were getting job satisfaction but for the most part I honestly feel that you get out of it what you put in. My safety campaign is a perfect example, there was a fear among some residents about cold‐callers so I gave everyone a no cold caller card to display if they chose and advice about how to keep safe. It was very popular with residents, most especially older ones. It was a simple campaign but very much appreciated. Seeing things I’ve done to help shape your community for the better gives great satisfaction. At times I’ve noticed that it’s sometimes the very small issues which matter the most and the appreciation shown in recognition makes all the long hours worthwhile.
Despite all the downsides I will be standing for re‐election, in fact I love being a councillor so much I’m standing in the County Council elections too. It has been the most rewarding experience of my life and I cannot recommend it highly enough. I even have my eye of a couple of people who have the potential to be great councillors, I hope that my passion and enthusiasm for the role can rub off on them.
There are still things to be done to make it better, to make it easier to take on a role like this and to be able to stay in these positions.
First, I believe wholeheartedly that we need to show off our councillors, to show the nation what we really do. Perhaps more will people will want to take on the role if it is portrayed more as something good and worthwhile. Councillors are often subjected to negative press but we need to turn the tides and show the positive things we do. We also need to show to our businesses what a great thing it is to have a councillor on‐board, the skills they have from such a role and make it a benefit to have them not an impairment.
We need to help guide people, offering more support and encouragement for those thinking of standing and once elected supporting them through the first few months, perhaps year. Perhaps we should consider guiding councils on better forms of training from the very beginning.
We must tackle the top‐up pension culture, otherwise we will end up (as we already are) with a higher and higher average age of councillor. Making meetings friendlier for those who want and need to have jobs. Councils have to look at the levels of paperwork they produce, reduce it if they can or give people more time to read it when possible, rather than just a few short days. It is time to look again at workload and remuneration for it, if we expect councillors to take on more responsibilities then we must pay them fairly or perhaps introduce shared caseworkers to help take off some of the workload.
Councillors play a vital role in their communities and should be recognised as such. There are always going to be up days and down days but overall it is by far the best thing I’ve ever done, I love being a councillor and I would recommend to anyone to take on the challenge.
i Full article detailing latest population estimates by ethnic group – Lancashire County Council website.
August 2012
Written evidence from Netmums (CC 45)
Netmums Survey: What’s Wrong with Being a Councillor?
The information below is based on the results of a survey carried out by Netmums in July 2012. The survey asked Netmums members a series of questions about their perceptions and experiences of councillors and local government. 104 people completed the survey.
Question 1
Which part of the country are you from?
Response Response Answer Options Percent Count North East England 7.7% 8 North West England 11.5% 12 Yorkshire and Humber 11.5% 12 East Midlands 1.9% 2 West Midlands 9.6% 10 East of England 0.0% 0 London 18.3% 19 South East England 21.2% 22 South West England 6.7% 7 Wales 5.8% 6 Scotland 4.8% 5 Northern Ireland 1.0% 1 answered question 104 skipped question 0
Question 2
Do you volunteer for anything?
Response Response Answer Options Percent Count No, I don't 48.0% 47 Toddler groups/pre-school - helping out 12.2% 12 Toddler groups/preschool - managing 4.1% 4 School - helping out 20.4% 20 School - as a Governor 12.2% 12 School - PTA 14.3% 14 Faith group (eg, at church) 12.2% 12 Brownies, scouts or similar 9.2% 9 Charity 17.3% 17 Other (please specify) 13 answered question 98 skipped question 6
Other (please specify)
• Leading group in school called Lighting the Candle. Helping to keep a church website going. • Local council • Local councillor • Women's Institute • Church Cleaning • Administrator for a counselling organisation • Community Library set up • Local amateur theatre • Community • Looking after other mums' kids on weekends when they work, local community centre fun days • National Trust
Question 3
Are you employed?
Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Yes, full time 34.3% 35 Yes, part time 31.4% 32 I'm a stay at home mum 34.3% 35 answered question 102 skipped question 2
Question 4
Do you have any interest in party politics?
Response Response Answer Options Percent Count No, not really 21.4% 22 I follow the news and I know who I agree with on 62.1% 64 most issues I support a political party and take a keen interest 16.5% 17 answered question 103 skipped question 1
Question 5
Do you have an interest in the decisions your local council makes?
Response Response Answer Options Percent Count No, it all seems very far removed 15.5% 16 I have some interest, but I don't really see that it 28.2% 29 affects me I do take an interest in what decisions are taken and 56.3% 58 how they will affect me answered question 103 skipped question 1
Question 6
Have you ever thought about being a local councillor yourself?
Response Response Answer Options Percent Count No, I'd hate to do that sort of thing 27.5% 28 I'm not really bothered 12.7% 13 I could be interested, but hadn't thought about it 30.4% 31 I have thought about it but decided not to 15.7% 16 I wanted to get involved, but it was difficult to do 9.8% 10 (please tell us more in Q9) Yes, I am a councillor 3.9% 4 answered question 102 skipped question 2
Question 7
In general, what do you think stops more women from applying to be local councillors? (Choose the top 3 barriers, in your opinion) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Lack of confidence 40.2% 41 Wouldn't occur to them to try 29.4% 30 They don't see the point 27.5% 28 Lack of knowledge or skills 18.6% 19 Dislike the arguments that happen in politics 29.4% 30 Modesty - not wanting to put yourself forward for 35.3% 36 election Lack of time 70.6% 72 Lack of or cost of childcare 47.1% 48 Other (please specify) 9 answered question 102 skipped question 2
Other (please state)
• Apathy
• Party system
• Intimidating pompous men
• Aggressive nasty election tactics, I think most women can't see the point in the tale telling you see a lot of the local men going for. Also I don't think its spoken about to young girls as a step to a political career as much as it could be.
• Male dominated environments can be aggressive and intimidating
• Arrogant patronising men
• Pure politics that go on: people often have cliques and they often seem impenetrable Question 8
In the past five years, have you ever been involved in a campaign directed at your local council (eg, to get funding for a new project or protest about a closure of services?) Response Response Answer Options Percent Count I've signed a petition 77.4% 65 I've written a letter 41.7% 35 I've joined a march 14.3% 12 I've been to a local council meeting 23.8% 20 I've met with a local councillor or staff at the 29.8% 25 authority answered question 84 skipped question 20
Question 9
Do you know anything about your local councillors? (Tick those that apply)
Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Quite a lot about who's involved and their 32.4% 33 backgrounds Just a name or two 43.1% 44 What party they are from 33.3% 34 I don't know anything really 26.5% 27 Other (please specify) 4 answered question 102 skipped question 2
Other (please specify)
• I know who our local councillor is and what local issues he was elected for. As long as our local one works for the good of the community that elected him, delivers what was promised, is friendly, approachable and works for all ages/genders/races etc that voted for him I don't need to know the councillors in the areas next to us. The next name would be our local MP's name. • I am a parish clerk.
Question 10
Please tell us more about your thoughts and experiences. If you've been involved with a local council, did you enjoy the experience and what do you see as the barriers? If you are not interested, tell us more about why.
• Would like to do it but I have too many voluntary jobs already
• I get really frustrated with our local councillors as they have all been in office for over 20 years, and some don't even live in their wards. I'd love to get involved, but I do feel like it is a bit of a thankless task at times ‐ but I don't know if that is because the wrong people are in charge! I'd love to see more 'normal' people get involved in local politics, because I do feel that it is something that you can control. I have to say, in the run up to the local elections in May, I found it very hard to find any information about what the candidates were going to do for their ward...... there seemed to be no manifestos and any information was very hard to come by, which I think is disgraceful in this day and age!
• I work full time, sometimes six days a week, am struggling in my own little world and wouldn't want to stand up for election as am quite shy and not very confident. I prefer to change the world in my own little way, not in huge, big, committed ways.
• Interested, but no experience
• My local councillors are self interested and I question whether they actually understand what their constituents want.
• Barriers preventing me becoming a councillor:
o Not having a political background.
o Seems to be a 'who' you know can sway your chances of getting in.
o I'm not an outspoken person!
• I don't support the Conservative party in my area; interested in local issues for ordinary people. I'm a member of the Labour and just joined Labour Friends of the Forces. Tend to sign the Save the Children petitions directed at the Government. Interested in low cost housing development. I feel very strongly that the physical punishment of children should be made illegal tomorrow. That affordable childcare should be for Mums who go out to work. Also support initiatives to address domestic abuse.
• I like being involved, but lack the confidence.
• I am a local councillor and have had three children whilst being a local councillor. Am finding it very hard.
• I used to be a councillor but meetings are during daytimes and not often outside core work hours. It is too difficult now with a child to be involved. Petty party politics also put me off and with the internet your reputation can be damaged due to political vendettas. • I've been a local councillor for almost 5 years and I love it. I didn't see any barriers and it's great making local changes for the better.
• My local councillor has helped me resolve a couple of issues in my local area, i.e. rubbish and traffic management. I find him very approachable and helpful and will contact him again the future if another issue arises.
• I would like to be more involved but I work as a pilot and am away at night quite a lot so can't serve a community if I am not here.
• I work as a Parish Clerk which I love. My role gives me the opportunity to help the communities I work for and is very satisfying. I feel the barrier to women becoming councillors (especially with school age children) is a lack of suitable and affordable childcare and time! I also feel that there is a general lack of understanding about the role of Parish, Town, City, District and County Councils.
• A lamppost was put outside my house and I wanted it moved as it affects the house. I started to complain before it was actually put up, but nearly nine months later, I still hadn't had a response, so I complained online. I got an answer ‐ they weren't going to move it ! So really there is no use to complain as they do whatever they want and don't care who it affects.
• Decisions being made without me being consulted. Challenged and got results. Hate the stupid health and safety issues, pathway only cut once a year, can't walk down it, but not allowed (although willing to do it myself) to cut due to stupid rules and neighbours.
My daughter sexually assaulted at school in February, wrote to [***] via local MP but he could not even be bother to reply (how dare he).
• My father was a Labour councillor in my original home area (South East) back in the 80s and I am a party member still but I don't have the child care or time to get involved these days.
• As a new parent I consider it important to contribute to my community which in turn I consider will benefit my family, neighbours, friends and others. Knowing more about what my council and local councillors do and being in a position to hold them to account/challenge them when necessary is an opportunity that is not afforded to many in other countries but is something that should be appreciated in the UK.
• I work for a local council and want to see more young and female councillors.
• I would love to be a councillor and have a real opportunity to change things in my local town but realistically: 1) I work full time and simply wouldn't have the time to devote to it at present; 2) I detest the mudslinging in both local and national politics ‐ I would want to be a councillor that is only for the people in my town and starts with a clean slate ‐ i.e. I cannot change what's been done before, I cannot work miracles but here's what we've got ‐ and get the town involved in voting/saying what should be done for the town. In my area, I've seen horrendous examples of money being wasted on what councillors 'think' should be done on behalf of the town but did anyone ask the council tax payers? I have worked in the past for two local councils and the waste/attitude was terrible. I had to leave in the end because the attitude towards new ideas was ONLY welcomed when it came from the top (dinosaur management). Any attempt from within staff to change things was met with opposition. I had to leave and now work for a company (private) where new ideas for efficiency/improvements are positively encouraged and welcomed.
• Politics has become a celebrity status, they are not there to serve the community, its more about what they can achieve from the community.
• It's so male dominated sadly ‐ men do less in the home and with childcare so its usually them that seem to be aware of politics ‐ my local Mayoress is a young lady who is childless!
• I was a councillor from 2006 to 2010. I loved it and hope to return in 2014!
• I have been involved in protesting on a couple of issues. I do find that a lot of my friends of a similar age to myself (29) think that it is a waste of time as the council will go ahead regardless of what their constituents think. I have spoken at a council meeting on behalf of local netmums against the closure of our town centre library, our council want to move the library to a less accessible place on the edge of the town centre.
• We normally know our local one as they are not covering huge areas, though I'm not that interested in how many times they had a cold over their life or what their childhood sweethearts’ names were.
It's sad and off putting that even at this ground level how much stupid detail about partner/children's past is brought up, as they don't choose to run, they're just supporting their partner/parent in something they want to do.
This puts me off as I wouldn't put my family and loved ones through that, you see too much of "Their wife/husband tried a drink/cannabis cigarette when they were in college so god forbid at the age of 45 they campaign for tighter or new laws".
How can those in politics know us well enough to lead if they haven't been young, had relationships good or bad and have family issues the same way we all do? Hypocritical is one thing, normal life experiences are another.
I also feel that there are still some lingering views that a woman in politics is a hard nosed ball breaker which women might think can leave husbands open to the fear of being mocked as under the thumb of a "strong" woman not an equal. This may also make some women feel the only way to look or act is to macho up instead of being themselves. You don't see many (some but not many) lady politicians in the more feminine office attire that isn't a sharp dark coloured business suit, so maybe how these women are presented affects the view of women who are not the city exec types on what type of women are expected at local level? These are all minor things but I think women in general are more prone to think a little more on how will it affect those around them and themselves more than a lot of men. These preconceptions have been changing towards the better for a long time but I don't think they have fully gone yet, though I believe most women feel that in the areas of intelligence/age/status and social background they are now even with men.
• I think local councils should not be party political, as parish councils are. This may encourage more local working and less political arguments. Women incur childcare costs that most men do not in volunteering for this kind of job.
• As the daughter of a county councillor who was formerly a town councillor and a district councillor I know the amount of time and effort these posts involve ‐ canvassing to get elected, knocking on doors, getting abuse or indifference, large numbers of meetings, paperwork, phone calls and emails. My father could only do this because my mother chose to be a stay at home mother and be there for all those times he wasn't. I don't think that it's very compatible with a family that is likely to have two wage earners, children and may not have available childcare.
• [***] council is forcing through an exclusive Catholic school (against government policy) and has raised sectarian tensions to boiling point. The borough desperately needs inclusive places yet it prioritises Catholics. It's behaviour and tone has been despicable. We have been forced to move.
• Local authority is still very male dominated and I find as a professional woman who comes into contact with the local authority and councillors that I am often patronised ‐ local authorities waste a lot of money on feasibility studies and exploration and less on making a difference where it is needed.
• I can't be doing with "party" politics ‐ the bickering and posturing between parties means nothing meaningful ever seems to get achieved, and few common sense decisions get made because the party comes first. I prefer Independent councillors, but few stand, and even fewer have the funding to fight the big parties on a level playing field in order to get elected.
• I think it's mainly a gravy train for them to get a lot of freebies at everyone else's expense!
• I intend to stand for election in 2014.
• I have a very personal interest ‐ my son is autistic, and trying to get the help and education to which he is entitled is enormously difficult, so I have had many interactions with the local council, and am currently undertaking a legal challenge to get their illegal policies over‐ turned.
• Never been involved.
• Women with families are just too busy to contemplate doing anything for themselves. Literally fill every day looking after kids/partner/house and working elsewhere. No time at all! Also childcare is ridiculously expensive.
• I think it is a closed shop. I do believe many people have substantial experience, thoughts and skills to offer. The everyday person is generally not found to be represented in local government. People already feel like they are undervalued so why would they bother bringing their thoughts to local council? All members of the public have experienced some form of cutback, yet many of those people could offer up an alternative solution or way to save money elsewhere. There are local people with grass roots experience of projects and services but yet local councils spend money on implementing projects that already exist.
• Politicians are all the same, they're in it for the money and don't really care about the public they serve. Politics is very male dominated because women often find it hard to get suitable affordable childcare (especially single mums like myself).
August 2012 Written evidence from participants in seminar at the Local Government Association (CC 46)
Note of the Seminar hosted by the Local Government Association on 19 June 2012
Committee Members present: Mr Clive Betts Stephen Gilbert Heidi Alexander George Hollingbery Simon Danczuk James Morris Bill Esterson
Councilors present: Joanne Beavis Braintree Conservative Lisa Brett Bath Liberal Democrat Ruth Cadbury Hounslow Labour Robert Cooke Hastings Conservative Gillian Ford Havering Independent Sarah Hayward Camden Labour Jack Hopkins Lambeth Labour Amina Lone Manchester Labour Sioned-Mair Richards Sheffield Labour Colin Noble Suffolk Conservative Terry Stacy Islington Liberal Democrat Clare Whelan Lambeth Conservative Emma Will Kensington and Chelsea Conservative
Committee Members met with a group of councillors to discuss some of the challenges faced in becoming and being a councillor. Discussion was chaired by Cllr Ruth Cadbury, Deputy Chair of the LGA Improvement Board and Cabinet Member at Hounslow Borough Council and Mr Clive Betts MP, Chair of the Communities and Local Government Committee. Below is a note of the points made during discussion of the topics highlighted in bold:
• Motivations for becoming a councillor There were many different journeys to becoming a councillor, which could involve a combination of factors motivating people to stand. For councillors representing political parties these broadly broke down as either through a political route – being previously active in a political party locally – or through involvement in the local community and local issues and so becoming active in local politics. Local parties varied in how actively they sought out and encouraged new candidates to stand; this could be through, events, leaflets and/or personal contact. It was also noted that not all councillors represented political parties and their route to standing would be different to those who do.
The majority of councillors said they were motivated to stand for election because they wanted to make a difference, particularly on a local issue, and being a councillor would enable them to make that difference.
Attendees felt that a lack of awareness among the public about the role of councillors and the impact they could have on their communities was one reason why more people do not stand for election. Another factor identified as discouraging people from standing was public opinion of politicians generally. This meant that councillors had to be personally resilient: one example of this was the critical stance of local press reporting which tended to focus on criticism of local authorities and councillors.
A campaign to promote awareness of the role of councillors could encourage more people to think about standing. A campaign could be co-ordinated by central or local government, though councillors were wary that running a campaign to promote their role might be seen by the public as self-interest. It was noted that the LGA was already running its be a councillor campaign to encourage people to consider standing for election. Be a councillor also involved political parties playing a greater role in encouraging people to think about becoming councillors. Equally councils should be encouraged to raise public awareness of the role of councillor. It was pointed out that Members of Parliament were well positioned to encourage individuals to come forward to stand as councillors, while recognising the need for MPs to stand back from participating in local selection.
• Recruitment and Diversity Strategies to promote a diverse range of councillors needed to be formulated locally, taking into account the particular characteristics of individual areas – a ‘one size fits all’ approach would not work. In many places political parties did reach out to under-represented groups, but this could be variable. Councillors should be representative of their communities, and the people that make up their communities. It was stressed that it was important to focus on representativeness rather than diversity – that councillors should reflect their local population in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, place of residence, economic background and many other factors.
A number of barriers prevented particular sections of society from becoming councillors. The working hours of a councillor could impact on parents and those with other caring responsibilities, those in full time employment or with any other major fixed time commitments. While the ability to ‘job-share’ as a councillor, by coming to mutually beneficial arrangements with other councillors, and other measures could make it easier to juggle other commitments, addressing the scheduling of council business was key to resolving this and each council would have its own methods of managing this.
As a result of negative publicity about allowances, some councillors felt pressure not to claim for reasonable costs incurred in the role, eg childcare expenses.
It was felt that young people working long hours to advance their career would have little spare time to devote to council work. This could be offset if legislation or other incentives were to provide employees with more time off to undertake council duties, and if employers understood the skills employees gained as councillors in a similar way to other civic roles such as the Territorial Army or magistrates.
Remuneration was seen as a barrier by some, particularly if an individual could not afford the loss of income or benefits associated with becoming a councillor. There were differing views as to whether this was an issue that had to be tackled locally or whether there was a role for a national body to advise authorities on remuneration and so take it out of local politics.
• Practicalities and challenges More IT and administrative support would help councillors to manage their work load more efficiently. MPs recognised that the support they received made a significant contribution to their effectiveness. Similar support for councillors should be tailored to the differing needs of executive and backbench members. The greatest barrier to IT and administrative support was council resources. A potential solution would be to redistribute the administrative support already available to officers between officers and councillors. It was also felt that better use could be made of councillors’ time through better use of technology or through fewer meetings/briefings where appropriate.
Information overload and undifferentiated data impeded councillors scrutinising the work of local authorities. Access to better quality, more straightforward data, for example, about the demographics of the area and council performance, would make it easier for councillors to make decisions.
It was suggested that in some areas resources might be redistributed by reducing the number of councillors, though the opposite point was made that in many areas with complex communities and needs there was less scope to reduce the number of councillors.
• Community Leadership Community Budgets and the Localism Act had the potential to impact greatly upon the way councillors work and their role as leaders of communities. Many councils had already devolved some budgets to wards or divisions to give communities more influence over local decisions; the impact that devolved budgets had had varied from place to place, but where done well this was a good tool for community engagement.
There are many challenges in taking on a more prominent ‘community leader’ role including reconciling or mediating disputes in divided communities and ensuring that all sections of the community are represented. There were discussions around voter turn-out and the impact on mandate.
Joined-up messages from central and local government on the role of councillors, MPs, and the recently introduced Community Organisers would be helpful. The complexity of governance structures risked confusing the public, particularly in multi-tier areas, where with both county and district (and potentially parish/town) councillors, it might be difficult for people to identify who their community leader was, and which tier had responsibility for which service.
Single member wards could make the system simpler for the public and give councillors a greater sense of responsibility, though this could increase the workload of individual councillors, especially in highly populated urban wards.
• Training and Skills These days most councils provided a good basic induction, often drawing on the excellent training provided for councillors by the LGA both immediately after election and later for further development of the more experienced. Prospective councillors coming from a political background might have some knowledge of council structures and procedures but those coming to the role without this experience had a steep learning curve when elected to a council. This was compounded by the fact that the national curriculum also did not provide the general public with a clear understanding of local politics or local government. It was recognised that the role of councillor was complex and support and training was vital for councillors to meet their potential. Many councils provided councillor training including inductions but this varied from council to council. The consequence was that it could take a long time for new councillors to become familiar with council procedure, and a lack of training and support in this area could put them off standing for re-election. Training and support had to continuously evolve to reflect the changing needs and challenges of the role.
A qualification covering the range of skills required by councillors could be useful, but the role and requirements would depend on each council and individual. If employers could be made aware of the benefits of the skills developed by councillors they might encourage and support staff to become councillors. Appendix A Councillors and the Community Inquiry – councillors’ seminar attendees’ thoughts on the future role of councillors.
31 July 2012
Members of the Communities and Local Government (CLG) Select Committee met with a group of councillors to discuss some of the challenges faced in becoming and being a councillor. Discussion was chaired by Cllr Ruth Cadbury, Deputy Chair of the LGA Improvement Board and Cabinet Member at Hounslow Borough Council and Mr Clive Betts MP, Chair of the CLG Select Committee. Attendees were not able to address all the points raised by the Committee, who asked that attendees submit their thoughts on:
• How do you see your role changing in future? For example, will the localism agenda and the likely rise of mayors change the role for the better or worse? • If there was one thing you could change to improve the lot of being a councillor, what would it be?
This note provides councillors’ responses to these questions and does not represent the Local Government Association’s corporate view.
The Future Role of Councillors
• How do you see your role changing in future? For example, will the localism agenda and the likely rise of mayors change the role for the better or worse?
1. In response to reduced resources, the role of councillors will continue to be more important as spending is prioritised. Sensible councils will reflect this by giving more power and authority to councillors. Greater efficiencies will be found by prioritising the real needs of a neighbourhood or ward. This is where the ward Councillor should be empowered.
Many councils already invest budgetary responsibility or at least priority setting (indirect budgetary responsibility) in local councillors through a variety of democratically constituted forums, ward budgets, or direct approval of investment priorities (e.g. Road resurfacing)
Some councils like Lambeth are going even further and devolving budgets to user groups and local residents with the councillor acting as commissioner, encouraging residents to "see what they can do" or whether particular activities need being done at all.
This is being reflected at a senior level in Lambeth for Cabinet Members themselves to become the commissioners of services. This is the next natural step and brings procurement and commissioning into much sharper focus on neighbourhood needs and outcomes, where whole systems and outcomes can be tested and written into contracts or service level agreements. These have often been missed by fault or design, meaning cost savings may have been made by the spending department but simply picked up somewhere else.
This requires a significant skills investment in councillors around finance, strategic statementing, any skill someone at the top of an organisation could need and this requires further investment in councillors. Once councillors are seen to be actual power brokers with an interesting and important role and one councillor is confident that the calibre will increase at a faster rate.
2. During these austere times it will be more difficult at a ward level to help those on benefits who see changes in Housing Benefit & Council Tax Benefit which will adversely affect them. Recipients will perceive the council as having made the changes not the government. There will be a real need to develop community resilience as services are cut. This may be harder in areas which are already depressed and where there is a very small middle class base to galvanise.
One councillor is not convinced that Mayors will be what local people see as the answer and suspects it will depend on how effective the Police and Crime Commissioning (PCCs), once operating, are perceived to be.
• If there was one thing you could change to improve the lot of being a councillor, what would it be?
1. British politics must be the only industry in the world where there is no significant relationship between those at the operational level and those at the strategic. Good businesses are agile, where operational tweaks and changes in the dynamics of delivery can be properly responded to. We have seen recently the dangers of those at the top not being in control of the basic business they make decisions on, whether that is Enron, Goldman Sachs or anyone involved in the sub prime mortgage crisis in the US.
At the moment we are generally encouraged to lobby on big ticket items which are complex to change when legislation is going through Parliament, or in response to consultations. What would be hugely beneficial would be the ability to make small changes.
The biggest thing that would vastly improve our lot would be a standing body of MPs whose responsibility it is to respond to councils' requests for small changes to legislation, closing loop holes without requiring long and timely acts of Parliament.
2. Another councillor believes that state-of-the-art IT equipment with more administrative back up would improve the lot of being a councillor.
Appendix B - from Cllr Ruth Cadbury Councillors and the Community Inquiry – reflections on the future role of councillors.
31 July 2012
Members of the Communities and Local Government (CLG) Select Committee met with a group of councillors to discuss some of the challenges faced in becoming and being a councillor. Attendees were not able to address all the points raised by the Committee, who asked that attendees submit their thoughts on:
• How do you see your role changing in future? For example, will the localism agenda and the likely rise of mayors change the role for the better or worse? • If there was one thing you could change to improve the lot of being a councillor, what would it be?
This note provides a summary of my reflections on this area.
The role of councillors is changing. As more powers are devolved to local communities and neighbourhoods, councillors will be playing even more active roles in their communities. The role is therefore becoming more demanding and expectations are rising. But for many councillors, much of their time is spent not at the front line but preparing for and attending meetings. There’s no doubt that councillors play a hugely important role in decision-making, overview and scrutiny, but are we making best use of their valuable time and skills by imposing a lengthy schedule of meetings and accompanying paperwork? It is also important to remember that it is not only meetings and accompanying work that takes time: basic administration, such as emailing, chasing and following up casework etc, often has a significant impact on councillors, particularly when there is limited administrative support.
If the focus of councillors’ time is changing, have we got the systems in place locally to help them respond? Councils might look to review their own practices and ask themselves whether their systems are helping councillors work directly with their ward and division, or whether the emphasis is on meeting attendance. This could mean a rebalancing of back office support towards work at on the front line.
The required changes to back office support are underlined by the further extension of directly elected mayors and whole place community budgets: if there is joint and combined work across councils and further devolution of the executive, there needs to be an extension of appropriate back office support.
The Localism Act has given localism a boost. It has created the formal rules, with measures such as the General Power of Competence, but we now need the cultural change that can translate these rules into better outcomes for our local people.
Written evidence from Warren W Hateley (CC 47)
In our town there is a generation of people who hold the post of town councillors (some have been in place for 20 years) and to say it is a closed society / old boy / family net work would be under stating the situation. Their mind set is so much set in concrete they do not want to see change and we have seen evidence of this in the past over decisions which have or have not been made. The prime example is James Dyson who some years ago wanted to expand his manufacturing base within the town. The site opposite his present premises was vacant he wanted to expand and employ an extra 400 people. In return under a 106 agreement he was prepared to build a new leisure centre. Needless to say it went to planning committee and was they voted against. Consequence was Dyson moved his manufacturing abroad ( previously the option had had not been on his radar ) outfall was there were 125 redundancies. Schools that are over prescribed after 18 months building which is out of step with services etc etc etc.
Up until recently the councillors meeting were very much a closed shop, minutes were being produced well after the events of meetings notices were not common place information published in a very circumspect way but seen to meet the necessary stator requirements. There was no transparency meetings held in camera with developers / interested parties and until members of the community pressed for change through a local web site being established and more people attended public meetings. So that information all of a sudden became available in the public domain rather than buried.
The closed shop was managed in such a way that the chosen few became councillors. This is now not the same but there is a small nucleus of the old guard and the new kids on the block and until there is complete change in the town leadership there will be resistance for change. In the mix there is no commercial representation and the town lacks focus. The budget for promoting the town is £2,600 this year bearing in mind we have 60,000 visitors in any one year. Can I get them to see sense it is virtually impossible the only way progress can be made and is made is outside the council thorough various committees / associations like the resident association which has over 2000 members.
Other examples were the original application for WOMAD to come to the town thank God that common sense prevailed in that case, the biggest impact was the closure of Lynham 3500 jobs out of the economy and £890 million black hole – councillors / military rejected a commercial solution to potentially employ 6000 people year two, establish new housing, education centres ( one which included a proposal from James Dyson to set up a engineering apprenticeship establishment together with a catering college ) a county showroom, a renewable energy centre producing 45% of Wilts energy requirement the old guard in the disguise of our Tory MP James Grey won the day, we have recently had proposals for two super markets on the outskirts of the town again both put on hold politics played a big part despite both offering employment for 200 people and reduction of travelling for 70% of the town that drive at least 12 miles to shop in super markets in Chippenham.
However the times are a changing through our new Area Board structure and although the back bone of the previous diehard regime has been broken the consequences change are starting to have an effect on attitudes. But we are still 5 years away from what I would regard as an open book and forward community lead society.
I tried getting involved in the change process by being the chairman of the local chamber I got sucked into the political swamp, fell foul of not in my back yard people, the blue rinse brigade and I also got fed up with banging my head against a brick wall. So I decided that I had better things to do with my Day. If I had the time and money I would put myself forward because time is what you need and running a business and being a councillor do not mix.
July 2012 Written evidence from Councillor Iain Malcolm, Leader of South Tyneside Council (CC 48)
Elected members are at the heart of all we do — from ward members championing their neighbourhoods, and resolving residents' queries, to cabinet members and committee chairs providing strategic leadership and scrutinising the performance of the council and its partners.
South Tyneside already has a national reputation for its innovative approach to meeting the needs of its residents and its through the knowledge of our members that we have been able to innovate with confidence, in everything from developing a new housing 'ALMO', redesigning area-based services, or launching our strategic partnership with BT.
Despite being amongst the hardest hit local authorities in the country in terms of financial allocations from central government, we are still committed to delivering our vision that South Tyneside will be an outstanding place to live, invest and bring up families. Over the last year, we have made efficiency savings of £35 million (on top of the £20 million in the previous year) with no major service closures. We have now identified a further £20M for 2012/13. This is an extraordinary level of savings for South Tyneside and it's thanks to the commitment of our elected members that we've achieved it whilst continuing to deliver rapidly improving services to our residents.
Close political and managerial partnership has been key to meeting this challenge. We have established a new strategic forum between members and officers to steer the organisation through these major challenges. SLMB ('Strategic Lead Member Briefing') met for 24 whole morning sessions in 2012 — a massive commitment from elected members, and their vision and insight into the priorities of our residents ensured that we made the right decisions when reshaping our services.
These strengths are also mirrored on the ground. In 2006, the IDE&A highlighted South Tyneside as a Beacon Council for the role of Elected Members as Neighbourhood and Community Champions. In 2011, the MJ also recognised us as winner of MJ Achievement Award for Excellence in Democratic Services, and we hosted vists from councils including Cambridge, Sunderland, Newport, Ealing, Hull, and Nottingham, all of whom were keen to learn from our success.
Community Area Forums
Our Community Area Forums (CAFs) have existed since 1973 and are our key democratic interface with the public. CAFs are held every six weeks so that local people can find out about what is happening in their area and have a chance to say what they think. All decisions are made by either all elected members at CAF meetings or by the Chair and Vice Chair of the CAF in consultation with the relevant ward members. Each CAF now includes a range of business and community representatives.
In 2002 a Members Community Areas Forum Review Steering Group which was established to look at issues affecting CAFs, including the Area Management Initiatives Scheme (finance from the corporate centre allocated to CAFs to spend). Consultation with residents showed the general feeling was that the scheme was valuable with many positive features, particularly the flexibility to respond to local needs with a strong emphasis on local control and member leadership. From 2005/2006 CAFs received additional funding, with a strong emphasis on supporting local priorities. Funding was increased by £90,000 to £349,080 with the additional money being allocated chiefly for environmental schemes. Members were encouraged to operate a 70/30 split on environmental/social funding. Forums were able to set CAF specific operating procedures to ensure they retained control of their allocation allowing decisions to be made depending on local needs and priorities.
In 2009/10 efficiencies made by South Tyneside Homes provided an additional £600,000 to be reinvested in housing services. The funding was allocated to Forums on the basis of the number of council houses, aimed at providing local neighbourhood solutions to council housing issues.
In 2011/12 increased demand for environmental initiatives led to additional funding being allocated to this area. In April 2011 Cabinet agreed the following allocations.
• Housing Initiatives Scheme (including increase) £700,000 • Environmental Initiatives Scheme £420,000 • Social Scheme £254,000
Our work with Partners through the ST Partnership A strong local partnership framework has always been a key feature within South Tyneside and has provided the foundation for many of our achievements in recent years. Elected members are at the core of that framework, taking an active role in influencing and challenging the range of organisations we work with, to ensure a focus on the priorities that matter most to our residents.
There is no longer a requirement for partners to work together under a local strategic partnership and at the end of 2010 we took this opportunity to review our arrangements in the context of the changing political and economic climate.
In 2011 we launched a new and invigorated South Tyneside Partnership, which built on the success of previous arrangements, but was reshaped to reflect new priorities and new ways of working. The new partnership is smaller in size and much more focused, with greater effort concentrated on 'action not words'.
As well as securing the involvement of a number of influential partners in the new arrangements, elected members remain at the heart of the partnership. All cabinet members are represented on at least one of the 'priority boards' ensuring democratic accountability across the partnership. The partnership will continue to evolve so that it remains fit for purpose to tackle the challenges we face, but it is already delivering improvements.
Progress on key priorities such as safeguarding, high impact families and tackling youth unemployment has firmly established that the new partnership is more joined up than ever before, with partners across the five priority boards recognising their collective responsibility for tackling 'wicked issues'. Elected members are key to making the links between the individual boards, back into the council's activities and with the communities they serve.
Involving more councillors in the decision making process
South Tyneside Council has been operating its existing Governance arrangements since the Local Government Act was passed in 2000 with only small changes in subsequent years. As the new Localism Act 2011 gave local authorities the opportunity to review their governance arrangements, we revised the way we worked across each area of the council's governance structure: • Executive decision-making (cabinet) • Non-executive decision-making (standing committees) • Scrutiny • Community-level governance (CAFs)
A particular focus was to increase member involvement in the commissioning of externally provided services.
Commissioning Panels The direction of travel for most councils is for a greater multiplicity of service providers. As we developed our own new operating model' it was important that elected members were still able to shape the services that the council commissions from third parties, while also holding these providers to account for their performance on behalf of their constituents.
Contracts Performance Panel We established a Contracts Performance Panel (CPP) to provide members with the opportunity to represent the views of the communities they serve and scrutinise the performance of a range of organisations who provide services to South Tyneside Council (inluding our Strategic Partnership with BT). The purpose of this panel is to • Agree a work-plan at the start of the year to scrutinise a range of larger contracts (with potential for more focused sub-groups) • Comment on service specifications to ensure that they are focusing on the outcomes that matter most to South Tyneside residents • Ensure that all commissioning activity contributes to the council's commitment to local spend (the 'Supply South Tyneside' Initiative). • Provide a sounding board for members on strategic commissioning issues. • Through regular performance reports and service reviews, comment on the effectiveness of commissioned services, with a particular focus on: 9 Customer satisfaction 9 Value for money
The work-programme this Contracts Performance Committee encompasses a range of contracts and partnerships, including:
• BT Partnership • Grounds Maintenance contracts • Local Education Partnership (school buildings) • Highways Maintenance contracts • Waste Partnership • Street Lighting and Highway Signs contract • Fleet and commercial vehicles • Adult Residential/Domiciliary Care Care contracts • Children's Fostering and Residential care contracts • Recycling service • Tyne and Wear Museums partnership • ITA Transport Contracts • TEDCO contract • APCOA parking contracts The CPP reports directly to South Tyneside Council's Cabinet, and will have the power to recommend urgent action (including ending contracts) if they consider that the performance of a provider is inadequate, or if demand can be met from other existing services through new models of service delivery.
Housing Performance Panel Given the strategic importance of providing high quality housing for our residents (and the dominance of housing matters in the workload of many elected members), a Housing Performance Panel was also established to provide members with the opportunity to represent the views of the communities they serve and scrutinise the performance of the housing provision we commission externally.
The purpose of this panel is to: • Help to shape the priorities in South Tyneside Homes' Annual Delivery Plan in advance of its agreement by South Tyneside Council's Cabinet • Provide a sounding board for broader strategic housing issues, and scrutinise the supply and mix of good quality housing to meet the needs and aspirations of current and future residents. • Through regular performance reports, comment on the effectiveness of housing services against the STH Delivery Plan, as well as other housing support services (including Extra Care, and Supporting People contracts), with an emphasis on: • Customer satisfaction 9 Support for vulnerable tenants 9 Re-let times and empty properties 9 Repairs and maintenance 9 Rent collection 9 Sustainability of our housing estates
The HPP will report directly to South Tyneside Council's Cabinet, and will have the power to recommend urgent action if they consider that the performance of a housing provider is inadequate.
Existing Scrutiny committees These have retained the same powers to scrutinise the discharge of any of the Council's executive functions, but now have an explicit focus on services delivered 'internally' by the council and the performance of other public sector service partners in South Tyneside.
In addition to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee our three current scrutiny select committees were consolidated down to two to better reflect the council's structure and piorities:
Overview & Scrutiny, Coordinating and Call in (OSCCI) This Committee has its own separate Chairperson and Vice Chairperson, but will also include the chair and vice-chairs of the two new 'People' and `Place' scrutiny select Committees. In addition, OSCCI will • approve an annual overview and scrutiny programme • determine which Committee should consider an issue where there is overlap • scrutinise cross-cutting issues where this is appropriate • 'call-in' decisions made but not yet implemented • Oversee 'corporate' issues (e.g. finance, equality and diversity, HR) • undertake scrutiny of partners ‘People' Scrutiny This committee will have their own separate chair and vice-chair and deal with matters relating to: • Adult and Community Learning • Adult Safeguarding and Social Care • Children's Safeguarding and Social Care • Family Support • Fostering and Adoption • Education and Building Schools for the Future • Services for Young People • Health and Wellbeing
‘Place' Scrutiny This committee will have their own separate chair and vice-chair and deal with matters relating to: • Asset Management • Cultural Services • Economic Regeneration (including Marketing) • Housing Policy • Planning, Built Environment, Development & Control • Regulatory Services (including Trading Standards)
Training for elected members
South Tyneside Council is committed to investing in training and development for all its Elected Members. In support of this, the Council has achieved Member Development Charter status and Beacon Status for Elected Members as Community Champions.
Our Training and Development Guide offers a range of development opportunities, to ensure that Elected Members have the skills they need to carry out their role effectively. This helps to ensure that Members have the skills necessary to fulfil the following needs: • Individual needs — identified through Personal Development Plans (PDPs) • Committee needs — training necessary to ensure members of specific committees are up to date with current legislation and current issues • Organisational needs — required to help the Council achieve its vision and priorities
We have a dedicated Training and Development Officer who not only organises the training and development, but also carries out annual Personal Development Plan meetings for all Members. We have a cross-party Member Development Group which is chaired by the Deputy Leader and is held bi-monthly.
To ensure that newly elected Members can fulfil their roles as soon as possible we hold an Induction day; which is partly facilitated by the Chief Executive. This helps Members understand corporate priorities as well as the other key issues to help orientate them in their new role. In addition to this the Leader holds a 'Summit' on an annual basis (with prominent national speakers) which gives all Members an opportunity to hear about new initiatives and offers a valuable arena for discussion. Key issues for councillors and local authority governance
Elected member demographics - we need to do more ensure that elected members reflect the local communities that they serve. We are proud that almost half of our elected members are women, but councillors still tend to be recruited from among the retired/long term sick, and although we are now holding more evening meetings, until greater responsibilities are devolved to councils, more professional people will simply refuse to serve sensing that it is a waste of their time
Remuneration — the current system leads to wide variations in remuneration packages to elected members, and considerable controversy among the public. Local independent panels play a key role, but they would benefit from a national framework to guide them (we used regional analysis to develop our own local remuneration scheme). Criticism of councillors' allowances would be reduced if remuneration was set and paid via HM Treasury.
Getting elected - more people need to be encouraged to stand for the council. Could each candidate have one piece of election literature delivered free by the Royal Mail? Alongside this, an increase in the number of nominee supporters required for a candidate to stand (or the imposition of a modest 'deposit').
July 2012
Written evidence from Somerset County Council (CC 49)
The role of the council and councillors in ‘new nuclear’
Somerset is a large rural County located at the heart of the Southwest with a population of approximately half a million people. Local Government is organised on a two tier basis with the County Council and five district councils. Somerset finds itself in the vanguard of new nuclear development with the first new station proposed to be located in West Somerset District.
1. Summary
Somerset County Council, Sedgemoor District Council and West Somerset are statutory consultees for the application by EDF Energy for a Development Consent Order (DCO) allowing the construction of two new nuclear reactors at Hinkley Point C and the associated development. The project will cost in excess of £10 billion and the consequences will affect the communities of Somerset for some 70 to 100 years.
This local project is of national significance and is subject to Ministerial and Departmental interest. At the same time, the potential effects on the local community, services, and economy, both now and in the future, are significant and complex. Councillors at all three tiers of local government are actively engaged in the many decisions related to the project.
The many opportunities and risks at play in Somerset reflect just how demanding the challenges facing councillors in the 21st century can be. Local councillors are making decisions on behalf of their communities that, it is no exaggeration to say, will have a profound effect on future generations both locally and nationally.
2. Background
The proposed site of the power station is in a remote, rural and very sensitive area at the foot of the Quantock Hills which was the first Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty nationally. Because of the scale of the project, and the location of the site, the construction phase places an enormous burden on local communities in increased traffic levels, noise and air pollution on roads that were not designed for this volume and weight of traffic.
The scale of the project also means there are vast economic opportunities on offer nationally and for surrounding areas if these can be captured. The resource and skills needed to capture what is on offer are fragile and this fragility means there is a danger the benefits may not be fully realised.
The scale of the proposed project means there will be many impacts on local communities over the lifespan of the development. For example, there will be a considerable impact on the demand for housing during the build period that impacts on local housing affordability, as well as an impact on demand for health, education and other welfare issues. The potential influx of new communities into Somerset raises concerns around social cohesion from including escalation in crime levels such as those associated with prostitution and drugs.
Local authorities are hopeful that they can secure community benefits over and above mitigation of planning issues. However, the community of West Somerset is an older community and many of the benefits will not accrue to the current generation of people that will have to bear the discomfort of the construction phase.
Local authorities must also absorb the cost and human resource burden to engage with Government and EDF energy throughout this complex process. The complexity is increased by the abolition of the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) and introduction of the new National Infrastructure Directorate within the Planning Inspectorate. As statutory consultees, councillors have a responsibility to respond on behalf of their communities to elements of the examination of the application under a relatively new planning process designed to fast track nationally significant infrastructure projects such as this one.
The new planning process is untried and untested, and the full impact on councils is as yet unknown. The complexity of the situation is increased by the need for simultaneous planning processes for ancillary works such as the jetty and earth movements. Again local authorities bear the brunt of these requirements.
3. The challenge for councillors
The scale, scope and subject matter involved in the Hinkley Point C project mean this is new territory for councillors. The complex and interlinked set of local and national issues combined with often very different public opinions on the benefits of nuclear energy have made this a huge task for councillors to take on.
Members needed to understand the implications – positive and negative – of the project and the ten-year construction period to be able to inform their communities and feed back any emerging concerns.
As well as informing themselves of the relevant details of the project itself – the application documents for the £10 billion scheme ran to some 55,000 pages – members had to become acquainted with a new planning process which relies heavily on written submissions and web-based information.
This was further complicated in the case of Hinkley Point C because the applicant applied for planning permission under the Town and Country Planning Act for part of the project to allow an early start on site before the Development Consent Order (DCO) was considered. It also applied to another organisation, the Marine Management Organisation for consent to build a temporary jetty.
As statutory consultees, the local authorities affected by the development were invited to submit a Local Impact Report (LIR) to the examining panel. They were not obliged to do this but the brief for the panel is to weigh the national need for the project in the balance with the anticipated local impact when reaching its decision. The quality of the evidence in the LIR would be vital and much of the evidence would come from the communities through their elected representatives.
As well as working with local communities, the council will be interacting with different government departments – the Departments for Energy and Climate Change, Communities and Local Government, Business Innovation and Skills, and HM Treasury – and Ministers, all with differing drivers and no joined-up approach, meaning the work of the council becomes yet again more complex as it balances local needs with national direction.
At the local level all three tiers of local government are involved. They all have strong views, and these views are not always the same. A vibrant local democracy helps ensure that the decisions taken will be the right ones for Somerset, however it adds another layer of complexity to an already complicated situation.
The weight of responsibility on councillors to understand the issues at play, accurately represent them to their residents, and then balance the needs of different communities when making far-reaching decisions should not be underestimated. They are at the heart of decisions that will affect not just their local area, but the national economy, for decades to come.
Councillors are elected representatives of their communities. They are not chosen on the expertise or knowledge about nuclear power, but as the best candidate for their division or ward. For many, the tasks they are now undertaking are far outside what they might reasonably have expected to deal with when they stood for election.
The example of Hinkley Point C demonstrates just how much the role of the councillor is changing, and the complexity and importance of the decisions they are responsible for. It is vital that councillors receive the support they need to ensure the best outcomes for local communities are achieved.
July 2012 Written evidence from Cllr Lynda Jones (CC 50)
Why did I run and what are my impressions? What would I change?
My name is Lynda Jones I am a local councillor for Cheshire West and Chester in the Winsford Over and Verdin Ward. I am a conservative and share my ward with 2 labour councillors. I am 50 years old married with 3 children aged 20, 11 and 6. I had a previous career in Recruitment, Contract Cleaning, sales and manufacturing before I became a housewife in 2006. I ran for election for the first time in May 2010.
A few years ago I became involved in the campaign against a waste incineration facility in Northwich through an ex colleague of my husbands. Working and lobbying to help try to prevent this made me want to be able to help the local person’s voice heard. On top of my ability to get this done locally in discussions with my council made me feel that I could add some value locally.
At this point it is worth noting that I had NEVER been involved in any local politics, had never been a member of a political party and understood nothing about how political system worked and the influencing skills required, aside from watching back episodes of Yes Minister.
What I did have was a reasonably successful career in business which had been continuously interrupted by my requirement to support my spouse as he travelled from job to job and built his career through the eighties and nineties. I was solid commercially, had an inbuilt capability to negotiate, driven to achieve targets and drive for results the usual business stuff that people discuss at interviews.
I had been on maternity leave and decided that a 5 year sabbatical I would turn to a new path and egged on by some friends entered the political arena in earnest.
Following a selection meeting I was put for forward as a candidate by the Conservative party for Winsford. I chose the Conservatives not through any deep seated political motive only that they closely reflected what my views and background was - if you work hard you should succeed and be rewarded. My family came from a working class West Lothian Scottish background totally labour and my father and mother would turn in their grave if they could now see me as one of Thatcher’s children turning out in Thatcher’s blue.
However path chosen I turned to the campaign and strategy.....what a bizarre experience that was. I was handed over to the local team who were undoubtedly driven and motivated towards their cause and ideals however explanatory notes and an overarching strategy were a little thin on the ground. The overwhelming message was that the Liberal Democrats were the issue and that campaigning should start in late March for the May election. I ignored the advice and started my campaign in early February and armed with batches of leaflets and maps I took to the streets and walked...... and talked and walked. I will not bore you with the next 2 months however during that time it became apparent that local council elections are fought on a team of 3 and that Labour was the incumbents not the Lib Dems.
On May 5th 2011 I was voted in by 7 votes, my 2 partners narrowly missed out and I was returned for Winsford with 2 Labour local councillors who had been in situ for a while.
Then it was down to business and creating an agenda to make a difference.....at this point I should state that you would not take local politics seriously if you had to make a living out of it and my first year with a crammed diary was manic. What you instantly notice is that local politics is a bit like life and a normal job there are those who contribute and work very hard and there are those who get elected to obtain the badge and then do absolutely nothing...... and I mean nothing....but they will remain nameless. Back to my working hours, I was doing 50hrs plus a week plus weekends and evenings and calls and letters for 11k per anum...... I was being asked to make decisions on serious issues for £4 an hour...... I had wrangles over child care payments for my 5 and 11 year old...... the objective has to be the creation of a system that rewards representation of the community but also encourages participation and at the same time does not discriminate against minority groups. The current system is not designed to reward results, value adding participation or to encourage representation from underrepresented groups.
Racism has been brought back into focus on the football pitches of the UK in the last year and it still slow burns in local politics. Women who cannot get full reimbursed expenses for childcare will not bring a new housewife faction racing into politics. However the main enemy of local politics is those who are elected to add real value and experience in the majority of cases do not. Probably shocked with the level of responsibility, or simply victims of a voting system, that is designed around party lines or a nice surname not on the capability of the individual.
I have seen the broad spectrum of this in just 12 months, from the kid that gets elected and has no experience of life, to the individuals who want to be invisible and add nothing, to the people in all parties who do not even seem to believe in their own parties’ agenda or politics. Or the paper candidates put forward that don’t even want to be involved.
My final issue is with the local press...... just shows my naivety when I stepped up for the role, I thought that reporting would be fair and balanced, I thought that press would be run on local stories and achievements, sadly this is not the case, I live and work in a Labour dominated area the newspaper wants to print stories with a pro Labour bias. If Labour do nothing and add no value they still get a good press that perpetuates the myth and recreates the flawed system. They always want to berate new ideas or policies however never have any plausible alternatives.
What would I change if I was painting a new canvas?
> Briefing packs and inductions for all prospective candidates that outlined their mission and their responsibilities.
> Payment on results on attendance and visibility. I would have less representatives and increase payments but still make an overall saving. 2 per ward opposed to 3. I would also limit the terms a councillor can stand for to ensure turnover and fresh ideas but this introduction should be staggered.
> Payments to councillors based on overall council performance vs. its mission and targets
> Improved payments will bring in better quality candidates. However in balance powers need to be given to Chief Execs of councils to warn Councillors that are not participating and performing duties to the required standard
> Review the requirement for town councillors...... it seems one layer too many
> Ensure the number of women candidates and minority groups had larger representations at elections
> Have Councillors who live in their own area - it so important it is so locally focused
> Have each Councillor outline their achievements and credentials and age on the polling booths. No party would want to potentially stop new candidates who do not have a record a suggested alternative for those would be that they make promises and are able to demonstrate if they have achieved them.
> Ensure the local press report on issues and achievements not simply on party lines.
> To ensure you are eligible you should sit a test, set by their local Council, this will help to identify suitability and commitment. If you were not driven and motivated to serve this would help to sort out the true candidates from the time wasters. Tax payers want and deserve to have the best working on their behalf. You would not let a person loose on the roads without a passed driving license, why would you then let them serve in local government and not only pay them public money but allow them to influence spend of public money without testing their suitability to serve.
In summary I have enjoyed my time as a Councillor despite the challenges I have a leader who rewards effort and bases his decisions on performance but this could be unique. We have a great opportunity to make a difference however that difference needs to be a collective effort by the whole team across party boundaries. My goal is to make Winsford and Whitegate better, safer and enjoyable and advantageous to live in...... that is a universal goal but the system is not focused on that outcome.
Will I stand again in 3 years time , yes I will, however my husband provides financial support to enable me to operate effectively and why I say operate effectively I mean that you have to put at least 50 hours a week into this role, beyond that you need to work at home both responding to correspondence and answering queries. You have to be visible, approachable and reachable...... if you cannot do these things you will not make an impact.
You also to have an effective contribution at meetings, forums and events and to do this you need a level of life and work experience which will allow you to add value.....again you need to have these skills and knowledge to make a difference.
Overall I enjoy the experience, I love helping individuals and groups and providing guidance, leadership and insight and I have found it a life enhancing experience.
July 2012
Supplementary written evidence from Cllr Lynda Jones (CC 50a)
It is difficult to substantiate the real impact that Cheshire West and Chester Council has made upon electorate representation. It is likely that electorate representation is a reflection of the actual selection processes within each of the political parties themselves, which is outside the influence of the Council.
However, there are a number of actions that the Council has undertaken since April 2009 in order to support members in their role to engage with their communities, including ‘hard to reach’ groups such as women, young people and ethnic minorities.
Leadership and Direction The Council has embraced the equality and diversity agenda and raised its profile by having the Leader of the Council as its Portfolio Holder. The Council has a pro-active Equality and Diversity Member Champion that works closely with minority communities, supporting very visible events across the borough. There is a clear message to all minority groups that the Council wants to engage with them and will give them a voice.
One of the Council’s key priorities is to narrow the gap between our most and least disadvantaged communities. In order to achieve this we ensure that equality monitoring and impact analysis is carried out and barriers to opportunity for a range of communities covering race, disability, rural, geography, age, sexual orientation, gender and religion and belief, are considered and addressed.
In July 2011 the Council was awarded the ‘Achieving’ Level of the Equality Framework for Local Government. Following a Peer Assessment the Council was complimented for being able to embed a culture of inclusivity and meeting customer needs into its new structures and ethos. The Council was able to provide many examples of a proactive approach to equality, consultation, involvement and inclusion. These included engagement with partners, establishing reference groups with individuals described as having a protected characteristic in accordance with the Equality Act 2010 and good internal and external communication channels. The very successful ‘Everybody In’ campaign has enabled the Council to raise awareness of equality and diversity issues across the whole community, including employees and elected members, to challenge discrimination and prejudice.
Member Engagement The Council has significantly invested in member training and development and offers a varied training programme overseen by a Member Group (the Chairman of this is also the Equality and Diversity Member Champion). Training is offered at different times of the day and in different formats, for example online training, face- to-face, mentoring, external courses and in-house training delivered by officers. There are also a series of induction sessions held for new members, designed to ensure they can ‘hit the ground running’ but not be bombarded with information. All members are offered an annual Personal Development Plan (PDP) interview to discuss their training needs and aspirations in a supportive environment.
The Member Support Team has a dedicated hotline telephone number and email address and provides an administrative and signposting service to all members. This includes ordering equipment, organising travel, inputting expense claims and assisting members with who to contact to resolve ward issues. The team also operate a ‘help desk’ prior to each full Council meeting.
The majority of Council and Committee meetings are arranged at times to enable working people to attend and expenses to cover, albeit the rules do detract from this by the taxing of actual costs claimed for childcare. For informal meetings such as Scrutiny Task Groups, teleconferencing is used. Most meetings are webcast, allowing members to keep abreast of issues without having to attend meetings as visiting members and enabling members to watch a webcast live or at a time that suits them.
The use of ICT and Social Media has been successful and the Council offers one- on-one training on the use of social media, primarily Facebook and Twitter, to enable members to communicate with residents in a way that fits in with their lives. Blackberry’s and other ICT equipment/solutions are offered to allow members to communicate whilst on the move.
I hope you find this information useful.
Councillor Lynda Jones October 2012
Written evidence from Christopher Padley (CC 51)
1. Executive Summary
The submitter was a Town Councillor for over 25 years. He found the experience more frustrating than rewarding and feels that, having put in a great deal of effort into trying to make a council work, that he has insights into why many do not, and has two recommendations born from experience he wishes the committee to consider..
2. My profile as submitter.
2.1. I was a Town Councillor for Market Rasen in Lincolnshire from the May 1986 to May 2011. Town Council are only equivalent to parish councils, but they vary enormously in the size of the town they serve. Market Rasen is a very small town, with only about 3,000 electors, but very much a market town rather than a village in character. It employs only one full time person - its clerk. I originally stood for the council in 1986 after being approached by the old Liberal Party. On its dissolution prior to the formation of the Liberal Democrat party I joined the Green Party. After that I re-stood as a Green Party candidate although around the same time parties ceased to play any formal role on the council and all members acted effectively as independents.
2.2. I was born and brought up in the same town and, although my career took me away from it for part of my life, I have been someone who felt committed to my home town.
2.3. I was also, for four years, one of the parish council-members of the district council's (West Lindsey District Council) Standards Committee, under the recently abolished local government standards legislation.
2.4. I decided not to re-stand at the 2011 elections. My reasons were as follows:
3. Reasons for not re-standing
3.1. A minor factor was changed personal circumstances, a move of home and more of my work activity being away from the town. Also, I had been a councillor for a very long time and I was becoming jaded. However, the major factor was the increased feeling that being a councillor was a futile business, and that it is almost impossible to achieve anything worthwhile on a local council, and certainly nothing proportional to the cost to the public purse. I feel it should not be like this, for we do need some form of local government at this level. To explain:
3.3. There was is lack of interest in the council on the part of the electorate. In over 25 years, I only faced two contested elections, and then there were no more than 14 candidates for the 12 places on the council. Voter turn out has been correspondingly low. In addition numerous casual vacancies have occurred at which either no election was called, or there was no contest. Vacancies have increasingly had to be filled by co-option. This situation has left the council easy to join. It only requires two nominations for a person to fill an uncontested seat at parish level, while in the case of co-option pressure to fill vacancies from the local deputy returning officer leads often leads the council to accept whoever is offering.
3..4. The result of all this is a council whose members too often have little knowledge or understanding of how local government works, a poor level of general education, and no experience of working purposefully on any kind of committee. The shortage of capable people results in too much work or responsibility being piled on a few. This would not be such a problem were it not that small town councils are too small to have proper officer support. They lack legal advice, while even the simplest questions of good administrative practice and proper procedure (matters a member of a parliamentary committee would probably regard as day to day routine) leave both members and the clerk floundering to understand.
3.5. A vicious circle has long ago set in, where once the council is seen to be functioning badly and rather than this inspiring people to stand for election and help sort it out, this has the opposite effect, and instead people say they don't want to be associated with such a body of people.
3.6. A further problem in recruiting candidates is the changed nature of rural society, this being a country market town. Fifty years ago, a town like this contained the full range of social groups, from manual labourers, through the trades and to the professions. Now, thanks to the car, rural villages and small towns have differentiated in the same manner as urban suburbs. Professional people now commute from a "posh" village where most inhabitants are well off. The shopkeepers no longer live over the shop, but also commute in, while the town has become largely a low-income area. A hundred years ago, the old Urban District Council (which of course had much wider responsibilities) had a local solicitor as its part-time clerk, and members from a variety of trades and professions. Now, the clerk is a person with basic secretarial skills, no lawyer lives in the town, and the councillors are mostly retired newcomers who bring no "corporate memory" to local problems.
3.7. A factor discouraging interest in the local council is it's lack of powers. People care most about the big issues; education, road repairs, policing, etc.. They know the parish or town council can do little about these. It has influence of course, with the principal authorities, and should act as a conduit of communication with them. This role is weakened by a lack of skills and knowledge of the council's members, especially when it results in failure to pursue matters consistently, as it often does. Officers of the higher authority soon tire of being receiving conflicting or unclear requests. Another vicious circle operates because, if lack of power results in lack of public interest, and lack of public interest results in poor performance, then poor performance results in reluctance to give the council more power.
3.8. Another problem is that when it becomes too easy to join the council, it enables people with small-community petty grudges to become councillors. I am quite sure that this happened more than once on our council, where someone joined solely in order to spoil the projects of an existing councillor, not because they thought the project was a bad idea, but because they didn't want their foe to gain credit for achieving something. You may imagine how frustrating this is to the rest of us.
4. Local standards committees
4.1. I hope the committee will be interested in my views on the short-lived regime of local standards. I was a strong supporter of the introduction of a scheme to control and regulate the behaviour of local councillors or local councils, and believe the compulsory standards scheme had a strong beneficial effect. There was much concern when it was introduced because many parish and town councillors decided not to re-stand at that time, creating a shortage. I believe that these were largely people jumping before they were pushed, and councils were better off without them,
4.2 the grudge-bearing spoilers I refer to above are only one type of character frightened off by a standards regime. However, I feel the now repealed law addressed the wrong part of the problem. It imposed standards, and provided an avenue of complaint, for councillors, but not councils at the parish and town level.
4.3. Town and parish councils frequently deviate from the legally proper course of action, and there is no means of redress below judicial review. These actions can often cause harm and waste of public money. More often than not, the loss and harm falls on the community as a whole, and no one individual is ever likely to have the means and motives to seek redress for the community in the courts. A system by which the public can raise complaints of unlawful actions by local councils to a higher authority is badly needed. An effective system of monitoring and handling complaints would, should greatly improve the performance of small councils by indirectly supporting and therefore attracting councillors who are honest and have the wherewithal to understand the need for lawful procedures and a proper and open way of doing things.
5. Employment disputes
5.1 One of the most frustrating things about my time as a councillor was the number employment disputes we were involved in, and the very poor way the council handled them. I would very much like to expand on this, but feel it would take too long, and this is not the place to go into details. It may be enough to say that I feel local councils are caught in a trap between the now-ancient laws under which they are founded - essentially the 1897 local government act, and much of modern employment and health and safety law. I have no complaints with the latter, but local councils are notably bad at administering them because they have so little access to good professional advice.
5.2. All of the above add up to the experience of willing councillors becoming one of intense frustration at the difficulty of making any progress, and the repeated waste of time and public money on projects and schemes that never make any progress. People join councils wanting to make a difference and find they cannot, but are spending a lot of taxpayers money doing nothing.
6. Recommendations
6.1 I would like to end with two suggestions born from long experience
6.2.. The clerks of parish and small town councils should be employed by the district or unitary council of the area and form a pool of trained personnel, comparable to the committee services clerks. This would ensure the clerks were properly trained and qualified. It would enable cover to be provided in events of illness or other reasons.. It would give them independence from bullying. It would enable employment disputes to be handled professionally without effectively decapitating a small council.
6.3. An independent system for handling complaints of procedural illegality on the part of parish and town councils should be introduced. This could, I believe, be adequately dealt with by the monitoring officer of the district or unitary authority if they were given the power.
6.4 Those two reforms would give a huge moral boost to decent councillors and would-be councillors, and thereby encourage more motivated and able people to stand.
July 2012
Written evidence from David Hill (CC 52)
I have been interested in being involved in my local community in some capacity for many years, since my interaction with, and interest in the wide range of people with whom I came into contact during my time as a retail business owner in Exeter. Since relocating firstly to Bovey Tracey and then to Newton Abbot in South Devon, I actively pursued being a local councillor. However, partly as a result of other activities, such as representing mental health issues both locally, and as a service user on a consultative group working with social work students at Plymouth University, I found my time more than well utilised.
Having said that, with a little more local political awareness and at least an acknowledgement of my existence by the Teignbridge MP, I may well have followed this interest. What has become apparent in the last few years, is that despite positive noises made by establishment organisations, Mental Health and/or disability issues remain a major concern awaiting resolution.
I gave a talk some years ago to BA Hons students at Plymouth titled White Stick Syndrome, in which they were invited to identify what they believed to be presenting factors in four people at the front of the lecture theatre. One had hearing aids, one a white stick and dark glasses, another in a wheelchair and still another merely standing by the others. The responses were fairly predictable, namely, the first person is deaf/has hearing issues, the second blindness/sight issues, the third “some kind of disability”, and the fourth was probably a friend or supporter of one of the other three. In actual fact, all had mental health problems in addition to the obvious disabilities exhibited by three of them. The fourth had severe Bipolar Disorder and was more potentially ill than the others.
This exercise demonstrated an unfortunate truism in society generally, namely, the inability of those who most need identification and support to attract it effectively. It is interesting that on the list of people currently under represented on some local authorities, ranging from young people, women, black and ethnic minorities through to disabled people, no mention is made of anyone who could represent mental health awareness issues. Anyone who has been through the whole diagnosis, treatment, recovery and resolution process in mental health would be expertly placed to represent the views of those whose areas of experience lay within these fields.
My wife and I are currently in process of relocating to North Devon, to support her recently widowed father. This will necessitate a fairly drastic reappraisal and reduction of, my voluntary activities. For instance my work with students will need to be modified to permit significant but limited interaction. I will therefore, be redefining my interest in local affairs and activities such as they impact on where we live. I hope to take as full a part in local community activities as possible. This could extend to being available to stand as a local councillor if appropriate. I am aware that choosing such a course of action not only comes from an innate desire to be useful/helpful ,but a recognition by those one seeks to represent that they feel this would be of value. This can only be established once the move is made.
July 2012
Written evidence from Suzanne Fletcher (CC 53)
I am sorry this submission is late, I have only just found out about the consultation now via a friend at the WEA. I hadn’t heard anything from the Council I used to serve.
I was a Councillor of nearly 30 years, having been elected in a by election in 1981, when I was 36 years old, and had a teenage child. I retired in May 2011.
Whilst it was a huge privilege to represent the people of my ward, and much was achieved for both individuals, the local and wider community I was relieved to have retired, and find it difficult to recommend such service to others.
For the whole of the time I was a Councillor I was in a “minority minority” group, and although I was Mayor for a year, I only ever had the opportunity for any position of any influence, as a chair of a select committee for a year.
My reasons for not being happy with being a Councillor :
1. Inability to be any part of setting an agenda. Only the party in power, and the more powerful of those, had influence of what was scrutinised, discussed, or had a say in what policies would be formulated. This was very frustrating as a representative of a community whose needs could never be dealt with in the proper way, and imagination and hard work was the only way of getting any issues raised.
2. Inability to do scrutiny properly. The whole scrutiny process was dominated by officer set procedures which were lengthy, and tied the hands of the committee. Recommendations were only allowed if the Cabinet member agreed to them, so there was no real opportunity for constructive challenge.
3. Skills which I had, and able to be used in other fields, were not able to be used for the simple reason I was of an opposition party. It was frustrating.
4. Training by the Council was centred on what they wanted us to know and to do, not on the needs we had to best represent our constituents.
5. Recognition for ideas and work was never given. Ward Councillors of opposition parties were never allowed to be in an official press release, even on issues in our own wards where we had worked hard to achieve things. Raising an issue with a Council officer led, if successful, to a press release quoting the Cabinet member as taking the initiative.
6. Not being in perfect health was not taken into account. Meetings in uncomfortable chairs are thankfully something of the past now I am retired from the Council. As are painful walks at times, and some difficult venues.
7. When I was younger, with a teenager to be responsible for, there was no allowance or tolerance for not being able to make some meetings with difficult timings.
8. Finance would have been a complete barrier in the early days before we had a basic allowance instead of attendance allowance, if I had not had a husband in a good job that could afford to subsidise my Council activities. After nearly 30 years of service I have a pension of around £900 a year. Again I can afford to live as my husband’s pension is greater, but it is important that lack of financial back up does not deter those willing to serve who do not have such support from a partner.
This does not read as though I had a happy time. I did enjoy the work, and as I said it was a privilege. I loved the people and working for the community and had an excellent working relationship with many council officers, as well as friendships, some of which continue with those of other political parties. However I find I can achieve a lot more effectively in the community now released from the constraints of the Council.
August 2012
Written evidence from the Association of Democratic Services Officers (ADSO) (CC 54)
1. Introduction
1.1 This submission will highlight the training, development and support being provided by local authorities to councillors and prospective councillors. It will look at member development budgets, development programmes, good practice and case studies and put forward a number of suggestions for improving the provision.
1.2 The evidence will cover the following questions:
(a) Have member development budgets been ring fenced in recent years?
(b) What are Councils currently doing to support members? Is it ‘fit for purpose’ given their changing roles?
(c) What could be done differently?
(d) What is being done to support people thinking of standing in local elections?
2. About the Association of Democratic Services Officers (ADSO)
ADSO is the professional body representing all staff who work in Democratic Services, encompassing councillor support, executive, area committees and scrutiny. We currently have over 900 members across 220 authorities. ADSO’s aim is to provide a voice, guidance and best practice for the sector, as well as professional development and qualifications to those who work in democracy roles in local government and other related organisations.
3. Have member development budgets been ring fenced in recent years?
3.1 From a survey of 52 authorities across England, evidence shows that 38 have ring fenced their budgets for member development in recent years. 7 have increased them and 7 have reduced them. Some councils ‘top load’ their budgets in the year following elections for induction purposes. We know also that a number of councils even with relatively small budgets do not spend their allocation year on year.
3.2 This however only tells us part of the story. Increases, reductions or the status quo do not tell us whether authorities and members are getting value for money and whether programmes are relevant to the modern day councillor. We need to dig deeper to look at what the budgets are being spent on and whether they are linked to the authorities’ objectives, the delivery of services and the needs of members both corporately and individually.
3.3 Nor do the figures tell us whether staffing support in relation to member development has been reduced. ADSO’s experience is that it has. National and regional associations are cutting back on their member support roles. Staff numbers are being reduced within local authorities, posts are being merged and there is undoubtedly less staffing support for member development than previously. One council in the south of England has advised us:
“We have been largely untouched by budget reductions over the last few years. Although staff resources available to manage member development have been depleted over the same period. From the equivalent of one Service manager with specific responsibility, plus an organisational development officer and admin support, we are now down to part of an officer’s time with admin support being provided within my members’ services team…”
In ADSO’s experience, this is not uncommon.
3.4 Whilst attributed to budget cuts, this could also be seen as a reflection on the priority (or that lack of it) which some councils afford to member development. ADSO is happy to undertake further research for the Committee on this subject if that would help.
3.5 The mechanisms authorities have in place to allocate funding are important too. For example, some councils do not have a structured or formal process in place for prioritising and allocating funds for their development programmes. It is almost a case of who shouts the loudest being given priority or it is officer driven. Some on the other hand have a more planned approach and allocate funding on a cross party basis to ensure equality of access. ADSO feels that members must take a more proactive role in this regard to ensure quality and access to development opportunities.
3.6 To cut costs, development sessions are being reduced in length. We have evidence to show that an increasing number of councils are asking for training to be curtailed into two hour sessions or less. This can lead to some sessions being rushed or incomplete, thus reducing their effectiveness, particularly in relation to skills development .
4. What’s currently provided in terms of member development and support? Is it ‘fit for purpose’ given their changing roles?
4.1 Member development is provided in many ways nationally, regionally and locally. The Local Government Association (LGA) for example runs the national Leadership Academy which is now recognised by the Institute of Leadership and Management. The LGA in partnership with regional employers’ organisations holds regional events free of charge aimed particularly at newly elected councillors. The same organisations also for example provide events to explain community budgeting and to explore its implications and benefits to councillors as community leaders and facilitators.
4.2 Regional employers’ organisations administer the member development charter which accredits councils as good practice providers. Councils are encouraged to commit to the charter. Evidence shows that charter councils have better motivated and supported councillors. Also, there are clearer links between development and the achievement of corporate strategic priorities within such councils. 206 councils in England are committed to achieving or have achieved the charter.
4.3 ADSO is already seeing a reduction in provision in all the above areas as budget cuts bite and organisations such as the above are forced to downsize. This is placing more pressure on local councils to fill the gaps and is proving a high risk to effective member development.
4.4 Locally, member development and support will vary depending on the culture of the authorities and the priority they place on such programmes. More and more are providing these programmes in-house, primarily for budgetary reasons, perhaps calling on external providers only if the expertise is not available internally. This has many advantages, but hearing an alternative view from an external expert or a ‘good practice’ authority can add value to the development of members. So a ‘mix and match’ approach is, in our view, preferable. Good practice authorities will involve members in identifying development needs, drawing up suitable programmes and reviewing them afterwards to shape and improve future events. This is crucial to the success of any development programme.
4.5 From our experience, there are various components of member development. These can include:
• personal skill development of councillors relevant to what the general role entails (e.g. time management, speed reading, presentation skills, casework management) • skill development for specific councillor roles (e.g. chairing, leadership, finance) • corporate or organisational requirements (e.g. code of conduct, regulatory, diversity, recruitment) • knowledge based (key areas of legislation) • political group requirements (how to be a good party councillor) • council service awareness/briefing sessions • conference attendance • mentoring/buddying 4.6 Examples of good practice are as follows. In the appendix to our submission, we expand on some of these by way of brief case studies.
• Events focussing on developing members as community leaders and identifying the skill sets required – emphasising the role of a ‘front-line councillor’ as opposed to a ‘backbencher’. • Ward walks for new councillors, with officers, to increase understanding and knowledge in their wards, particularly those issues of most interest to local residents. • Holding ward surgeries in supermarkets, shopping centres and other busy public places - again helping members to increase their profile as well as improving their knowledge of wards and constituents. • Experiential development for members – through scrutiny reviews for example, members can experience council services first hand both from the customer and service provider perspectives. • Council ‘market places’ where departments display their services for members to see the what’s provided and engage with key staff • Personal development programmes for members – identifying key skills previously acquired and agreeing a programme of future development needs • E training modules enabling councillors to fit their development into their already busy lives • Focussing member development on key local issues to enable members to better recognise and reflect the needs of their residents. This can include enabling and empowering residents to address local issues themselves • Phased and varied induction programmes over a longer period to enable members to better absorb the information they require • Accredited qualifications in leadership - nationally recognised at foundation degree level • Member development charters • Inter and cross council mentoring/partnering
4.7 National and regional associations plus local councils are working hard to reflect the changing roles of members in their development programmes. In the authorities surveyed, there was an emphasis not only on essential knowledge required to be a councillor, but also on the ‘softer’ skills necessary for successful community leaders such as communication, listening, networking, dealing with challenging situations/people, negotiating, facilitating, managing and ensuring change, plus team building skills. The skills of a particular councillor do not always suit the role they have been given by their political groups. This creates additional challenges for member development with members often required to ‘learn on the job in Committee’ with support from Democratic Services Officers. Members also have much more statistical and demographic information available at their disposal relating to their wards and authority, giving them a much better understanding of the areas and people they represent. This can include for example health, crime, education and housing statistics.
4.8 So, in ADSO’s view, local authorities, plus national and regional associations, are trying to recognise the changing roles of councillors and the increased knowledge and skills they require. Many are working hard to ensure that their (often) small budgets stretch as far as possible. However, member development is no longer ‘fit for purpose’ in too many authorities and more can and should be done.
5. What could be done differently?
5.1 Despite the good practice identified above, it is ADSO’s view that member development is still very traditional in some areas and not as effective as it should be. Whilst there may still be a requirement for this traditional approach in some cases, there needs to be a shift in culture for members to respond to the challenges and emerging roles brought about for example by the Localism agenda and Act 2011.
5.2 The traditional ‘face to face’ classroom type sessions do not work in many instances. We all have examples where only a handful of members have turned up even after members themselves have requested the training. This even happens when training is free. This is becoming a real problem for local authorities. It is not only poor value for money but equally sessions are of less value for those few members who do attend.
5.3 Development should be more targeted. Those who need it most often don’t receive it. Members also need to be clearer as to what they want to get out of the training they attend. Co-ordinated and planned programmes, responding to identified need and driven by members, are required.
5.4 Authorities need to be more creative in the type of development they provide. Methods that suit the modern day councillor and the busy lives they lead will be much more effective. More use should be made of social media and on-line resources. A number of Councils have e learning for officers but, in our experience, this is yet to be rolled out in any numbers for councillors. We have seen examples of top quality use of modern day technology but they are very much the exception rather than the rule. Tools already in place (such as the LGA councillor workbooks) are a good starting point but on-line learning can be used to much greater effect. Too often, it is left to individual members with a particular interest in social media or technology to ‘do it themselves’
5.5 Development in whatever form is not sufficient in itself. Councils must then be prepared to support members to put their increased skills and knowledge into practice. Some of the good practice examples above (ward walks, surgeries in public places and experiencing front line service delivery) help to achieve this.
5.6 Many councillors want better training in matters relating to their ward work and helping them be more effective ‘on the ground’. Some councils have regarded this type of development as part of the political process and therefore have left it to the political parties. Plus member development is too often seen as supporting the internal decision making process rather than the ward councillor role. ADSO feels that this is an important element of a member’s development and should be prioritised by authorities.
5.7 More use should be made of cross authority training. Members in our view would benefit from sharing experiences and skills with colleagues from other councils. This already happens to good effect in parts of the country but it could and should be more widespread. It could also drive down costs whether provided in-house or externally. This is even more relevant now that councils are looking to share services and maximise value for money.
5.8 Commissioning of member development could also be more effective and provide better value for money. Not enough competitive procurement takes place. More councils should adhere to the following simple steps:
• identify need • agree the best way of meeting this need • write specification • identify suitable providers • select the best ones through a competitive process
5.9 There also needs to be better evaluation of development sessions and improved organisational learning as a result. Members attend expensive conferences for example but the knowledge and information they gain is not shared within the authority. Similarly, it’s surprising how many councils fail to evaluate the effectiveness of the sessions they provide. They should be asking:
• were the sessions what members wanted? • what difference has it made to the individual receiving the training? • what benefits are accruing to the council?
5.10 Unless councils evaluate their member development effectively, they cannot say whether they are receiving value for money.
5.11 Championing member development from leading political figures within an authority can improve both provision and take up. Those councils who have member champions and a member group charged with member development responsibilities, tend to be those who are more successful.
5.12 Councillors should look for 360o feedback from partner organisations, peers and the public. Councils and councillors should make better use of the Political Skills Framework when selecting councillors; for personal development planning; and appraisals. Appraisal of councillor performance should become an integral part of the role, linked to a role profile.
6. What is being done to support people thinking of standing in local elections?
6.1 Traditionally, recruiting and preparing people to stand in local council elections was seen in the main as the responsibility of the political parties. Now however Councils see themselves as having a legitimate role in:
• issuing publicity in advance of elections, • engaging with prospective candidates, • explaining the election ‘do’s and don’ts’; and • setting out members’ duties, responsibilities and support services if and when they are elected.
6.2 Many councils hold ‘be a councillor’ campaigns or events often in Local Democracy week to highlight the above and encourage people to come forward.
6.3 Publicity is often targeted in particular at the under-represented sections of the community to encourage members of those communities to think about standing for public office. It can also be broadened out to include information about standing for election as school governors, tenants associations or getting involved in volunteering generally. Youth parliaments and school councils are also used to engage with young people who, by their very involvement in such organisations, may have interests and ambitions to be councillors or holders of other public offices.
7. Conclusion
7.1 ADSO welcomes the opportunity to present this evidence to the Select Committee. Our research has shown that much good work is taking place in member development. In the main, budgets have been protected from recent cuts in expenditure but staffing support has been reduced, significantly in some cases. Much more can be done to ensure value for money and to meet the needs of the modern day councillor and we have given some pointers as to how this can be achieved.
7.2 In the current climate, some may see member development as a luxury. ADSO believes that it is essential to ensure we have first class representatives with the skills and support to undertake their challenging roles for the benefit of their citizens.
7.3 We hope this submission is helpful to the Committee and we would be pleased to assist your work in the future.
September 2012 Appendix
Case Studies
1. Council A
Complementing ward information packs, one authority arranged ward walks for each new councillor elected in the May 2010 elections.
Each informal ward walk, led by senior officers from across the council, was designed to give the new councillors a chance to better understand the dynamics of their ward, particular issues those residents may be facing, and learn about any past issues that may influence future developments the councillor may wish to champion. Following each walk, officers provided follow-up information to all the questions councillors raised during the walk.
All who went on these walks rated them very highly for the insight they provided at the start of their new term in council. Importantly, both the officers and councillors also believed these ward walks provided strong foundations for successful on-going partnerships for the good of the borough and its residents.
2. Council B
This Council undertook a review of community transport in their area (Dial a Ride etc). Councillors had received a number of complaints about a poor service. As part of the review, some members travelled on a community transport mini bus on its journey to collect elderly people to attend a luncheon club. In transit, they spoke to the users of the service as well as the driver. Some of the findings included:
• Late pick ups were common as the bus got held up in traffic • Delays meant that some elderly users were sitting on the bus for two hours or more – sometimes in very hot weather • The driver felt under pressure and de-motivated as he saw first hand the effect this was having on service users.
As well as making recommendations for improvement, members learned a great deal by seeing first hand the service in operation and talking to those most affected. Post review evaluation showed that this was much more beneficial to their development and produced a better outcome for both the service users and the providers.
3. Council C
A major success of one Council’s recent induction programme was the ‘market place’ where Council departments manned stalls displaying their services – Members were asked to visit each stall and engage with officers and then vote on which stall they felt was best. Officer and members both enjoyed this opportunity to interact and network, often resolving issues picked up on the members’ election campaigns. Key themes from the induction days are then explored more fully in the development programme during the remainder of the year.
Written evidence from Rebecca Lane (CC 55)
I am aged 37 with two boys aged 5 and 11. I am married and my husband works full‐time as an Engineer for British Gas. We own our own home and an additional property which we rent out. I work as an Administrator part‐time in Chepstow. I made the consious decision after having my second child not to return to work full‐time so I could take and pick up the kids from school. I am White, Welsh and attend Church of England church every few months. Any spare time I have after being with the children I use to go to the gym and run. I run half marathons every few months and am a member of my local running club.
If you have made a conscious decision not to stand for election: ∙ What do you do to serve your community already? ‐ Until recently I was a member of my son's school PTA where I volunteered my time whenever they needed me. I have also contacted my local councillor a few times to have issues local to me resolved when I couldn't get any help from the Local Authority. For example there was a zebra crossing by where I live that was half finished for months. The Local Authority wouldn't listen to me and it took my Councillor to speak to the right person to get it finished. I have also contacted him about the problem of fly tipping near my home and a bin storage that was outside my house. I raised a petition to get it demolished and he helped me with getting that to the right people.
∙ Why did you decide against standing for election? (Please be as specific as you can.) Was your decision related more to the practicalities of being a councillor or to what you thought the role would entail? ‐ I don't know enough about being a councillor to make the decision to stand. The hours for example to be able to know if I could do the role with having two kids & is there any office you work from or is it from your home, also what is the Job Description? In addition I have decided not to investigate into standing because it gives the impression of being very stuffy, generally for the older generation and male dominated. Also they seem very set in their ways and they seem to argue with each other. For example our councillors use the local paper to send messages to each other AFTER a meeting which I think is very childish and does not send the right positive message to the community.
∙ What would need to change for you to consider standing in future? ‐ It needs to be more open, see through with the role explained properly like any other job you would apply for. More professional as well. The councillors seem to get nominated not on their personal skills & qualifications or attributes but on how they sell themselves and who they know and how long they have known them for and how popular they seem to be.
If you have wanted to be a candidate: ∙ Why did you want to stand for election? ‐ I want to be able to do not just one thing for my town but many things. Instead of feeling like I am banging my head against a wall when trying to get any of the issues above resolved on my own I could help people get their issues solved. I also want to help drop the poor image that seems to surround local council by being as approachable and open as possible.
∙ What, if any, specific barriers prevented you from standing? ‐ of course having two boys one quite small with the logistics of childcare is one of the reasons (which was one of the reasons I couldn't make the Commons on 17 September).
September 2012 Written evidence from Jack Hopkins (CC 56)
Training and Development for Councillors
Development of Councillors is an area I have particular interest in having been a campaign organiser, political assistant, council officer and elected as a councillor in 2010. During my two years as the Chief whip in Lambeth I focused significantly on development of my group, delivering a bespoke programme with London Southbank University, developing training packages with various external providers and trying to organise a pooling of resource across London Labour Groups for Councillor development.
I have written some of my experiences and understanding of this area, what we are considering in Lambeth as part of the cooperative council and some proposals which I think would be beneficial. At the outset I should state that I believe that the training and development of Councillors is an area which needs significant work and that the day of the 'experienced amateur' councillor is or at least should be over.
Training and development happens by chance (or doesn't) As an elected councillor your training and development needs very much rely on where you are elected. Whether there is a budget, who controls it and whether you have access to it. There is no consistency apart from the need for better training and supported Councillors.
Budgets are borough based and therefore at the whim of the executive of that authority. This means in some cases that there is no standing budget for which minority parties have access or discretion. In some places they are divided by political group, others use it solely for cross party training. In many places executive members use the lions share of budgets due to access and knowledge.
The group whip is usually the link to these funds, given their relationship with democratic services officers where this generally fits. Whether the whip views the development of their group as a responsibility often varies.
If as a backbencher you get an email from a training and development company you can request to go on the training
The agenda and content needs to be better driven by Councillors At the moment I have not found sufficient evidence that Councillors are driving this agenda either in terms of content or delivery. This is in part because officers take a lead, and because Councillors do not. This results in training programmes being provided which support what offices need Councillors to know or think Councillors should know, and/or delivered in a traditional style which can limit effectiveness.
The LGA and London Councils do have programmes which are useful and support Councillors effectively, albeit a focus on existing leaders as opposed to potential ones. The LGA next generation leadership course is excellent, as is the Planning Advisory Service weekends.
In terms of content however I would say that providers very much focus on what officers think is useful. There are many providers who do scrutiny training, chairing training, etc... yet less who will do something related to being a frontline councillor. There should be more focus on either making a councillor more effective and progressing as a Councillor or providing some form of accreditation so that the skills and competences we develop are recognised in the wider job market.
What we've tried in Lambeth 1. Acting as a host for training for London Labour Councillors In Lambeth we piloted the pooling resources and acted as a host for training and development for Labour Councillors from across London. Through buying in trainers from the Lambeth Labour Group training budget we were able to reduce head costs for our Councillors who attended, as well as offer discounted prices for those colleagues from other authorities dependent on their ability to pay. This is a model which could well be supported by London Councils or the Local Government Association. In part this was helped greatly by Cllr Clyde Loakes, Whip at London Councils, who convened regular meetings of the Labour whips giving me and others a platform to discuss training and development needs.
2. Bespoke course at London Southbank University for backbenchers Our programme with LSBU was run over three Saturdays for backbenchers and focused on "how to be the cabinet member for your ward." In part it was designed to explore the needs of backbenchers in becoming commissioners of services on a ward basis through a mix of theoretical and practical subject areas. The topics covered were: • Stakeholder mapping and management • Negotiation and influence • Exercising power • Components of Delivery - successes and failures • Levers of delivery The sessions led to a series of recommendations to the Leader and Chief Executive about potential improvements to aid the Councillor in fulfilling their role, and these have influenced the thinking and proposals for the Cooperative Council commissioning model and role of the Councillor as a commissioner.
As a first attempt at doing something difference, designed for Councillors by Councillors, we were pleased at the results and the fact we just did it. The next step for us is to develop a more formal and structured programme which could be accredited. One early thought is to follow the example of Oldham and allow greater responsibilities to Councillors who have undertaken and passed appropriate development or training, linked to community based commissioning, an enhanced and supported community leadership role and/or formal council role.
Recommendations
• Dedicated training and development budgets for individual councillors as well as groups • Accreditation for Councillors to demonstrate their skills in the 'real' world • Better range of training and development opportunities for Councillors based on their actual needs and new skills sets needed • More focus on the needs of backbenchers and wider range of Councillors, not just executive members
September 2012 Written evidence from Ray Spalding (CC 57)
1) I am a volunteer with; Lincoln & Lindsey Blind Society Vitalise (Charity providing sighted guides for Visually Impaired Persons) Deaf Blind U K Hearing Dogs for Deaf People Macular Disease Society in various roles, including guide, tutor, speaker etc
2) Committee member North Lincolnshire Twinning group.
3) I have mobility problems myself due to arthritis and Congestive Heart Failure, which may cause difficulty breathing.
I would like to stand as a councillor, but feel that my mobility issues would make doorstep campaigning awkward and may have an adverse effect upon the required successful outcome, BUT I would be delighted to be able to represent people with disabilities, whom, I believe are considered by people who do not have disabilities, who thus do not understand such issues as the provision of coat hooks in disabled toilets, the provision of disabled toilets not fitted with RADAR locks, which are therefore denied to disabled people outside the 08.00 - 18.00 opening times applied to many public conveniences.
I would respectfully point out that victims of urological issues (of which I have been one for the last 20 years) do not have an off switch on their bladders operating at 18.00 hours. As has recently appeared in the press such devices as Pelican crossings, with a time allowance for pedestrians to cross allow insufficient time for such as I, who need 6 times the time to cross that an able bodied person does. I have been told that emergency service drivers are not advised to be doubly alert when "on a call" where vision head is limited, as, if a person with a mobility problem, who has checked that the road is clear as far as they can see may be so slow to be unable to move out of the path of a fast moving vehicle.
August 2012
Written evidence from Cllr Marianne Overton (CC 58)
Introduction to Cllr Marianne Overton
Marianne is an Independent Councillor who has been elected by the public as a Parish, North Kesteven District and Lincolnshire County Councillor at each election since 1991. Subsequently Marianne was elected as a regional representative for East Midlands and last year as Leader of the Independent Group and Vice Chairman of the Local Government Association. Her community engagement is such that she attains among the highest number of votes in the County with turnouts as high as 70%. Marianne also stood as an MP in 2010 and was one of just a handful of Independent candidates who kept her deposit. Marianne also sits on the board of NHS Lincolnshire. Other posts have included being a governor on the board of the University of Lincoln, Chairman of the Society of Biology, Chairman of Relate Lincolnshire and many local organisations.
Marianne has lived and worked in several countries, running expeditions for volunteers in Central Africa. Marianne took part in the Pan-African Peer Reviews, in partnership with the United Cities and Local Government Africa (UCLGA), working to improve the National Local Government Association in Ghana.
Marianne is an experienced and qualified teacher of Biology and Science to A level and is involved in running family business interests.
What is different about an Independent councillor?
The approach of Independent Councillors setting an agenda in partnership with their communities
Independents as listening, diverse and representative councillors
Challenges of party politics as a disincentive to local leadership
Motivation and disincentives?
Many Independents are driven by the desire to achieve something useful in their communities, rather than a desire to be part of a team, but they need both to be effective.
Independents need to dare to be different and determined enough to succeed, but sensitive enough to work successfully in a team.
Party politics is a major disincentive to all councillors
Community budgets under councillors or “mayors”
Barriers to standing for election, in practice
Size of election areas Finance
Unfair press coverage
Petty politics, especially in a tribalistic environment, leading to a fear of unfair disadvantage for communities
Time commitment, with competing demands
Party machinery and use of postal votes
Importance of Community engagement and the effect of reducing the number of councillors on the role of engagement.
Role of an Independent Community Leader
• Listen: Pickup the issues that matter to people. Sources: Media, people who know, people you know and others at events or behind doors. • Ask widely to get a clear view: Attend and organise meetings, maintain networks, newsletter to residents, respond to correspondence • Question Authority: Find who is responsible or has the ability to influence. Frame the issues raised into questions to help identify best solutions. What change would be needed to improve the situation? • Test wider opinion: Newsletter to residents, people you know whose opinion you trust. • Identify action Required: • Campaign: Write to press and media, attend and organise meetings, posters, petition, leaflets, door knock, seek resolution with those in authority.
Additional Roles of a Councillor
Councillor has additional roles in influencing policy to support local needs. Example: Lincolnshire County Council Waste
Council support for councillor’s work in community leadership is vital
Councillors also have an additional role in influencing National policy to support local needs.
Skills and training
Lincolnshire County and North Kesteven District Councils have both been leaders in this field being among the earliest to win accreditation.
The training and officer support is directed towards the course of the Institution, rather than the local leadership role and a number of tasks are prevented on the premise that they are seen as “political”. Not all staff see themselves as serving all councillors. The single-party Executive has no incentive to be inclusive and indeed, may well see an advantage in disenfranchising “opposition” councillors with overt rudeness, even in public meetings. This tribalistic approach is deeply undermining of democratically elected representatives and there is no mechanism to kerb it. This leads to lower turnouts at election and many good councillors leave in order to find something more rewarding to do, reducing the quality of local government.
More support is needed in administration, research and individual training budgets. IT support is hampered by long-term contracts which are not fast-moving enough.
Cllr Marianne Overton BSc(Hons) Leader of the Independent Group on the National Association of Local Government October 2012 Written evidence from NAVCA (CC 59)
NAVCA is the national voice of local support and development organisations in England. We champion and strengthen voluntary and community action by supporting our members in their work with over 160,000 local charities and community groups. We have a member serving every local authority area in England. NAVCA believes that voluntary and community action is vital for vibrant and caring communities.
We provide our members with networking opportunities, specialist advice, support, policy information and training. NAVCA is a vital bridge between local groups and national government.
Our specialist teams take a lead on the issues that matter most to local support and development organisations. We influence national and local government policy to strengthen local voluntary and community action.
1. Introduction 1.1 NAVCA has always encouraged our member organisations to establish and develop the best possible relationships with local councillors, recognising the natural partnership that should exist between those elected by the community as its representatives and bearing responsibility for the delivery of public services, and those organisations rooted in and owned by the local community to provide services to its people.
1.2 NAVCA members are known as councils for voluntary service (CVS), but other common descriptors include “voluntary action” and “community action” organisations. All provide local support and development and infrastructure services for the local VCS (voluntary and community sector).
1.3 For the purposes of this Inquiry, we contacted our member organisations to ask them about their experience of working with local councillors and what makes the experience more or less positive.
1.4 NAVCA members identify a common motivation with local councillors for the work they undertake: Most councillors “act out of a desire to serve their communities which is an important starting point for work with the VCS.”
1.5 One common theme can be expressed in a single brief sentence from one NAVCA member’s response: “A well informed councillor at any level is of great benefit to the sector.”
2. Engagement 2.1 NAVCA members clearly and unequivocally acknowledge the role of local councillors and the potential of that role for community development and transformation, and are more than willing to work with local councillors in achieving their common aims and objectives. “Councillors could have strong role in identifying and championing ward level priorities – especially in areas which are not parished – if they have resources to do so. CVSs could support this work.” “Local infrastructure organisations could play a much greater role in supporting community level action involving local councillors, especially if this was ‘designed in’ as part of a councillor’s remit.”
2.2 NAVCA members report that district and county councillors generally take seriously their role as local representatives, seeking to engage their communities in a variety of ways including holding surgeries, involving themselves in local issues and attending local events. This work is very much valued: “The most important element is that councillors are connected to their local communities – in general they are accessible and will respond to genuine local concerns.” “Relationships between councillors and the VCS work best when they are personal rather than having conversations between sectors.”
2.3 Several NAVCA members recognised the significant amount of time that local councillors commit to their role, recognising that for many this is probably more than they may have anticipated when first elected.
2.4 Some NAVCA members also acknowledged the big steps forward that have been made in councillors’ understanding of the significance and role of the voluntary and community sector (VCS): “3 or 4 years ago there would have been a much lower level understanding of the role and power of the VCS and the opportunities it presents to advance county council strategies.(10 years ago there was almost no understanding).”
2.5 This experience is not universal, however. One NAVCA member notes that “there is a lot of untapped potential here. This is because on the one hand the VCS knowledge and understanding of councillors, their role and engagement opportunities is not uniformly high and there can be a lack of confidence about
this sort of work with councillors. On the other hand the need to improve a number of areas of local councillors’ relationships with their communities holds groups back from offering such opportunities.”
2.6 It was also noted that the opportunities for the local voluntary and community sector to engage with councillors diminish as the size of the geographic area increase: “County councillors cannot be expected to maintain the same relationships with the voluntary and community sector in their area as a town and parish councillor can.” “County council wards are so big that they tend to cross over several ‘natural’ communities leading to more “distance” between communities and councillor.” “Parish councillors tend to be the most community focussed of councillors as a group,” but “often feel threatened and unsure when asked to consult the wider community on specific issues.” They “do not readily understand their role in stimulating community wide conversations and action,” and “do not like moving to talk to those outside their immediate social circles… They tend to favour the status quo and are slow to adopt new ideas – this marginalises new communities and the disadvantaged.”
2.7 In some areas, county and district councils or unitary have sought to create structures to support the representative role of councillors, such as local area forums, area panels or community assemblies. These are designed to enable councillors to engage with each other and with the wider community. Their effectiveness varies greatly, however: “Some of the local area forums have sought to engage widely with groups and organisations within the local voluntary and community sector but this has not been uniform across all of the local area forums. It is also true to say that some of the local areas forums have struggled to overcome the perennial turf wars between county and district councillors over who has legitimacy to speak for ‘their’ patch.”
2.8 In other areas, however, councillors themselves report facing challenges to their representation work: [District councillors] “often report that the locally adopted cabinet structure means they have no real say over what happens locally – they feel they have no impact if they are not a cabinet member.” “Decision making by district council cabinet is not obviously or clearly linked to community wishes or needs leading to conflict and a view that the council ‘doesn’t listen’ to us.”
“We have the impression that a lot of councillors do not feel that they are involved in local decisions and are very frustrated about this. For example in one meeting a comment from a councillor was ‘I am not having an officer tell me what to do’. This means that in turn they are not always the best champions for involving communities in local decision making.”
3. Funding 3.1 NAVCA members report that where councillors have been allocated funds, they have been better able to respond to local concerns and to support local needs and projects, leading to better relations with their local communities.
3.2 Where the local VCS has been involved in participatory or community budget events, these received enthusiastic endorsement from NAVCA members: [The council] “have involved us as the CVS in facilitating these events where local residents decide on the allocation of small grants to community groups in their area. It has been crucial to win councillors’ support for this process and the events in their area. Once they have had a chance to get involved and see how it works there has been a very positive response and councillors have been central to connecting local groups and residents to the opportunity to take part. This has been real participative democracy supported by representative democracy.”
3.3 It is also reported, however, that councillors fail to understand the potential for creative interaction of representative with participatory democracy: “In a one-party dominated borough there is a dominant culture of scepticism about more participative democracy and an insistence from some vocal councillors that as they are elected they are the proper/only voice of their communities. This has a drag on more empowering and innovative community involvement though there are enough councillors with a different view to mean this is not always prevented.”
3.4 The vital importance of good consultation practice to deliver a constructive combination of representative and participatory democracy was highlighted by some NAVCA members, particularly around the allocation of funding: “We are concerned about the competence of councillors to assess competing needs and to champion accountable decision making – I’m afraid we can point too many examples of groups being support because they have a link with the local councillor which is not supported by the business case or assessment of priority against local need. In recent months we have encouraged local
authorities to make greater use of organisations, such as our local Community Foundation, who have significant experience in objective assessment of applications for such delegated funds.”
3.5 NAVCA members are very concerned about the political and practical implications for councillors of having to implement central government funding cuts: “At a time of cuts there is not the space or willingness to be more honest about the impact this is having locally for fear of the electoral impact of this. This is a very short sighted attitude and is something that communities see straight through and find very frustrating.”
4. Diversity 4.1 NAVCA members, especially in rural areas, report concerns that their local councillors do not adequately reflect the diversity of their constituencies, even where this diversity is not great: “In our area councillors remain predominantly retired or semi-retired and white. Although the gender balance is more equal there is little diversity in relation to ethnicity, age or disability.” “District councillors tend to be over the retirement age and therefore have certain age related biases, and often lack energy or vision – favouring the status quo and are anti-change.” “There are far too many white, old men whose cultural and political understanding are not up to date. In particular a paternalistic attitude to the community is very frustrating.”
5. Training and skills 5.1 NAVCA members appreciate that principal local authorities provide training to councillors on a range of skills. Our members value the opportunity offered in some areas to be involved in this training.
5.2 NAVCA members also report a perceived conflict between their duties to the communities they represent and their political party loyalties which might be addressed by better training: “Some local people and groups can be unwilling to engage with councillors because, with a great deal of justification, they see their activities as ‘political’ rather than representative, participative and empowering. Councillors need to be encouraged and skilled up to see that encouraging and supporting participative
democracy isn’t in conflict with their representative democratic role and in fact over time is greatly to its benefit.”
5.3 Some NAVCA members offer their local councillors support for their role as community leaders but the response is not always positive: “This has not had the take up that we expected and there remains a minority of councillors with the view that ‘I’ve been elected to represent, I don’t need to consult as a result’.” “Firstly, I would want to encourage a broader sense of what it means to be a community leader, which for me is about including, listening and having a strong sense of proper process to ensure opportunities for involvement, rather than a traditional view of robust decision making and leading from the front. Secondly, I would want to encourage an approach of meeting groups where they are rather than requiring them to fit into your way of doing something. I’m afraid I still come across councillors who operate with the view that if they are not doing something, then nobody is and so something needs to be done – invariably the answer is that there is a group who are doing something it is just that the local councillor (and the local council) are not aware of them.”
5.4 There remains, however, almost unanimous willingness among NAVCA members to continue to engage and work with local councillors. “There is a fantastic opportunity for us to continue to build the relationship with Parish councils by offering them infrastructure support services.”
6. Localism 6.1 The general feeling expressed by NAVCA members and applying to both councillors and their communities unsettling theme can be summarised in two brief sentences from one response: “Localism is not understood. It is slightly feared.”
6.2 Several NAVCA members also expressed the view that, while the community rights enshrined in the Localism Act 2011 and the provisions of the Best Value Statutory Guidance and National Planning Police Framework might have provided communities with opportunities in other circumstances, the significant cuts to public funding which have impacted on the VCS at least as much as on local authorities mean that the priority for both community organisations and communities is simply survival.
6.3 There is also a widespread feeling that the new rights and powers are too complex, and that the community rights have been watered down so much during their passage through parliament that their use would involve too much time and effort with no guarantee of any successful outcome: “At a recent event on the community rights as a community member said the fear is that these are rights for the articulate minority only. I also believe that very few councillors in this borough are aware of these opportunities and even if they were as mentioned above a lot of them would take some convincing that more participative democracy is the best thing. And this doesn’t even mention the complexities of working with council officers in this area! Sorry to be so down beat but at a time of cuts in all sectors it is very hard to see where the capacity for engagement with such ‘opportunities’ is going to come from.”
7. Conclusions 7.1 Our research clearly shows that there is widespread appreciation of the role of councillors by NAVCA members.
7.2 There is concern in some areas that councillors do not reflect the diversity of their communities, and NAVCA members ready to be involved in addressing this issue.
7.3 NAVCA members recognises the enormous pressures that councillors are under and are very willing to support local councillors in their decision making by providing information and intelligence, promoting engagement and facilitating consultation with local communities – especially vulnerable and excluded groups and individuals – and offering or contributing to induction and training.
October 2012