Localism - A Conservative view

In response, and to balance out the earlier post, one of our Conservative consultants has given his views on the Localism concept below......................

Localism Bill - A Conservative view

The Localism Bill has been applauded for its emphasis on decentralisation and is seen as a first crucial step away from the top-down and inefficient system inherited from the last Labour Government. It was conceived as a way of releasing local councils from the controlling hand of the oligarchical State and enabling them increased autonomy, thus accountability and economic efficiency.

Eric Pickles today stated that:

“For too long, central government has kept local government on a tight leash, strangling the life out of councils. This has stopped councils doing anything without running to ministers first. It means that local public services are run on the whims of bureaucrats many miles away. It has stopped councils from using their creativity to improve services and from focusing on what residents want.”

The system of control over local government by the State has had a two-fold effect: first, it has bred complacency among local councils. They have found a convenient scape-goat on which to pass the buck. Second, it has resulted in apathy among the general public who realise that their local council is essentially powerless up against the State’s bureaucrats- resulting in declining turn-outs in local elections.

The Bill has been described as a “triumph for democracy” on two fronts. First, by increasing the powers of locally elected Councillors to set up services and to better create tailored responses to the financial challenges ahead. Second, by empowering local individuals:

• Communities can question how services - such as children's centres, care homes and transport - are being run and potentially take them over.

• Directly elected mayors in 12 cities.

• More power for local people to overrule planning decisions, decide where new homes should go and protect green spaces.

• Powers for people to approve or veto "excessive" council tax rises.

• Giving local people and organisations the right to buy community assets like shops, pubs and libraries. If a council decides to sell a property community organisations will get extra time to develop their bid.

Critics of the Bill have argued that it amounts to no more than “swingeing cuts”. In the short term these cuts will of course be felt. The logic behind the Localism Bill, however, is that by granting councils greater autonomy and, by proxy, accountability, they will rise above the simplistic mindset that you can solve problems simply by throwing money at them. As such the Localism Bill is the long-awaited shot in the arm needed to deliver the public, faced with continually rising Council Tax bills, a remedy from the disease of local government profligacy.

George Saliagopoulos, Curtin&Co Conservative consultant

Localism - A Labour view

With the Localism Bill being published this afternoon and already elements of it seeping out we asked one of our Labour consultants for his thoughts on it ............................................

"I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power." Thomas Jefferson.

The Localism Bill has been one of the most trailed and well publicised bills of recent years, but it is hard to find anyone who can truly tell you what Localism actually means. And that is the point. Simply devolving power and saying in effect ‘here you go, you do it now’ is not enough. That is the coalitions biggest mistake, because while localism is in principle right, the approach being taken is one of potential disaster not enlightenment – think of the Titanic sailing towards the ice berg, think of Local Government sailing towards 27% cuts and then overlay the Localism Bill’s proposed free-for-all.

The Government’s big idea is that the bill will enable local communities and councils to quite literally do their own thing. Therein localism truly means different things to different people and will in reality be interpreted and implemented differently all over the country.

The cry of power to the people only has resonance if it is also matched by the resources to achieve. The Achilles heel of the Localism Bill is that it is based on the largest and most swinging cuts to the budgets of local government in post war Britain. The funding cuts will in themselves change the face of service delivery to local people across England and will result in some of the hardest choices councils will have to make. Do they cut education, social services, youth services, or community safety? In reality all will be cut and hit very hard. Indeed one senior local government officer commented recently that the cuts proposed were catastrophic and the most vulnerable in society would literally be cut adrift.

The New Local Government Network has described the Localism Bill, already, as ‘a real disappointment to communities’. ‘If you are a council facing frontloaded cuts of up to 40 per cent, then greater freedom in how you spend it means little but a devolved axe.”

What the bill will do:

• Give councils a general power of competence

• Give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any local issue and the power to veto excessive council tax increases

• Grant greater financial autonomy to local government and community groups

• Return decision-making powers on housing and planning to local councils and communities

• Abolish Regional Spatial Strategies

• Give communities the right to bid to take over local state-run services

• Require public bodies to publish online the job titles of every member of staff and the salaries and expenses of senior officials

• Create Local Enterprise Partnerships (to replace Regional Development Agencies)

• Review the Housing Revenue Account

The Localism Bill will include proposals to make councillors approve and publish pay rules for their chief executives. It will also include powers to create directly elected mayors in 12 of Britain’s cities such as Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool. Of real interest is the power for people to approve or veto "excessive" council tax rises, which will impact very heavily on those councils whose revenue budgets to deliver services are dependent on council tax income.

The Bill will create a "community right to buy" which will give local community groups and parish councils a legal right to name assets like shops, libraries and community centres as critical to their neighbourhoods and if they are put up for sale, local people will be given time to prepare a business plan and raise the funds they need to bid for it.

There will also be a "community right to challenge" - whereby community groups and parish councils will have the power to challenge and take over a local service. This could include running children's centres, social care services and local transport links. Councils would be forced to publish the reasons why the service could not be run by local groups, the onus being placed on the principle that they should be run by the community.

This is paternalism writ large and is essentially a ‘do gooders charter’. Every religious, community and neighbourhood group will be coming out of the woodwork to potentially take over services that until now have been professionally run by local government civil servants in the interests of the whole community and those most vulnerable. Without that professionalism local groups will likely choose who is deserving and who is not – can you imagine the impact that will have on those in most need. It has Dickensian overtones of the poorhouse running throughout the idea. Consider a local children’s social services department which could be run by a community group? The bill while well meaning will open a Pandora’s Box of paradox’s to be unravelled sometime after the initial damage is done.

The result of the bill will be confusion, much introspection amongst local government mandarins as the implications are slowly understood. The landscape of local government will be changed that is certain, not many people have yet realised just how radical these reforms are, and in terms of ambition set against available resources to deliver the bill the reality is that while it may read well and look good on paper, its implementation is another story all together.

Dr. Paul Harvey, Curtin&Co consultant and Labour councillor

Localism Bill will be introduced on Monday 13th December

After several weeks of 'will they won't they' and various dates flying around, the government have finally announced that the Localism Bill will be out on Monday 13th December. The news was first announced by Eric Pickles via Twitter in a post that read, "Localism Bill will be introduced next Monday. Lots of power to to Councils".

Stay tuned for more information and analysis..

http://www.planningresource.co.uk/bulletins/Planning-Resource-Daily-Bulletin/News/1046146/Localism-Bill-on-Monday/?DCMP=EMC-DailyBulletin

Local Government Landscape Set To Change

Well the Tories all knew that this would happen, but even by our own very pessimistic forecasts the results of recent local council by-elections has been quite staggering. In one election this week the Conservatives lost a previously impervious council seat on Sandwell MBC in the West Midlands with a huge 45% swing to Labour. Of course local factors would doubtless be in play, and this local authority was hit hard by the cancellation of the Building Schools for the Future programme. But even taking this into account that result really does stand out.

This result follows a pretty predictable pattern of local government strength increasing for parties in opposition. Immediately prior to 1997 the Conservatives suffered a meltdown in their local councillor base. In one night in 1994 over 1,500 councillors were wiped out. Whole swathes of the UK became Tory-free zones. As John Major shuffled out of Downing Street on that gloriously sunny day in May 1997 the Conservatives were in an absolutely awful state.

Over the next 13 years there was not a single year where the blues didn't make significant new gains. Voters are far more likely to vote against the government. It is human nature to be motivated against something than to be for it. In the coming years it is entirely likely that previous Labour strongholds seized by the Conservatives and Lib Dems when Gordon Brown and Tony Blair occupied Number 10 will return to the fold.

The political landscape in local government is really set to change.

Antony Calvert
Conservative Consultant, Curtin&Co

PINS response to CALA Homes: Analysis

Following the Cala Homes decision in the High Court most local council’s haven’t really known which way to jump in recent days. They have reacted quite understandably like rabbits caught in the glare of headlights.

The advice from the Planning Inspectorate then is not surprising but it is important. The advice is aimed at settling the minds of both developers and Council’s but when we take a closer look it is nothing more than a fudge to hold the line.

The new Localism Bill will in very simple terms state that the Regional Strategies are revoked and therein the housing targets derived of them are gone as well.

The Planning Guidance is careful to offer weight to both the Government’s view that it is intent on revoking the RSSs and the High Court decision that states until legislation is formally adopted the 2004 Act establishing RSSs applies, and any evidence or analysis using the policies of the RSS has relevance as a consequence.

There is no way that local councils can escape the conundrum this places them in – developers will now be able to cite the RSS policy framework as a material consideration that inspectors will have to give weight to.

In essence the judgements that will be made by inspectors will be a balance of fairness. If the application of RSS can be adjudged as unreasonable set against the prospect of the new legislation then an Inspector can give that perspective weight. The problem is that until the legislation is made law the existing statute is of greater importance than a Government’s announced intent.

Those sites that are subject to appeals that have fallen after Eric Pickles July announcement and the reinstatement of the RSSs under the Court ruling will have to be carefully assessed against the relevance and fairness test. Again, this is highly subjective and is likely to lead to some fairly complex legal wrangling.

The following approach has been developed by the Planning Inspectorate to assist in determining which cases may merit reopening, which may be dealt with by a reference back to parties for comment and which cases may not need any additional action:

(a) where RSS policy has no material relevance because the decision is of limited (local only) scale and impact and the decision-maker can rely on local statutory development plan policy alone as would have been the case before 6 July 2010, no further action is required;

(b) where it appears to an Inspector that RSS policy may be material as a consequence of the significant (greater than local) scale or impact of the proposal, but the cases put by the parties make no reference to RSS, the Inspector must refer to the parties, seeking a view as to the materiality and weight of RSS policies. Chart should be informed.

(c) where a decision relies on both local policy and RSS policy on the same issue, it is possible that the local statutory development plan policy can be relied upon if by applying less weight to the RSS policy the outcome does not change;

(d) where both local policy and RSS policy are relied upon on the same issue, but the RSS is relied on to a greater extent and if as a result of applying reduced weight to the RS the outcome is less certain or could change, then the parties’ views should be canvassed (Chart should then be advised); and

(e) where the parties’ cases rely primarily on the RSS, then the parties should be canvassed.
(f) If there is a reference to the parties or a re-opening, the Inspector should consider whether the case can be completed following consideration of issues raised by the parties or whether a postponement or adjournment is warranted.

None of this is straightforward and each developer with a case will have to test the water on a site by site basis, authority by authority. The position of those Councils who ripped up their Local Plans with great glee since July is of most note, they are vulnerable to appeals.

It appears as if the authorities are carefully acknowledging that they cannot ignore the court ruling, but that they are aware of the Localism Bill hitting the ground very shortly. Therein this debate becomes a matter of timing and process, how quickly can developers get their sites reconsidered using the RSSs before Pickles gets the Localism Bill adopted as an Act.

Dr Paul Harvey
Consultant, Curtin&Co

Planning Inspectorate confirm RS numbers form part of all development plans "on an ongoing basis"

The Planning Inspectorate has issued guidance following thte CALA homes decision - effectively confirming that the 'former' RSS numbers will still apply in planning decisions until the abolition is ratified in legislation following the Localism Bill's passage through parliament.

This effectively leaves developers with an open window for applications and appeals on the basis of RSS numbers until this point in time (estimated as November 2012).

The Planning Inspectorate's key line as far as the development community is concerned reads as follows:

"Until any further announcement is made and/or legislation to formally repeal or revoke RS is implemented, the Cala decision means that RS is part of the development plan on an ongoing basis."

Updates on the situation will follow as they are made public.

A "victory for Localism" as Manchester becomes the first city-region authority outside of the capital

Manchester's super-council was signed off by Ministers today to become the first city-region authority outside of London.

The council will hold responsibility for housing, job creation, transport and economic development, and will formalise the Manchester region LEP approved by the DCLG and BIS last month.

Centre for Cities think tank analyst Keiran Larkin has hailed the move "a victory for localism" - watch out for further developments in city-region LEPs across the country over the coming months.......

Cala High Court ruling political analysis

An Analysis of the Political Dimension to the ‘Cala’ Decision

The High Court decision to wrap Eric Pickles across the knuckles for acting unlawfully when he unilaterally announced without primary legislation that the Regional Spatial Strategies and housing targets based on them were scrapped in July is a very serious political decision.

It is not just a case of political embarrassment that the High Court has judged the Secretary of State for Local Government and Communities to have acted unlawfully: The far more salient point is that councils across the country have been ripping up their Core Strategies and throwing out planning applications based on his decision.

If, for now, the Regional Strategies are alive and kicking and their targets are relevant and enforceable then developers will have a field day at appeal with sites that local authorities have thrown out, or sites that have been allocated in Core Strategies that authorities have since thrown out. Everybody who acted immediately on Pickles’ decision in July is now in a Pickle.

This decision could mean planning by appeal for the next year or more whilst the Localism Bill travels through the Parliamentary process. Developers may be submitting applications at some considerable pace based on the Regional Strategies policies and targets in order to beat the new legislation scrapping those same policies and targets. This is a recipe for confusion and for a lot of work for the Planning Inspectorate. It will also mean developers having to explain what will look like a very aggressive move to both councillors and communities who had assumed RSSs were gone for good.

You could not script the drama that this High Court decision is going to create. Watch out now for the Town Hall reaction which is likely to be as dramatic and angry – this is politics and the Judiciary are getting in the way of politicians doing what they want.

The Judgement:

The Judgement itself was very clear and stated that:

“The LDEDCA 2009 maintains in place, with some modifications, the whole elaborate machinery set up by Parliament under the PCPA 2004 to create a new statutory tier of regional planning guidance in the form of Regional Spatial Strategies, now re-named as Regional Strategies. I refer to some particular features of the regime set out in Part 5 of the 2009 Act below, but the main and critical point is that there is no sufficient indication in section 79(6) of the 2009 Act that Parliament intended to reserve to the Secretary of State a power to set that whole elaborate structure at nought if, in his opinion, it was expedient or necessary to do so because it was not operating in the public interest. If Parliament had intended to create such a power for the Secretary of State – something akin to a Henry VIII clause, since the practical effect of it would be to grant the Secretary of State power to denude primary legislation of any practical effect, without having to seek the approval of Parliament for such a course by passing further legislation – it would in my opinion undoubtedly have used much clearer language to achieve that effect and would have given the provision far greater prominence than section 79(6) has, tucked away as a final sub-section in a provision otherwise dealing with revision of Regional Strategies. A contrast may be drawn in that regard between the location of section 79(6) in Part 5 of the 2009 Act and the prominence given to section 70(1) as the leading provision in Part 5, which sets the scene for the provisions which follow in that Part and is the basis for the whole elaborate framework which that Part puts in place.

The provisions in Part 5 of the 2009 Act requiring Regional Strategies to be published, making provision for the public to have opportunities to make representations regarding their drafting (including, where appropriate, at examinations in public) and for community involvement in the preparation of such planning policy guidance (see section 75) are all strong indications as to the importance which Regional Strategies are intended to have in the operation of the planning system and for the guidance of the public. These are important means of ensuring public participation in the creation of planning policy and transparency in relation to such policy, and it is not plausible to suppose that Parliament intended that they should be capable of being simply by-passed by action taken by the Secretary of State under section 79(6), which carries with it no procedural protections or requirements at all;

The centrality which Parliament intended Regional Strategies to have in the planning system is underlined by the strong practical effect to be given to them as set out in section 36(3) and (6) of the PCPA 2004 (as amended by the 2009 Act), when applications for planning permission fall to be determined. Again, I do not consider that it is plausible to suppose that Parliament can have intended that the Secretary of State's power in section 79(6) should extend to abrogating the whole system to have in place and give effect to such a primary instrument of planning policy.”

Conclusion:

The central legal point is that the Judge declares that the legislation regarding Regional Strategies exists, that the Secretary of State does not have the delegated authority outside of Parliament to abrogate RSSs from the planning system and, crucially, that they remain in place and applicable to all planning considerations. It will take an Act of Parliament to remove them.

The Government is, at this stage, not proposing to appeal the decision and other developers are lining up to launch their own legal actions based on their own experiences around the country.

There are a few key points that need to be established:

1) How local authorities will react – they have neither the expertise nor finances to tackle legal challenges, and they will be wary of the High Court ruling. However, for those authorities that have already scrapped their LDFs or have taken decisions based on the scrapping of housing targets and RSS policies, they now find themselves in a no-man’s land. Developers will need to carefully explore the options with these authorities in light of the publication of the Localism Bill’s timetable.

2) The Localism Bill’s timetable is everything now: Just how much time have developers got to play with until the RSSs and Housing Targets are scrapped under primary legislation. There is no question that the Government is still committed to its new planning framework so it is a question of “when” rather than “if”.

3) The dialogue between councils and developers is now emphasised not just as a part of the Localism agenda, but also as a part of the process of planning between now and the adoption of the Localism Bill.

The three key points are watching for reaction, looking for time, and opening dialogue. This is a messy situation and everyone will be picking up the pieces and trying to feel their way over the coming weeks.

Dr Paul Harvey, Curtin&Co

DCLG launch Business Plan for 2011-2015

Timescales were published today by the DCLG in their ‘2011-2015 Business Plan’.

The Localism Bill will be introduced this month.

An ‘Affordable rent’ scheme which will contribute towards up to 150,000 new affordable homes will be implemented in April 2011.

Funding for town and parish councils to develop neighbourhood plans will be made available in April 2011.

The New Homes Bonus Scheme entitling planning authorities to cash for every new home built is also due to commence in April 2011.

RDA Assets list published

The RDA's asset-list was released today following in the wake of a parliamentary question and the Government's White Paper last week.

Should be interesting to see how the DCLG disposes of these in the coming months.

The full list will be made available online here in the coming days:

http://deposits.parliament.uk./

Curtin&Co win Rising Star Consultancy award

Curtin&Co was last night named “Rising Star Consultancy” at the prestigious Public Affairs News Awards. The award recognises the highest achieving public affairs agency which is less than two years old.

Presenting the award, Laura Kuenssberg (Chief Political Correspondent for the BBC) highlighted Curtin&Co’s rapid growth, project wins and excellent client references.

Chief Executive Tom Curtin said:

“It is a real honour to win this award and receive recognition from our peers. We strive to bring real value to our clients by providing effective communication with both local communities and politicians and this award shows that we are moving in the right direction.

We are also very grateful to our clients who provided such excellent references for us to really set our entry apart.”

Super-council for London

Following the CSR, radical plans have been announced for a new ‘super council’ in London. Under the plans the London Boroughs of Westminster, Hammersmith & Fulham, and Kensington & Chelsea would merge, saving up to £ 100m.

Some in a Labour camp see this as a sneaky move by the Conservatives to keep control of the London councils. While all the three boroughs currently have a Conservative majority, Hammersmith & Fulham was controlled by Labour until 2006 and there’s a good chance this could return to Labour in the next batch of elections. However if plans go ahead, Labour would still find themselves the minority party.

The Chief Executives of the three councils are currently examining the proposals and will report back in the new year. With £81bn of cuts being set out in the CSR and councils being hit with a 26% reduction in central government grants, maybe a merger is the only solution? It will be interesting to see if more councils follow suit.

Green light for housing incentives

The Conservatives have stuck with their commitment to incentivise local auhtorities to build more homes, confirming thei pledge to match council tax for the first six years on all new homes built.

A huge piece of news for the industry after the policy had looked in doubt last month as talks continued between the DCLG and HM Treasury - and a welcome piece of good news after this weeks CSR!

Comprehensive Spending Review Reaction

The day of reckoning – postponed

So, after six months of speculation, rows and leaks the country’s necessary but bitter medicine has been prescribed and dispensed.

There were few surprises, a number of worrying political flourishes which reminded me of the former Chancellor who had got us into this mess originally, but also some important strategic decisions such as the continued investment into science and infrastructure that should be warmly applauded.

The process was seriously compromised from the start by the Party’s electoral commitment to ‘protect Health and Overseas Aid’. As a result Welfare, the Home Office, Housing and Local Government have been really clobbered to make up the gap. We’ve probably squeezed our Armed Forces too much too given their existing commitments.

Welfare needed to be addressed, despite the pain this will cause people and families in genuine need, there is too much misdirected money which needs to be reigned in and targeted more effectively to those that really need it. With the country still in dire straits after the worst recession in 70 years there has to be a question as to how achievable some of the proposals are. I applaud the start to tackle the ludicracy of universal benefits, despite the cack handed way it was initially rolled out but l fear the Coalition Government will wither in its determination on this necessary reform.

The key question now is how is the patient going to respond?

I fear not well and ironically the real threat is not the Chancellor’s cuts but interest rates.

Few people can genuinely defend the current Welfare system or budget and with IDS we probably have the best chance for 40 years to reform the current mess but it will be tough. If Cameron didn’t enjoy the debacle over Child Benefit, he’s going to really squirm over the plethora of other measures that will need to be imposed to deliver the draconian savings set out yesterday.

Local Government after several years of squeeze of Gershon efficiencies, is now one of the most efficient parts of the public sector but is being tightly squeezed again. Worryingly infrastructure investment has been savagely hacked – too much in my opinion and many councils will find this unsustainable. Maybe this is where the funding from new houses will play a key role in rescuing them from the impending black hole.

The real elephant in the room is interest rates. Vast swathes of the middle classes have emerged from the last two years almost unscathed due to incredibly low interest rates. Inflation is above the Bank of England’s target, we have a VAT rise due in the New Year which will increase it yet further albeit for a just a year but the current level of interest is unsustainable. Has the Chancellor acted to prevent inflationary pressures? Not enough, and this will be the catalyst for real unrest and political change.


Frank Browne
Conservative Consultant


The death of compassionate Conservatism

The Comprehensive Spending Review is one of the most ideologically loaded decisions of any Government in recent years. This is the true face of the Tory Government - the ‘nasty party’ are back and they have some yellow friends this time!

The impact on the Welfare State and Public Sector of these cuts will be the greatest since the 1945 Post War Settlement. This is what many Tories came into politics to do - rip up welfare and slash and burn the public sector.

The rush to cut the deficit endangers the recovery and reduces the prospects for employment in the short term, and prosperity in the longer term. Before Nick Clegg discovered Greece (in the period between the ballot boxes closing and the door of his ministerial car opening) they, like Labour, argued that in the context of reducing the deficit, speed kills. It’s amazing how power has changed everything the Liberals ever believed.

There is nothing fair about Child Benefit changes that leave a single earner on £45,000 losing thousands of pounds, while a family on £80,000 gets to keep every penny. As things stand the government is looking for a bigger contribution to reducing the deficit to come from children than from the banks. That can’t be right.

The poorest 10% will bear a greater burden than the richest – with the middle squeezed, and women are shouldering three quarters of the cuts?

A 75% cut in the social housing capital budget and putting social rents up by 80% to bring them closer to the private market will result in a large increase in homelessness. The landscape of housing will change dramatically as people who cannot afford a home or as a result of these changes even a social home will find themselves excluded and what do we do then – leave families homeless who can’t afford to rent? Developers are going to be forced away from delivering affordable housing and in so doing large parts of our population will find that they cannot afford a home, this will hit social mobility very hard - it will make the poorest poorer.

This whole spending review is about easing the pain on the wealthy, avoiding doing too much damage to the middle class, and hitting the poorest hardest. It is regressive and cruel. In the middle of this political storm are the Liberal Democrats and they have a lot to answer for…it’s amazing how power corrupts principles, I’m sure Nick Clegg’s Conservative Party membership card is in the post.

Dr Paul Harvey
Labour Consultant






The silent partners

Liberal Democrat members will have received a communication from Nick Clegg following the CSR yesterday reassuring them that “Liberal Democrat values and priorities are written through the review, like the message in a stick of rock”.

A stick of rock straight out of the Conservative ‘tuck shop’ presumably - for which Mr Clegg has developed a worryingly sweet tooth in the last 3 months.

Liberal Democrat ministers have had an input into this review. This is beyond doubt - but the principles upon which Liberal Democrats would like to think their leadership base policy programmes and decisions upon are, bar a few exceptions, nowhere to be seen here.

The party’s rhetoric on ‘Fairness’ in particular has not translated into anything substantial. The concept itself needs redefining according to David Cameron, and the Conservatives have put down something of a marker in this regard over the past week.

The Comprehensive Spending Review was never going to be a pleasant experience (though the government’s front bench seemed to enjoy themselves) and, there were some tough but necessary decisions that needed to be taken by the government yesterday.

Cuts to welfare in some shape or form were inevitable and justified. More detail on Duncan-Smith’s plans for the area is long overdue, and any reasonable judgement of welfare cuts must take into account what will replace the current structure.

Investment in education, foreign aid and innovation are all welcome steps of course. Although granting the NHS holy cow status at the outset of this process has inevitably resulted in an over-squeeze of other areas. Whilst ultimately effective as a political tactic, ring-fencing emotive areas may come back to bite the Conservatives as the knock-on effects to other departments (particularly the Home Office and DCLG) begin to take hold over the next year.

What will deeply concern those who consider themselves on the progressive end of the political spectrum is the unrestrained joy with which these cuts were greeted from the government benches yesterday – and not just from the kind of Conservatives who have made it their life’s mission to deal a blow to the ‘nanny state’ (though there was no shortage of those lining the aisles).

It was an unpleasant moment – and one that reveals a deeply entrenched lack of empathy within the government with those who will be made jobless as a result of these cuts. Labour’s handwringing will only carry them so far in the political dynamic we now found ourselves in, and although the impact of these cuts will have a huge impact on the public’s perception of the coalition, the Labour party need to haul themselves out of 1945 and engage in the debate in the meaningful way if they are to present a credible challenge.

Ally Kennedy
Liberal Democrat Consultant

Why the Gloom?

Everyone seems to be expecting the CSR to be a doomsday for business. I am not surprised that planners are worried for their jobs – it is a feeling most industries will understand well after the last few years.

However, speaking regularly to politicians, there is a firm belief that the CSR is going to hit local government even worse than has been anticipated. When this has sunk in and budget deficits have become clear where will they find the plug for their spending gap? Development.

Localism says that there will be incentives for councils to build in order to meet their housing requirement (read “target”, if you like) and, even if this is not at the level that Shapps has been promoting to date, it will still be necessary in order to fund community projects.

So we should be looking at localism in a different way: as an opportunity.
The Government is right that it will mean less of the top-down, target-driven development which we saw under New Labour, but this does not (indeed, it cannot) mean the end of development full stop.

Instead, we need to begin from a new starting point: not the pristine masterplan which has been worked up for months before being released upon an unsuspecting public; but with that public itself. Planners will still be key because nobody else fully understands the complexities of the job they do. Under localism, though, they will not be the first cog turning in the planning machine any more, but will have to learn to respond to what the community wants. In this way, effective communication is the most important feature of localism – mediating between two distinct parties (communities and developers, planners, etc) to create win-win developments.

Will 'Third Party RIghts' lose out in the Localism Bill?

Interesting (although not altogether surprising) to note the DCLG's refusal to confirm the inclusion of 'third party rights' in the forthcoming Localism Bill today.

Whilst empowering communities remains top of the coalition's agenda, the move signifies a recognition that the country's planning system must not grind to a complete halt at the hands of local residents groups and vehement objectors.

The door remains open for an inclusion of third party rights in some shape or form, although one would expect this to be significantly watered down if a 'rebalancing of the planning system' is to avoid the obvious danger of gross imbalance in the opposite direction.

The coalition's resolve to reform remains firm.

However, industry professionals will doubtless be thankful that a sense of reason is also starting to manage expectations as to how sweeping the Localism agenda can be.

Opinion: Labour's Shadow Cabinet

We asked two of our political consultants to give ustheir views on Ed Miliband's recent Shadow Cabinet announcement, and a flavour of some key contests to watch in the months ahead.......

From Red Ed to Sensible Ed

So Ed Miliband has chosen his Shadow Cabinet, whilst being a David Miliband supporter in the run-up to the leadership election, I was warming towards Ed, thinking that maybe he would be able to move the party on from New Labour. After seeing his Shadow Cabinet appointments however, I am yet to be convinced.

Despite winning the most votes by far and being, and in my view the most qualified for the Shadow Chancellorship, Yvette Cooper was appointed as Shadow Foreign Secretary. Instead Ed Miliband appointed former postman Alan Johnson – the safe option, the easier to control option, possibly the keeping the seat warm for David option. Yvette Cooper was also appointed Shadow Minister for Equalities, yet it seems to me that rather than being a champion for equality Cooper is scared to step out of her husband’s shadow.

Balls takes on the role of Shadow Home Secretary, in my view one of Miliband’s best appointments, and Teresa May should be shaking in her leopard-print kitten heels at the prospect of a showdown.

Caroline Flint, who during her time as housing minister introduced new shared ownership and equity schemes and who is known for her outspoken views, takes the Shadow Cabinet role at the DCLG.

Burnham takes education, and Healey who came 2nd in the Shadow Cabinet elections takes health - both safe and sensible options.

Evidence that Ed Miliband is looking to the future however is in his appointment of several new MPs as junior ministers, including Chukka Umunna the Streatham MP who has been hailed as ‘Britain’s Barack Obama’ and named by the Economist as one of the 8 new MPs to watch.

He’s been called ‘Red Ed’, from his Cabinet appointments I see ‘Sensible Ed’, but when are we going to see ‘Progressive Ed’?

Anna Mitra
Labour Consultant




Christmas comes early for Mr Miliband

Parliament reconvenes this week after a lively conference season and the beginning of the end of the coalition government’s honeymoon.

Reports that Mr Cameron is rubbing his hands with glee following ‘Red Ed’s’ surprise victory over his brother are likely to be short lived following a canny set of cabinet appointments.

Whilst the political pundits got all hot and bothered about the surprise appointment of Alan Johnson to Shadow Chancellor, what most missed was Ed’s opening up of a second front with the positioning of Ed Balls to face the Home Secretary Theresa May. The Home affairs brief is almost always the most unpredictable and whilst Mrs May has surprised many by an adroit handling of the brief many considered too big for her, she will neither enjoy nor respond well to the pressure Balls will bring. Not only has he demonstrated that he is not the one trick treasury pony many expected him to be by being a robust and energetic education secretary, almost out Blairing Blair in this field; he has been one of the nimblest and most effective labour M.P.s to handle the transition from power to opposition, causing serious damage to Michael Gove on the way. Labour’s very own semi-trained polecat will ruthlessly exploit the differences between the Liberals and Conservatives in the government as well as being merciless in highlighting any failings – real or perceived.

The positioning of the former postman Alan Johnson against ‘never had a real job’ Osborne ahead of the necessary cuts is also a neat trick from a labour perspective. The Conservatives have, so far, failed to successfully get the message across as to why the heavily trailed cuts are necessary and with Johnson in place as Osborne’s shadow, Labour is well positioned to benefit from an empathy with the country over the cuts they really do not deserve.

The other ‘one to watch’ is Sadiq Khan who will be facing both Ken Clark and Nick Clegg. My guess is that he will be quick to out-tough Clarke on the justice brief and will ruthlessly exploit the gaping splits between the Conservatives and Liberals on the political and constitutional reforms currently rumbling through the Houses. Whilst the threat of a full scale Conservative revolt over AV is receding, prepare to enjoy the spectacle of Khan shamelessly highlighting the unease and mutual dislike on the green benches opposite him on this issue.

With tuition fees, electoral reform and the spending review coming up over the next 10 weeks, it will not be long before the Michaelmas term cannot end fast enough for the Con Dem coalition whereas ‘Red Ed’ could be forgiven for thinking that all his Christmases had arrived early.

Frank Browne
Conservative Consultant

Broken Promises and Yet More Cuts.

George Osborne’s announcement yesterday that child benefits will be cut to middle income families should have been nothing of a surprise. After all, this is the government that seems to want to make the young in society suffer the most, with the cutting of the BSF, Sure Start, pregnancy grants, Future Jobs Fund amongst many others. However, during the election campaign, one thing that was explicitly and repeatedly said by both parties in this coalition government was that universal benefits would not be cut. It seems clear now, that these election promises were just words. Only this morning, David Cameron was forced to apologise for not including these cuts in their party manifesto. An act of omission is one thing; a broken manifesto promise (which this is) is another.

Nobody denies the deficit or the fact that it has to be tackled, but the reality is that the deficit was caused by the irresponsible actions of the banks, not the average hard-working middle income families. The current government have attempted to insinuate that they had no choice; that their backs were against the wall over these cuts. Let me be very clear; this government had a choice and this is what they choose to do. They have on the one hand chosen to cut these benefits under the premise that it is only fair to ask everyone to contribute to the deficit, whilst on the other hand chosen to give the banks a multi-billion pound tax cut. Where is the consistency or ‘fairness’ in that?

However, for me, the problem goes much deeper. By deciding to test child benefit on single salaries, as opposed to the household income implies a complete disregard for single parents and the right of mothers (or fathers) to choose to remain at home. The reality of modern living means that families often make the choice to keep one parent at home, on the basis of the other being able to provide a higher wage packet. Furthermore, these proposals may place undue pressure on stay-at-home mums and dads to re-enter the workplace at a time when unemployment is still high, and these roles could go to those in desperate need of employment.

If the Tories were only after fairness, then I would argue that it is only ‘fair’ to look at household incomes, not to punish those that have worked hard and slowly and consistently worked their way up the salary ladder. They may be classed as middle-income but the reality is that a lot of people rely on these payments, set their budgets on the basis of having these payments and the loss of thousands of pounds a year (in addition to the earlier cuts mentioned above) would have a profound adverse reaction on them. In addition, the expected announcement of married couples tax credits all seem to paint the picture of what this government sees as the ‘ideal’ family set-up, a view which is not shared by me. One can only look forward (ha!) to October 20th to see what other misery this coalition has in store for families, children and the rest of us already struggling with their annihilation of public services.

Pavitar Mann
(Labour consultant)

The devil is in the (lack of) detail

Like every other Minister pouring over their departmental spending budgets, Grant Shapps has been keen to keep his cards close to his chest of late - and who can blame him.

As the Comprehensive Spending Review (and this Autumn's Localism Bill) draw ever closer, so does the dreaded fleshing out of government policy.

The process of soundbite-peppered branding begins to morph into a tangible legislative program, and it is upon this (not the all-to-easy rhetoric of 'fiscal responsbility', 'reconceptualisation' and 'unleashing entrepreneurail spirit') that the coalition will be judged.

During the brief period of limbo we now find ourselves in, a few policy details will be drip-fed through to demonstrate the government's ongoing reformist and progressive credetials.

Occassionally, however, details of this kind trickle through that might give you the impression that the policy had not been entirely thought through. Grant Shapps' announcement on Wednesday regarding Right to Build is one such detail.

The previous requirement of 90% in a local ballot to trigger automatic approval of a development was, in truth, a ridiculous figure if the policy was ever to achieve its desired aims - empowering communities, devolving responsibility and reducing bureaucracy in local government.

In this sense, the new 75% figure is a progressive move (if one agrees with the policy's premise in the first instance).

However, the emergence of 'Community Right to Build organisations' in the rhetoric presents another huge grey area - with the structure and remit of these organisations (and their relationship with the local planning authority) still anyone's guess.

Doubtless we will receive "further details after the CSR/Localism Bill" - and perhaps the policy will prove to be a grand success.

But, it is the lack of clarity and detail that has industry professionals tearing their hair out on these proposals - and thankfully, the waiting is almost over.

Ally Kennedy
Liberal Democrat Consultant

Which 'Jedward' to choose......???

"Reports of my death are greatly exaggerated" said Mark Twain after a newspaper published an obituary of him.

The same could be said of the Labour Party, who continue to perform well in local by-elections.

They have just taken control of Exeter City Council, which is a fairly major coup, and held Norwich.

In the euphoria of the general election, it was easy to miss how well Labour did in the local elections of the same day - especially in London.

When one of the brothers Miliband succeeds their predeecessor as the party's new hope - their opponents will be genuinely wary of them, with good cause.

Whichever 'Jedward' act the public opts for in the end (whether it be Ed/David or David/Nick), the next few months should make for interesting reading.

Pushing incentives another rung down the ladder of localism

Interesting aside on the localism debate from Policy Exchange recently - the think-tank widely regarded as the epitomy of 'Cameron Conservatism' during the party's time in opposition and a key influencer on the no.10 policy unit.

The group has suggested residents in specific areas most affected by development should vote on project proposals, and be provided with cash incentives to persuade them to back development in their area.

The move's motivation has been publicised as preventing small and militant community minoirites effectively lobbying councils against development without legitimacy as representatives of the local view.

This, no one would argue with.

Whether local residents are best placed to weigh the strategic considerations of a council's vision against their interests as local residents fairly and objectively will remain a contentious issue.

Grant Shapps' silence on the matter suggests we will not see this being muted as a policy option in the Localism Bill - although it may resurface should localism's mantra fail to translate into effective and reasoned legislation by the end of the year.

PAN nominated Curtin and Co for rising star consultancy award

Public Affairs News (PAN) have announced the nomination of Curtin&Co under the category of "Rising Star Consultancy" at this years PAN Awards ceremony.

See further details on the nominees, categories, past winnners and the awards ceremony itself at:

www.publicaffairsnews.com/panawards

Featured Article: The Problem with Localism

Our consultants have been grappling with the implications of Localism for regeneration in the UK as well as the wider planning system.

You can view their thoughts in this weeks Regeneration & Renewal Magazine here:

www.regen.net/news/ByDiscipline/Policy/1024705/Opinion-problem-localism/


(if you are not a current subscriber to the magazine, type ''opinion problem localism'' into Google and click on the first link)

Planning in the South West - to scrap or not to scrap?

Interesting to see a number of Council's in the South West have scrapped their housing targets this week, lopping almost 60,000 off the regional requirement in total.

In the same week, the Gloucester, Tewkesbury & Cheltenham Joint Core Strategy team have used the former RSS figures to publish their urban extension outline document, for use as a guideline in determining suitable development sites in the area.

Mixed messages, as always, appearr the dominant form of communication with regard to Planning matters under the coalition, and until we get some more clarification on the incentives on offer for ambitious Councils from Shapps et al., this sort of uncertainty looks set to continue. We could see similar steps taken up and down the UK as Councils struggle to adapt to the interim period ofuncertainty. Watch this space.........

A View from the Bridge

Never out of the limelight for long, Boris Johnson has returned to the fore.

This morning he issued supplementary Planning guidance for London's View Management Framework, promising greater clarity and a closer resemblance to the Londonplan policies, protecting views of key landmarks and world heritage sites.

Let's hope the plans will avoid another St. Paul's episode in the months ahead!

Click on the GLA website link below to view the document:

http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runs-london/mayor/publications/planning/revised-london-view-management-framework-spg

Chris Huhne's Climate statement to the Commons

Interesting reading over the DECC climate statement delivered by Huhne to the Commons on Tuesday.

Good to see some of the Climate Secretary's comments in the Sunday Telegraph on the importance of rolling-out wind farm development fleshed out to include a few more specifics.

(Although, in essence, the document is another coalition policy programme broad in scope but very thin on specifics).

Nonetheless, some useful clues of what we can expect from the reports '32 actions'.

Click on the links below to view the DECC's accompanying press release and the annual climate statement document itself

Media launch: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/pn10_85/pn10_85.aspx

Annual climate statement:

http://www.decc.gov.uk/media/viewfile.ashx?filetype=4&filepath=what%20we%20do/uk%20energy%20supply/237-annual-energy-statement-2010.pdf

Picklewatch: turning of the tide?

South Oxfordshire

South Oxfordshire Council led the pack in withdrawing its core strategy in June, and could prove a trend-setter agan over the next few months as it re-commences forumlation of its core strategy this week. The authority clearly has one eye on the end of its current Local Plan in 2011. How pragmatic/politically prudent other Councils choose to me in the timing of teir corer strategy negotiations remains to be seen, and should make for interesting reading.

Commenting on the news on the South Oxfordshire authority's website, Planning Cabinet Member Cllr Angie Paterson said:

"We now have a strong steer from government that we are responsible for establishing the right pattern of development for our area, including the right level of local housing provision. The withdrawal of the South East Plan means that housing targets will no longer be imposed upon us.

"The responsibility is now ours to address how best to meet the various challenges facing us, including how best to foster a healthy local economy and how to meet the present and on-going need for more housing.

"To respond fully to these new freedoms and responsibilities will mean a fresh approach to producing local planning policy documents and we know this will take some time to do, probably several years. But in the meantime we are also very conscious that our current Local Plan only takes us to 2011. We need a clear vision to carry us through the next few years until we can deliver the next generation of local plan. We need a vision that will help us to continue to attract funding and investment for those areas where we are confident there is support for further development and that will also ensure we are in control of what development happens elsewhere - development led by our vision and not by speculative planning applications."

Read the full article here: http://www.southoxon.gov.uk/ccm/content/cmt/press-releases/july-2010/council-moves-ahead-with-core-strategy.en;jsessionid=aEMrMdpT8jW4

London autonomy bid

Interesting news on London's autonomy as Boris and the London politicos send a unified letter to Eric Pickles outlining a proposed devolutionary package for the capital.

View the full letter here:

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/London%20Councils/DevolutiontoLondonjointlettertoSecretaryofState.pdf

RTPI questions 'Right to Build' credentials

Interesting to see the RTPI has warned that the government's Right to Build proposals could "disempower" communities by bypassing the current structure of representative Council decision-making.

The RTPI's spokesperson Jamie Hodge's comments are particularly revealing:

"Proper planning scrutiny has served us well whereas this proposal appears to disempower local authorities by removing their right to determine development proposals and may mean that new housing built as a result may conflict with existing wider community priorities, and will only have to meet nationally proscribed minimum standards, even if the local authority wishes to see higher design standards in its own area."

Huhne eyes wind farm development surge

Some good news for Wind Farm developers yesterday with the Energy Seretary Chris Huhne's statement on the importance of wind technology in averting a possible power crisis.

To read the full Yorkshire Post article, click on the link below:

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Energy-Secretary-supports-increase-in.6439035.jp

Shapps announces 'Right to Build' proposals

The coalition Government has launched its Right to Build policy, allowing rural area communities to build homes, shops and other local amenities without planning permission.

Early indications suggest the detail will be published in the Localism Bill (set for Autumn 2011).

We may well see an unrealistically high threshold for voting through planning proposals, or another caveat that effectively prevents the populist thrust of the announcemens translating into effective action.

Picklewatch - Pickles outlines plans to abolish regional government

Eric Pickles, Communities and Local Government Secretary, has announced the Government's intention in principle to abolish the remaining eight Government Offices for the Regions across England, subject to using the Spending Review to resolve consequential issues. The final decisions will be made at the end of the Spending Review in the autumn.

http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/corporate/1646834

Clarification of LEPs

Adrian Bailey, Labour MP for West Bromwich West, has the unenviable task of determining how LEP partnerships will work in practice.

How local indpendence can be reconciled with cross-boundary cooperation could prove an intractable problem for the BIS committee tasked with the policy's thorough formulation.

As always, details look set to remain unclear until the Localism Bill's publication.

Planning Officers Society offer Pickles Advice on Cutting Red Tape

The Planning Officers Society today responded to Eric Pickles call for planning professionals to advise him on how to simplify the planning system and do away with time consuming and unnecessary bureaucracy and red tape.

Links to the letter and list of suggestions are below


Letter from Planning Officers Society re deregulation suggestions

Planning Officers Society easing the Burden of regulation draft paper

Shapps vows to relinquish Treasury's grip on local authority funding

Local government minister Grant Shapps yesterday promised to push the Treasury to relax its grip on local bodies' financial activities.

In a question and answer session at the National Regeneration Summit in London, Shapps said that he would "ask the Treasury for more flexibility" in areas such as prudential borrowing.

He said: "I think local authorities have the ability to put together sensible schemes and do extraordinary things."

He also told the audience that he already had anecdotal evidence that the government’s financial incentives for councils to allow new housebuilding were taking effect.

The Conservatives have pledged to match the council tax for each new property in a local authority area with an equivalent contribution to the council for the six years after the house is built.

Shapps said: "Major developers have told me that local authorities are starting to work with them because they realise that their finances depend on it".

National tenants body funding slashed

The Government is to stop funding the quango set up by Labour to give tenants a voice in national policymaking.

National Tenant Voice was told this week by housing minister Grant Shapps that its funding will be withdrawn.

Set up by the Labour government in April this year with a budget of more than £1m, NTV was made up of 50 unpaid tenant representatives and a 15-member board, nine of which were tenants.

A spokesman for the Department for Communities and Local Government said the organisation was "too distant" and represented poor value for money.

He added that Shapps had asked NTV chair Michael Gelling to consult members of the organisation on how some elements of its operations could continue.

"The best way to ensure tenants have a more influential role over the services they receive is by putting more power and voice directly into their hands", the spokesman said.

Northants & Leicestershire lead the way in LEP formations

Cllr Harker of Northamptonshire County Council was the first leader to meet with Communities Secretary Eric Pickles about the bodies, and announced today that the council is proposing a new Local Enterprise Partnership looking to join forces with Leicestershire and other potentially interested partners to drive the wider area forward.

Cllr Harker said: "What is clear is that the growth agenda with its thousands of new homes in the county is now a thing of the past. What is also clear is that we will be expected to set up more local partnerships with our neighbouring counties to plan the future.

"This is a golden opportunity for us to now drive forward new arrangements working at a more local level to reduce bureaucracy and creating new ways to boost the local economy and enterprise of the area.

"I am delighted that Northamptonshire with Leicestershire were the first authorities to have discussions with Eric Pickles about Local Enterprise Partnerships, and I am equally delighted that already we have made real progress in this area. We are working with Leicestershire and hopefully with others on proposals which would see a partnership set up of leading business figures and the public sector to drive investment, planning, infrastructure, skills and employment in our counties.

"We are also already talking to other potentially interested partners to join this Local Enterprise Partnership and look forward to submitting our proposals to government in the coming weeks."

RDAs forced to drop ERDF grants

The government has ordered regional development agencies to halt further grants to projects seeking to access £2.7bn of European funding, the body representing England's regional development agencies said today.

The directive, issued by the Treasury on Monday, covers the £2.3bn European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and Regional Competitiveness and Employment programme, which are in place across the whole of England outside Cornwall.

It also covers Cornwall’s access to the ERDF Convergence Fund, a £384m funding stream reserved for areas with a GDP of less than 75% of the EU average, a spokesman for South West Regional Development Agency (Swerda) said.

The delivery of both ERDF funding streams is managed by the RDAs.

The funding covers the period 2007-2013, meaning up to 50% of grants have already been accessed.

'London will keep its housebuilding targets' - Deputy Mayor

London will retain its housebuilding targets despite the fact that they are being dropped in the rest of the country, the capital's deputy mayor said today.

Regionally-set housebuilding goals have been dropped as part of the coalition government’s revocation of regional spatial strategies. But, speaking at Regeneration & Renewal’s National Regeneration Summit, Greater London Authority deputy mayor Sir Simon Milton said that they would remain in the capital. "The affordability of housing is a big issue," he said. "It would be bizarre for [the mayor] not to be concerned about the production of housing".

However, he said the mayor’s team disagreed with the methodology that had been used to produce housing targets for some boroughs under the last government, and that revisions to those borough’s figures would be presented to the ongoing public inquiry into the draft London plan.

Urban regeneration company funding up for review

Sir Bob Kerslake says the agency is assessing its involvement in various delivery vehicles.


The boss of England's housing and regeneration quango has said that its future funding for urban regeneration companies is "an area up for review".

Homes & Communities Agency (HCA) chief executive Sir Bob Kerslake said the organisation was reviewing its involvement in "a range of different local delivery vehicles", including urban regeneration companies (URCs), on a "case-by-case basis".


Last month, housing and regeneration minister Grant Shapps revealed that the HCA would not be abolished under the new coalition Government, although it faced a future as a smaller body.

The planning power vacuum

Eric Pickles announcement that housing targets are scrapped and with them the Regional Spatial Strategies is all well and good, but what do Council’s do now?

The Conservatives and Liberals current view is that all things to do with central government are bad. They have an ideological aversion to the role of government in society; therefore planning matters should be devolved away from government.

By removing the only mechanism that existed to provide a framework and context for development beyond the individual local authority and placing the responsibility on local Council’s for determining numbers, the coalition have simultaneously created a planning vacuum and removed themselves from responsibility for its consequences.

How many houses do you know you can build if the money for a new motorway junction, or hospital or school isn’t confirmed?

Is there a role for the old County Structure Plans?

Now Council’s are waiting on every announcement as they have no idea which way to jump, and the uncertainty that this creates in the development industry is not healthy in a time of fragile recovery.

The Con Dem idea is to devolve the responsibility, but at the moment this responsibility is handed down to Councils without the means to deliver. The government are able to blame the Council’s if they get it wrong because it’s their role now to determine how many houses get built, where and with what infrastructure.

There is an idea that Council’s could keep a sum of money from each unit built, a Council Tax rebate to the authority for infrastructure. This could be millions for localities based on building thousands of units, but it will be a trickle down fund that will not meet major infrastructure costs of motorways, hospitals or schools. Also, Council’s do have a tendency to divert monies into pet projects rather than focusing investment on the bigger picture.

The aim of this localism is sound, to empower local communities to directly influence what housing gets built where.

In reality the localism the current Coalition are delivering is devolved responsibility to Council’s who, as a reaction to over a decade of disempowerment, will horde their new powers and decide for communities without necessarily listening to them. The Councils that use the new framework in the manner it is intended by truly enabling a bottom up planning system will be few.

It’s all well and good unpicking the previous government’s policies and structures, but you need a coherent idea of what you are replacing it with. Interestingly, as we slowly move towards the publishing of the Localism Bill, the drip of reality is taking hold. SHLAA’s are now valuable pieces of evidence, Council’s can now work together in cross-boundary economic partnerships, and entities such as Thames Gateway which make sense and are good examples of regionalism working are now to be kept in some form. Opposition rhetoric is becoming government reality

Watch this space; localism won’t go that far because it isn’t in the politician’s interests that it does.

Dr Paul Harvey, Curtin&Co

More political commentary from Curtin&Co

Stay tuned for our Labour consultant's analysis of the coalition's planning power vacuum.................

Coalition halves eco-town funding

The coalition government has halved funding for eco-town projects, the Department for Communities and Local Government has confirmed.

In a letter sent last week to local authorities working on plans for eco-town developments, housing minister Grant Shapps told council leaders he was reducing funding for 2010/11 from a total of £70 million to £35 million.

Earlier this year the previous Labour government pledged £60 million to fund homes and infrastructure projects on the first four confirmed eco-town sites in Hampshire, Cornwall, Norfolk and Oxfordshire. A further £10 million was pledged for 11 projects in the second wave of the eco-towns programme. Those amounts have now been reduced to £30 million and £5 million respectively.

A spokesman for the DCLG said: "While there has been a 50 per cent cut in eco-town funding awards for 2010/2011, this still provides a good level of start-up funding for these projects in the current circumstances."

Pickles blasts ERDF mismanagement

The Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles MP, today pledged to end the mismanagement of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

The Communities and Local Government accounts for last year, laid today, show the extent of the financial irregularities in the administration of the ERDF by the previous Government. The failure to ensure compliance with EC rules has left a bill for more than £150 million to be picked up by taxpayers.

EC Auditors found instances where projects allegedly failed to keep proper records or used the funding inappropriately. The Department is challenging these issues robustly. But where there is no convincing case, the EC will impose financial penalties on the Government for these failures of monitoring and, where the misspent funds can't be recovered from projects, the taxpayer has to bear the loss.

"The 'financial irregularities' which have been reported mean that we are likely to need to find up to £155 million to pay back to Europe.

"This mismanagement ends now.

"I am urgently reviewing how we manage and distribute these funds to make sure taxpayers have confidence that their money is not being wasted. And I will be pressing the EC Commissioner about the needless bureaucracy which holds up the money from being spent to kick start the recovery in Britain."

Pickles calls for planners input

Secretary of state for communities Eric Pickles has invited "council staff and sector experts" to suggest regulations which could be scrapped to improve their ability to do their jobs.

Unveiling the initiative today Pickles published a list of what he described as "unnecessary regulations, ridiculous micromanagement or outdated laws".

The list includes a proposal to combine the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995/419 and 16 amendment orders into one. Pickles said this would "greatly clarify the planning application system for local authorities, applicants, and other interested parties. The greater clarity provided will free-up valuable local planning authority officer time, which can be redirected towards more fruitful actives than wading through pages of amendments to secondary legislation."

Pickles LGA speech

Click on the link below to view Eric Pickles' speech to the Local Government Association this week:


http://www.24dash.com/news/local_government/2010-07-07-Eric-Pickles-speech-to-the-Local-Government-Association-annual-conference-in-full

Pickles scraps Labours 3 million homes target

Labour's plans to build three million new homes by 2020 have been scrapped.

Gordon Brown announced plans shortly after becoming Prime Minister in July 2007 to build three million new homes by 2020 in a bid to stimulate new house building.

However the Government said yesterday that "the reality is that construction has slowed down so much the country is facing the lowest peacetime housebuilding rates since 1924".

Mr Pickles said he was "hammering another nail in the coffin of unwanted and an unaccountable regional bureaucracy".

"Communities will no longer have to endure the previous Government's failed Soviet tractor-style top-down planning targets. They were terrible, expensive, time-consuming ways to impose house building and worst of all threatened the destruction of the Green Belt.

"They were a national disaster that robbed local people of their democratic voice, alienating them and entrenching opposition against new development."

Pickles confirms RSS scrap

Secretary of state for communities Eric Pickles has announced the revocation of Regional Strategies (RSSs) with immediate effect.

Pickles made the announcement in a letter sent today to chief planning officers in Local Planning Authorities across England.

The letter includes guidance which reads: "In the longer term the legal basis for Regional Strategies will be abolished through the 'Localism Bill' that we are introducing in the current Parliamentary session.


Click on the link below to read the letter in full, which includes a Q&A appendix:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/1631904.pdf

U-turn on LEP funding

The coalition Government has withdrawn its stipulation that the public-private partnerships with which it intends to replace the regional development agencies will have to fund their own day-to-day running costs.

Earlier this week, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Department for Communities and Local Government jointly wrote to councils inviting them to bid to become new local enterprise partnerships.
A version of the letter uploaded on the DCLG website on Tuesday morning said that LEPs would have no dedicated funding for running costs. The news cast doubt on coalition government assurances that, in areas of the country where councils and businesses backed RDAs, they would be able to retain them more or less as they were, albeit in a rebadged form.

Localism Bill Analysis

The cut and thrust of the Localism Bill looks set to focus on three main elements: transparency, accountability and, most prominently, devolved decision-making powers.

Devolved decision-making - Regional Spatial Strategies and Comprehensive Area Assessments will be consigned to the scrap-heap in a planning system shakeup that promises to be ruthlessly comprehensive in tackling ‘waste’ and centralised bureaucracy.

However, in spite of some over-zealous rhetoric and enthusiastic cuts of RDAs amongst other cross-Council organisations, do not expect ‘umbrella’ authorities to disappear entirely. The Conservatives Green Paper in early 2010 is clear in its assertion that it is uniformity in the application of planning procedures that is the enemy, not the administrative network itself.

Greg Clarke’s announcement this week regarding obligatory cooperation between Council’s on cross-boundary policy further acknowledges the limitations of localism as a panacea for the ills of Labour’s planning system. Elements of its ties to central government will quite necessarily and sensibly remain, and it would be a mistake to assume that some of the slash and burn rhetoric flying around parliamentary press conferences will translate into concrete legislative proposals.

Accountability - Unelected regional bodies will almost certainly go in their entirety, with Local Authority Leader Boards the first to feel the sharp end of the Localism agenda. The proposal of a democratically elected Infrastructure Unit will be of particular interest to developers involved with Transport projects, who may find political motivation begins to play a greater role in securing project approval and funding. The power for residents to instigate local referendums on ‘any local issue’ will prove a thorny topic, and is likely to be dropped at least in part if the coalition is to avoid stalling development further following the standoff that has emerged since Eric Pickles letter to Councils on 27th May.

Transparency - There is a real appetite for Council boss salaries in particular to be exposed, a desire that has verged on blood-lust in the local press since the Coalition’s formation brought with it a sense of opportunity for radical reform. Councils will publish the names and wages of salaried staff members, as (in all likelihood) will the vast majority of all other publicly funded bodies.


-----------------------------------

Speculation over the Localism Bill’s contents will doubtless continue until it is first tabled in Westminster in September (a date that will be subject to the successful passage of George Osborne’s emergency budget). The potential disparity between the ‘localism’ of Conservative rhetoric and the Bill’s legislative program is certainly there, although one suspects that by and large the Localism Bill will deliver, at least in part, on the Conservative’s program of greater flexibility and civil engagement in local government. Whether the Coalition’s legislative program will have its desired effects, on the other hand, remains to be seen.......

Localism Bill will enforce Council cooperation and compliance

Decentralisation Minister Greg Clarke has announced The Localism Bill will contain a statutory obligation for councils to cooperate across area boundaries.

In a keynote speech to yesterday’s RTPI Conference, Clark said he was "passionately in favour of localism and passionately in favour of development."

He emphasised points made in Eric Pickles' letter to Councils last month, stating the importance of ensuring that Regional Spatial Strategies were "cast aside and they won’t come back."

However, he said that a shift away from regionalism wouldn’t see the end of cooperation between councils. The Localism Bill will contain an "obligation on authorities to cooperate on those parts of their policies which cross borders and boundaries and in a way that cross boundaries that were perhaps not recognised in the regional system."

Housing and Planning Unit scrapped 'with immediate effect'

In a letter to stakeholders Richard McCarthy, director general of housing and planning at the Department for Communities and Local Government, said that the National Housing and Planning Advice Unit would be wound up.

"In order to achieve savings, it has been decided to close the NHPAU with immediate effect," the letter said.

"This does not mean that the new Government is any less committed to increasing housing supply."