Bacon, N

Hilder, P

Woodcraft, S

English

UCL Discovery

The Smith InstituteThe Smith Institute is an independent think tank that has been set up to look at issues which flow from the changing relationship between social values and economic imperatives.If you would like to know more about the Smith Institute please write to:The DirectorThe Smith Institute3rd Floor52 Grosvenor GardensLondonSW1W 0AWTelephone +44 (0)20 7823 4240Fax +44 (0)20 7823 4823Email info@smith-institute.org.ukWebsite www.smith-institute.org.ukDesigned and produced by Owen & OwenEdited by Geoff Mulgan and Fran Bury of the Young Foundationthe renewal of localgovernmentdoubledevolution:2006double devolution: the renewal of local governmentT H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T EEdited by Geoff Mulgan and Fran Bury of the Young FoundationPublished by the Smith InstituteISBN 1 905370 02 4© The Smith Institute 2006double devolution:the renewal of localgovernmentDouble Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 12T H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T EContentsPrefaceBy Wilf Stevenson, Director, Smith InstituteIntroduction: Local government and the case for double devolutionGeoff Mulgan, Director of the Young Foundation, and Fran Bury, Young Foundation ResearcherPart I: DiagnosisChapter 1: Devolution from a local politician’s perspectiveLord Smith of Leigh, Leader of Wigan Council Chapter 2: Governing in democratic societiesProfessor Sir Robert Worcester, Founder of MORI and Visiting Professor ofGovernment at the London School of Economics & Political Science  Part II: History and international experienceChapter 3: International localism  Sir Simon Jenkins, Journalist and Author Chapter 4: The French commune – lessons in local government reform   Laurie Howes, Senior Lecturer and Head of the Centre for Local Policy Studies at the University of Gloucestershire  Part III: PrescriptionChapter 5: How to develop high-quality leadership through a cross-sectorcareer structure Phil Swann, Director of the Tavistock Institute  Chapter 6: New roles and structures for local government   Professor Gerry Stoker, Professor of Political Science and Director of the Institute for Political & Economic Governance at the University of Manchester  Chapter 7: Overcoming the practical obstacles to local government reform   Sue Charteris, Public Policy Consultant and a Founding Director of Shared Intelligence   4524304050606672Double Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 2T H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T E3Chapter 8: How changes in finance can help develop a more effective local government tier  Richard Brooks, Research Director of the Fabian Society and Lead Councillor forResources at the London Borough of Tower Hamlets  Chapter 9: Neighbourhoods – the role and nature of the very local tier of governance  Paul Hilder, Policy Lead for Transforming Neighbourhoods, Saffron James, ResearchFellow and Project Manager for Transforming Neighbourhoods, and Nicola Bacon,Head of Local Working at the Young Foundation  Chapter 10: Giving cities more power over their economic destinies Dermot Finch, Director of the Centre for Cities at the Institute of Public Policy Research   Chapter 11: Alternative policy approaches to governing rural areas Lord Chris Haskins, Farmer and Chair of the Council of the Open University    Chapter 12: Joining it all up – how different tiers of government can be encouraged to work co-operatively Lucy de Groot, Executive Director of the Improvement & Development Agency    Part IV: PracticeChapter 13: Been there; done that  Nick Raynsford, MP for Greenwich and Woolwich   Chapter 14: Leave them alone – a Lib Dem view  Sarah Teather MP, Liberal Democrat Shadow Secretary for Community and Local Government   Chapter 15: London’s experience of devolutionNeale Coleman, Director of Business Planning and Regeneration at the Greater London Authority   Chapter 16: A new model for regional development agencies and local government Tom Riordan, Chief Executive of Yorkshire Forward78849096102110116122128Double Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 320 Nweke et al (2002) Otim-Nape et al (2000)T H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T E83Chapter 9Neighbourhoods – the role andnature of the very local tier ofgovernance   Paul Hilder, Policy Lead for Transforming Neighbourhoods, Saffron James, Research Fellow and Project Manager forTransforming Neighbourhoods, and Nicola Bacon, Head of Local Working at the Young FoundationDouble Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 83Neighbourhoods – the role and nature of the very local tier of governancePaul Hilder, Saffron James and Nicola Bacon What is commonly missing from the debate about devolving powers to local government,and beyond that to neighbourhoods, is the citizen perspective. So far at least, the debateis overwhelmingly a top-down one, which tends to focus on the structures that are neededto empower communities and improve services. But what does devolution mean to realpeople who are trying to improve their communities or to tackle problems that affect theireveryday lives? How can they imagine and engage with community or neighbourhoodgovernance? What will they be able to do, and how?What really mattersTo answer these questions it is helpful to think about what is important to people andcommunities. At the top of the list is practical action. What matters most to people isbeing able to get things done to improve their quality of life, whether that means tacklingantisocial behaviour, better street lighting, making sure that there is more for young people to do, more local nursery school places, or less rubbish on the street corner. Theconnections between politics, policy and public services are played out at the very locallevel where gaps and problems become pressing issues that affect people’s sense of safety, security and belonging. And, it is at street level that practical action can have the most impact.This suggests that structures are less important than practice in neighbourhoods. For frustrated mothers, disaffected teenagers or lonely pensioners, it doesn’t matter whetherthe vehicle for change is a neighbourhood council, a parish councillor, a community trustor a neighbourhood management partnership, so long as their opinion is counted, theirvoice is heard at the right level and they see tangible results or, if not, get a reasonableexplanation. While structures set the frame for action – enabling communities to engagewith public authorities and service providers – they should be seen as a means to an end.The long-term vision of a new, localised future should not be imagined as a proliferationof new governance structures, but as a new relationship between citizens and the state,built on widespread participation, partnership and collaboration, and supported by anenabling and legitimate framework. For citizens, this means new powers for people to make practical things happen in theirneighbourhood – powers that are clearly communicated, easy to access and delivered inT H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T E84Double Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 84a way that makes sense for the unique social, cultural, ethnic, religious and spatial configurations of different communities. Put simply: opportunities for people to influencedecisions about the services they receive through participatory neighbourhood, communityor parish planning; powers to tackle problems at a local level through partnershipsbetween police, primary care trusts, schools and other bodies who can make things happen; rights to suggest improvements, ideas and initiatives where there are gaps orunsatisfactory services; and ways to shape local spending through delegated budgets.In practice this means that people should be able to play a part in imagining and constructing a future for their communities – changing the way they react to the challenges, frustrations and possibilities of their everyday environment, as these visions of a new, localised future suggest.What if…? Paths to a new, localised futureIrritated citizen: I think my local park could be much better. There’s nothing for my eight-year-old, just a little playground for small children. I think there should be an area wheredogs can’t go and I don’t understand why they keep planting all these boring flowers –some parks just look much better.In the new, localised future: you send an email to your neighbourhood council. The neighbourhood council support team pass it on to the parks department and to your localcommunity councillor. The parks department emails you back and sends you its plan foryour park, asking whether you have any comments. The councillor replies and asks if youwould like to be involved in the steering group. You say no (much too busy!) but youwould like to be kept up to date. The park plan picks up on some things you want, butnothing about better planting. You have another thought about setting up a communitygarden in an overgrown corner where local people could get involved in gardening. Itwould be a great thing for the kids with learning disabilities who go to the centre downthe road. A couple of months later, Groundwork contacts you to say it has been given acontract to develop community gardens throughout the area, would you like to talk tothem about your ideas? You have become so enthused by the work you’ve done that you say yes. Irritated citizen: There’s nothing for older people in this area. I am really worried aboutmy neighbour, who seems so lonely and depressed. I’ve got so worried I talked to the localpensioners’ group, who say they are looking to see what could be done. They seemedgreat, but will anyone listen to them?T H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T E85Double Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 85In the new, localised future: the pensioners’ group, which is made up of local residents andhas a strong tradition of advocating for people’s entitlements, organises a petition of residents to ask their neighbourhood representatives to look at the issue. The petition of1,000 signatures is easy to organise; the pensioners’ group uses its local contacts. Peoplein the area know this is a problem since the Age Concern day centre closed last year. Theneighbourhood council responds by launching a local inquiry. This results in an action planbinding the primary care trust, local authority social services and the neighbourhoodcouncil together to take steps to resolve the issue. The local primary school becomes an important part of the solution – a spare Portakabin can be re-equipped as an older person’s resource centre. Its users can tap into the school’s IT, and many become volunteers at the nursery and helping older children with reading.Evolution, not revolutionIs this vision unrealistic? At the moment, many people are disengaged from local democraticinstitutions, electoral turnout is low, and when services consult the public the response isfar from overwhelming. A frequent response to debates about local accountability andnew governance institutions is that apathy, disengagement and cynicism will make anynew localism unworkable. While there is profound disengagement from political processes and from local governanceinstitutions, many small-scale examples do exist of people getting involved in runningtheir neighbourhood. Some of these have been prompted by regeneration investment;others have emerged more organically, without state support. In most areas there is asmall core of local activists who will step up to take part in new activities. Behind themstand many more people who want, in small ways, to become more involved in what happens in their neighbourhood and who could, if inspired and nurtured, contribute significantly to its governance. In 2005 half of the population volunteered at least once a month – equivalent to over 20 million people, a significant increase from 2001.36Many of the building blocks of this future can already be found in communities aroundthe UK. Experiments in neighbourhood management in 250 different areas have shownhow services and citizens can work better together, and from Wolverhampton toLewisham, the process of reinvigorating the role of democratically elected representativesin leading such processes is under way. T H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T E8636 Early results from the Home Office citizenship survey, 2005.Double Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 86T H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T E87In Milton Keynes, neighbourhood councils work closely with their citizens, helping to tackle localproblems and to shape the priorities of strategic councils, the police and other authorities,as do parish, town and village councils in rural areas. In Wiltshire, a lively community planning process is bringing local partnerships and elected representatives together toshape common visions and action plans (as well as organising events involving thousandsof people at a time), and it has begun to influence service planning across the board. We are starting to see how civil society can work collaboratively with the state, but equallycan challenge it where necessary, operating through a combination of voluntary actionand democratic representation. Significant value can be added by this kind of working, inlimiting the costs of crime, poor environments and limited aspirations, but also in themore intangible dimensions of social cohesion, happiness and quality of life.Over the past three decades, it is true that we have seen some failures, as well as the moresuccessful devolution experiments. Baronial tactics, central government obstruction, failuresto retain a centre or to mainstream neighbourhood activity, or over-large budgets haveoften been to blame. There are lessons to be learned here. Councils and local strategicpartnerships should play a key role in creating minimum standards and a governancesafety net for neighbourhoods to manage some of these risks. In different neighbourhoods, the frameworks that evolve will combine elected councillors,local budgets, some influence over mainstream spending and services, officer support andpartnership working. Neighbourhood charters could help establish ground rules, alongsidebetter public information. Greater powers for community initiatives to be instigatedthrough councillors or by petition will add a dynamic element of bottom-up proposal andchallenge. However, citizens and local authorities should also have the opportunity tobuild stronger neighbourhood governance structures, ranging from recognised communityforums or partnerships to more autonomous neighbourhood councils (next-generationparishes) that could be integrated with new model authorities and provide local communityadvocacy and engagement. Representation of the interests of the whole community will always be best supportedthrough participatory engagement, as in the best parish councils or neighbourhood management initiatives. Connecting shared space through neighbourhood hubs, civicmedia and the local public realm could help to underpin these developments. Finally,strengthening local strategic powers is crucial to neighbourhood empowerment: localdecisions have to matter more for local engagement to grow.Double Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 87T H E S M I T H I N S T I T U T E88Remember the citizen’s perspective:• The challenge is to bring local experience into larger processes of governance, notsimply to replicate local government structures in neighbourhoods. Neighbourhoodgovernance needs to be seen not as an arm of the state, but as a locally ownedchannel for influencing public priorities and a gathering point for collective voice,responsibility and action. • A more flexible and less prescriptive approach to neighbourhood empowerment willcreate opportunities for very local governance arrangements to evolve over time,in line with communities’ changing circumstances and developing capacities.• Ultimately arrangements for neighbourhood governance will vary from place to place,reflecting the diversity and varying circumstances of communities. While we mustrecognise that not all neighbourhoods will need, or want, formal structures forcommunity governance, there should be opportunities for all neighbourhoodswith the appetite, need and capacity to take on new participatory anddecision-making roles. Double Dev Text.qxd  25/4/06  2:13 pm  Page 88

Neighbourhoods: the role and nature of the very local tier of governance

https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10087972/7/Woodcraft_DoubleDevolution_chapter.pdf

Neighbourhoods: the role and nature of the very local tier of governance

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UCL Discovery