By David Williams
14 December 2010
The Localism Bill, published yesterday, has been characterised as ‘schizophrenic’ by the chair of the local government select committee.
Clive Betts said that, on the one hand, the Bill introduced sweeping new powers for councils, yet on the other sought to ‘micromanage’ them over bin collections.
‘I’m still not sure where the narrative is about localism, where the philosophy is, and how you link together lots of disparate initiatives into a total strategy,’ he said.
Betts added that the proposals could run into difficulties over how a ‘community’ is defined in law and said that the GPC could also fall down in the courts.
‘Hopefully this will be a good step forward – but then the Labour government thought it got it right with the power of wellbeing, but the courts cast a shadow over it. You can’t make anything lawyer-proof, but you have to make sure things are as well defined as possible – otherwise they end up in legal actions.’
But other commentators were more positive. Ed Cox, director of the Institute for Public Policy Research North, applauded the transfer of power away from Westminster, but said ministers had only a ‘cosmetic commitment to localism’.
‘Power follows money and really the government has missed an opportunity to devolve genuine financial autonomy to local authorities,’ he said.
He attacked plans for the secretary of state to trigger local referendums on ‘excessive’ council tax rises as a move that appeared localist, but was in fact a ‘ploy to control local government spending’.
Baroness Margaret Eaton, chair of the Local Government Association, welcomed the introduction of a general power of competence, which she said would allow councils more freedom to innovate.
Simon Parker, director of the New Local Government Network, hailed the Bill as ‘the most important piece of legislation for local government in a generation’.
‘This will bring an era of radical change and innovation, driven by the burning platform of unprecedented cuts,’ he said.
Meanwhile Toby Blume, director of the community support charity Urban Forum, added that, while he was pleased to see new rights given to neighbourhoods, it would be important to ensure that marginalised groups are equally able to get involved.
He said: ‘Creating opportunities is fine but those opportunities need to be taken up in equitable way that doesn’t compound the problem.’
