Eric Pickles was right to take strong and decisive action on Rotherham. Councils can’t dodge responsibility for serious failings, but must to root out, challenge and expose risks to the people they represent
I am often quick to criticise government, but on this occasion I find the need to jump to the defence of the secretary of state for communities and local government.
We live in a complex environment where absolutes are seldom helpful. But occasionally leadership does require absolute resolve, just as it often requires mediating those absolutes to allow for complexity. So with this in mind, I am concerned that local government is not lining up to acknowledge and accept the draconian directions made against Rotherham MBC.
Of course one can choose to quibble. Would such actions have been taken against a Conservative council? Why are regulators which gave a clean bill of health to children’s services not being sanctioned? Why are other agencies such as the police not receiving the similar treatment of having their accountability structures set aside?
But given the findings of the Casey report, we have to treat Rotherham as an absolute: a statutory body charged with protecting children failed to do so. Furthermore it has been defensive and unwilling to acknowledge this. If this is more harsh for local government than other bodies, that is because local government is more accountable than other bodies; and if a council does not root out, expose and challenge risks to those it represents, who will? So personally, I disagree with the Local Government Association and others who question the proportionality of the directions being taken. Staff, managers, partners and indeed politicians in Rotherham need time and space to rebuild services, change culture and earn the trust of the public that has been lost. DCLG is trying to do the right thing and in my view we should line up behind the department because the scale of what took place absolutely trumps all other considerations.
And there is an important message here about sector led self-improvement. The LGA is doing a good job on self-improvement and I hope it continues to do so in the face of potential competition. Rigorous self-improvement is stronger and more effective than regulation, not just a substitute for it. But more is required, in particular we need collective leadership where parties have the courage to call time on councils of their own political hue, and the sector is equally willing to challenge itself. Rotherham has many good individual staff, councillors and services. But collectively it failed badly on the prime directive of local councils to always and unhesitatingly act in the public interest; and as an absolute measure the secretary of state has therefore acted reasonably to fundamentally change its culture.
Of course we must bear in mind this set of circumstances are unlikely to be isolated. As reported in Public Finance this week, Grant Thornton’s survey on the effectiveness of local authority governance found that over two-fifths of respondents have warned that scrutiny committees are not doing enough to challenge the way that councils operate. Rotherham isn’t alone.
