UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Local Government

  • Theresa May – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    Theresa May – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    The speech made by Theresa May at the Conservative Spring Forum on 23 March 2002.

    I’m delighted to be responding to this session at the Spring Forum – and my goodness haven’t we heard some exciting examples of how Conservatives have been working to improve their local communities – making life better in your areas.

    Over the next few weeks we all have the opportunity in the local government elections to take the message we have heard today out onto the streets and show people that up and down the country it is Conservatives who are listening to their concerns and worries, it is Conservatives that are recognising the problems in their local communities and it is Conservatives who are delivering practical solutions that meet people’s needs.

    The Conservative Party is the party that listens, that cares and that delivers – delivers for all in society, from Bromley to Bradford, from Cambridgeshire to Calderdale.

    Local authorities are responsible for a wide range of services that directly affect people’s everyday quality of life and often it is the most vulnerable in our society who depend on them most.

    Good local government is about improving people’s quality of life – about making life better.

    Just think about the impact a council has on people’s day-to-day life – imagine someone walking out of their front door. Has the uneven pavement been mended? Is the street clean or full of litter? Has the rubbish been properly collected? Do the street lights work?

    Have the potholes in the road been repaired? Has the traffic got worse since the council gave permission for that new development on the outskirts of the town? Why did they bring in that one-way system? And now of course the primary school’s full. Mrs Smith next door is worried because her husband’s still in hospital – they simply can’t get him anywhere in a care home locally because they’re all closing.

    To find answers to these problems – to make life better – councillors need to have the freedom and flexibility to make decisions that suit their local area.

    Today that power has been taken away in so many ways. This Labour Government has increased centralisation, increased bureaucracy and increased the regulations local councils have to cope with.

    Now I accept that previous Conservative governments do not have a blameless record in their approach to local government. But what started as an attempt by central government to protect people from the worst excesses of bad local councils has now, under Labour, been made a means of control, a tool for imposing Westminster’s priorities over local priorities.

    In 1997 just over 4% of a council’s funding was ring-fenced today, it is 15%. And that’s without counting the money that’s spent on the extra bureaucracy and regulations imposed from Whitehall.

    Central government telling councils how to spend your money.

    Today, local authorities are judged against close to 150 performance indicators and must agree up to 66 plans with central government. Such burdens waste money and distort priorities. 66 plans – don’t tell me they’re a tool for better government – it’s just increased bureaucracy and a way of the centre exercising control.

    And when it comes to regulations just look at the impact of the directive on fridges – enormous cost to local authorities and the risk of fridges abandoned in our streets and lanes. Abandoned cars will be next and then other white goods.

    And against this background of red tape and central control Gordon Brown has made council tax a stealth tax .

    Every year since Labour came to power they have promised that there was no need for large increases in council tax and every year council tax has gone up by three times the rate of inflation.

    This year the average increase is 8.3% – more than four times the rate of inflation.

    What’s more the government has slowly increased the amount of council’s funding that has to be paid through council tax – from 23% in 1997 to 27% today.

    People are on average paying nearly £300 more on a Band D property than when Labour came into power.

    Conservative councils are still showing that they can charge less council tax and deliver quality services.

    How many of the top 20 councils charging the highest council tax are Conservative – none.

    Looking at Band D properties, this year across every tier of local government Conservative councils cost less than Labour or LibDem councils.

    In unitary authorities Conservative councils cost £132 a year less than Lib Dem councils.

    In London Conservative councils cost £313 less than Labour councils.

    On average across all types of council Conservative councils cost £135 less than Labour councils and £159 less than Lib Dem councils.

    And which council costs most of all – Tony Blair’s own back-yard yes, Sedgefield where for Band D local people pay almost £1,200 a year.

    Increases well over inflation and shifting the burden to the council taxpayer – yet another stealth tax.

    A stealth tax that hits hardest on some of the most vulnerable in society like the elderly living on fixed incomes.

    More red tape, more paperwork, higher cost, less freedom that’s the impact of Labour on local government.

    The other day Stephen Byers department announced that government would streamline and rationalise the 66 plans they require from councils. Do you believe Stephen Byers – I certainly don’t.

    Remember the three big lies – (the cheque’s in the post, Darling I still love you, and Trust me I’m Stephen Byers).

    What better advert for New Labour could there be?

    You can’t trust him on transport, you can’t trust him on local government and you can’t trust him on planning.

    Just look at what he is promising to do.

    He’s going to grade councils as high performing, coasting, striving or poor performing, but they will be judged not by whether they are doing what people want, but by whether they are doing what the government wants.

    He’s going to introduce a new tier of regional politicians. That means he’s going to abolish county councils and have to restructure district councils at an estimated cost of £2bn – how many care home places could that fund.

    He’s heaping yet more regulation and bureaucracy on parish and town councils including a code of conduct that means parish councillors, the unpaid volunteer backbone of our rural communities, have to declare not just their interests, but the interests of their relations, including would you believe it their nephew’s partner.

    Little wonder parish councillors are threatening to resign across the country.

    And on planning he’s going to bring in a new system that will increase bureaucracy for business, reduce the voice of local communities and bring in a betterment tax that will particularly hit small local firms.

    In the annals of incompetent government Stephen Byers is a serial offender.

    From the Post Office to PPP on the Tube, from increased rights for trade unions to reduced rights for local communities on planning, from Rover to Railtrack, Byers bungles cost us all dear.

    But this Government’s interference and centralisation doesn’t just increase the paperwork in the town hall. It erodes local democracy so fewer people vote and it damages the effective delivery of public services and the ability of local councillors to respond to the needs of their local community.

    The Department for Transport Local Government and the Regions is what I call the quality of life department because with transport and local government together it is responsible for the things that so often make the difference between having a good or a bad day.

    And across the country it is Conservative councils who are making the difference in their areas.

    Just think about the problems we all face in our day to day lives.

    What is number one concern for many people today – crime or the fear of crime.

    Kent and Westminster have recognised this and delivered for local people.

    Kent County Council has introduced rural community wardens in partnership with Kent police. Westminster Council has launched a city guardian initiative to reduce crime, anti-social behaviour and breaches of public safety; and their CCTV van, staffed by trained council officers, has played a significant role in reducing levels of crime in parts of the Borough.

    Conservative councils delivering for local people.

    But fear of crime is also about the environment in which people live and work. Graffiti ridden streets increase the fear of crime and petty vandalism is often a first step in criminality. We believe that cleaning up our streets is an essential part of the war against crime.

    West Oxfordshire District Council has introduced an Environmental Hit Squad to crack down on fly tipping and fly posting. Tandridge District Council brought in a successful graffiti clean up initiative, with a £500 reward for information on perpetrators. Wandsworth Council doubled the number of litter bins on local streets all of which are emptied at least once a day and has a team of uniformed investigators who patrol the Borough enforcing laws on litter, fly-tipping and dog fouling.

    Conservative Councils delivering for local people.

    People get fed up being held up in traffic jams on the way to work – we all know how much better the roads are in the school holidays so getting school transport right matters. That’s why Runnymede Borough Council has introduced yellow school buses and Surrey County Council is soon to launch its Pegasus project for school transport for primary schools.

    Conservative Councils delivering for local people.

    People want their children to have the best start in life with a good education. Calderdale Council recognised this and has one of the most improved set of academic results at 16 years across the whole country.

    East Sussex saw the need for a new university locally – it’s just been given the go-ahead and the first students will start in Hastings University in autumn 2003.

    Conservative Councils delivering for local people.

    People also want to see deprived areas in their towns and cities being regenerated – so the quality of life of people who live there can be improved. In Bradford the council’s decision to establish a ground breaking Urban Regeneration Company was described as “the single best piece of news the district has had for many long years”. The Council is pushing forward re-development such as the Broadway shopping complex and the plans to transform the Odsal stadium site with a new stadium, leisure and retail development, cleaning up a former landfill site and creating hundreds of new jobs. What a pity Stephen Byers has called the Odsal application in for an inquiry.

    A Conservative-led council delivering for local people.

    And people worry about those whose lives need re-building. Kent County Council has launched its Dependency Reduction Programme – which aims to support and help people trapped in dependency to lift themselves back into independence, employment and a better quality of life.

    A Conservative council delivering for local people.

    These are examples of how Conservative councils listen to their local communities, care about the quality of life for local people and deliver to make life better.

    But if that is what Conservatives in local government can achieve despite the imposition and burdens from the centre think what more good we could be doing for our local communities if councils had their freedom.

    If local democracy is to mean anything then the power to say whether or not a council is doing well should rest with the voters in the ballot box. In stark contrast to Labour’s principle of ‘earned autonomy’ – we believe that all councils should be given freedom.

    Of course it is right that there should be powers to intervene where a local authority is clearly failing in its duty, but this should be the exception and we should always presume freedom rather than regulation.

    It is now almost five years since Labour were elected. Five years since their warm words of decentralisation – how they would ‘give back responsibility to local communities’, ‘take the shackles off local government’ and create ‘powerful new roles for all councillors’. Five years on, not only has this not happened, but in many cases, the reverse has been the case –and Stephen Byers Local Government White Paper promises more of the same.

    Strong local government unburdened by impositions from the centre is essential to the quality of life and to re-building local democracy. Local authorities need to be able to recognise and respond to local needs, exercising community leadership and championing local interests.

    This is our model of local government. A model built on our key principles as a party of freedom, choice and independence.

    Unlike Labour we do not believe that Whitehall knows best. We believe in minimal state interference. We want to give people the opportunity to live their lives free from unnecessary and burdensome interference from the state. We want to see government taken down to the level where people can best exercise decision-making and choice.

    So the Conservative Party is launching a policy review in local government that will re-define radically the relationship between central and local government.

    We will roll back the intervention from the centre, remove regulations and restrictions on local government autonomy, reduce the amount of ring-fenced funding, cut the burdens imposed by central government, and revive local involvement in decision making.

    We will be the party that gives power back to local councillors to make a real difference for their local communities.

    Conservatives governing for the whole nation – the prosperous and the poor, the north and the south, the rural village, the suburban town and the urban inner city.

    Together Conservatives will deliver community government making life better for all.

  • Theresa May – 2002 Speech at the Town and Country Planning Association Conference

    Theresa May – 2002 Speech at the Town and Country Planning Association Conference

    The speech made by Theresa May on 1 May 2002.

    It is a pleasure to be with you today at this conference looking at the implications of the Government’s Planning Green Paper with of course particular reference to the structure of plans proposed and within that to the life or death of structure plans.

    In his foreword to the Planning Green Paper the Secretary of State, Stephen Byers said

    “..Some fifty years after it was first put in place the planning system is showing its age. What was once an innovative emphasis on consultation has now become a set of inflexible, legalistic and bureaucratic procedures. A system that was intended to promote development now blocks it. Business complains that the speed of decision is undermining productivity and competitiveness. People feel that they are not sufficiently involved in decisions that affect their lives…….We need a better, simpler, faster, more accessible system that serves both business and the community.”

    Similarly in the written answer announcing the Green Paper the Secretary of State said “The present planning system is too complicated, too slow and engages insufficiently with local communities. We need to make it more efficient and more accessible so that it better serves everybody with an interest in the growth and development of their community.”

    For once ladies and gentlemen, I can say that I agree with much of what Stephen Byers said.

    I believe that we have a basic problem in that too many people do not have confidence in the planning system. There are a number of reasons for that. Of course there’s the problem of those who feel that the system has prevented them from doing what they wanted to do, be it extend their house or build a major development.

    But for many individuals and communities there is a feeling that somehow the system doesn’t take account of their views or, often, of local needs. And we all know the complaints from business of the delay in decision taking, the inconsistency of approach and the uncertainty of the system. And that’s even before talking about the T5 inquiry.

    So the Government was right in that some change was needed. We need to have a planning system in which people have confidence.

    But beyond that I have real reservations about what the Government is proposing.

    And in particular I take issue with them in their view that the Green Paper delivers, simplification of the system, involvement of local communities and meets businesses needs.

    But perhaps an even more fundamental question is whether the system needs the degree of change that the Government is proposing.

    Obviously I have spent some time since the Green Paper was published talking to and hearing from people involved in the planning system – planners, consultants, developers and local groups. The general verdict on the Green Paper is that it is like the curate’s egg, good in parts.

    But perhaps the more overwhelming comment seems to be “does the system really need such fundamental change. After all we’re not so sure it’s the system that’s wrong just the way it is implemented….”

    Perhaps the Government would have done better to pay more attention to the comments made by the CBI last year in their document “Planning for productivity. A ten-point action plan”.

    That document was of course supported by the British Property Federation, the House Builders Federation and the British Chambers of Commerce.

    In their Ten point plan the CBI identified three key areas in which the system “is perceived to fail its users”. They were:-

    · the system is too slow, too often on decisions that matter

    · the process involves too many uncertainties

    · there is too much scope for poor decisions
    They reflected on the inconsistency of performance between local authorities, but their solutions did not depend on a fundamental revamp of the system. Rather they proposed a focus on “consolidating and developing what works well in the system and rationalising where it does not work well”.

    The problem not only for the Government, but also for everyone who uses or is involved on the planning system, is that the general consensus emerging is that the Green Paper does not meet the needs of business, or of local communities.

    And that is certainly our position on the Green Paper.

    The needs of business are not met in the Green Paper.

    The key issue is that, far from simplifying the system, the new structure of plans that is proposed is more complex, more bureaucratic and I suggest will lead to more delay than the current system.

    Because we are going to see national guidance, structure, local and unitary development plans being replaced by:-

    · National policy
    · Regional Spatial Strategy
    · Sub-regional planning strategies
    · County mineral and waste plans
    · Local Development Frameworks
    · Area Action Plans
    · Some Business Development Plans.

    As SPISE, Sane Planning in the South East put it “Will replacing National and regional guidance and a one or two tier Development Plan with National Policy, National Advice, Regional Plans, Sub-regional Strategies, Local development frameworks and Area Action Plans make the system more manageable or more comprehensible? Are these any more likely to be consistent with one another and reviewed more rapidly?”

    I think the answer is a clear no. The new structure will lead to a multiplicity of plans which will not only be more complex for business and individuals to navigate their way around, but will also put yet more pressure on scarce resources at local authority level.

    Far from streamlining the system, the Government is making it more bureaucratic and more complex.

    Central to the new hierarchy of plans of course is the abolition of the county structure plans and with it the role of the county councils in the planning hierarchy.

    As an MP and a former councillor I know the difficulty of persuading people that when they object to a planning application they must object on planning grounds. I think the same test should be applied to the Government’s proposals on the hierarchy of plans. Is the abolition of county structure plans being proposed on good planning grounds?

    I suspect the answer to that is no. Because I believe that the proposal to abolish the role of county councils owes less to the desire to streamline the planning system and more to the Government’s commitment to press ahead with regional government. And on that basis alone it should be given short shrift.

    As I am sure you are all aware, in 1999 under the Government’s modernising planning agenda, the then DETR commissioned a study on “Examination of the operation and effectiveness of the structure planning process”.

    The report concluded that “the statutory structure plan should be retained as the crucial link between enhanced regional planning guidance and local plans”. It also concluded that the structure plans should be redefined to reflect their strategic role and should be concerned with all matters that required integrated treatment at a sub-regional level.

    The Government’s decision to abolish the county structure plans therefore flies in the face of their own research.

    But it also ignores the key role played by county councils in delivering transport, education, waste management and social services.

    Now those reading the Local Government Chronicle might have taken some comfort from the headline in the 11 April issue that “Falconer seeks to reassure counties”.

    But a careful reading of that interview would have given no such reassurance. He said there was a role for counties. Was that because of their involvement in the issues I raised above like transport and waste management? Was it because of the importance of the involvement of elected representatives in the planning process? Was it because without the involvement of the county councils the planning process would ignore local needs and would not achieve the integration so beloved of government?

    No – it was because in his words “they have lots and lots of structural planners”. So the counties will pay for the work but won’t be making the decisions.

    We believe that the county councils should continue to be involved and to be part of the decision making process and of course the counties can provide that sub-regional level of plan.

    We do not support the Government’s proposals on regional government and we will fight to keep the county councils. But it is not only the county councils that will be affected, because it has become clear that the regional assemblies would require not only the abolition of county councils but also the re-configuration of district councils in many areas – at a potential cost of £2bn. I think there are better things the Government could be spending taxpayers’ money on than setting up a new tier of politicians and bureaucrats.

    But it is not just in making the system more complex that the needs of business are not being met. The Green Paper proposes a new stealth tax on business – a development tax – through the proposals to change the current rules on planning gain – Section 106.

    I think most people would agree that Section 106 and the whole planning gain process is not working as well as it should. Many people feel it lacks accountability and that too often local communities are left with planning gain that has little to do with the impact of a development and lots to do with what the council wants to do locally but can’t afford.

    Many would say that greater clarity and consistency would be a benefit. But the Government’s proposed tariff system would leave developers paying a tariff and on top of that possibly having to negotiate planning gain with the local authority.

    How long would it be before the Treasury saw monies raised through the tariff as an excuse to cut authorities’ revenue support grant. Then would we see authorities being deemed to be raising funds through the tariff and having grant cut regardless of whether they were in receipt of funds through the tariff or not.

    Greater clarity is needed, but also surely we need to get back to a system where the gain is clearly linked to the impact of a development.

    I said the Green Paper doesn’t meet the needs of business or local communities. Despite all the statements about local involvement in the Green Paper I believe that the proposals will lead to a reduction in the voice of local communities.

    To an extent we see that in the move on structure plans – removing the role of elected representatives and moving decisions to unelected regional planning bodies.

    But we see it most clearly in the proposals on major infrastructure projects.

    Here the proposals have been driven by experience on Terminal 5. That was not a good experience, but it might be useful to reflect that the delay was not entirely due to the length o f the planning inquiry. The minister took a time in coming to a decision as well!

    We are currently looking at how major infrastructure projects should be dealt with in the planning system, but I am sure of one thing and that is that a proposal that could lead to decisions being whipped through a committee on limited debate of the issues – even as little as an hour and a half – would cut out the voice of local communities and is the wrong way to go.

    There is a similar issue at a lower level in the proposal to delegate 90% of an authority’s planning decisions to officers. Practise of course varies. But the Government is I believe wrong to think that the one size fits all approach will work.

    Practise often varies because the nature of the applications and particularly the balance between individual applications and larger scale developments varies from authority to authority. I spoke recently to an authority which delegates more than 90% of its applications to officers, but which allows any Member to put any application on the development control committee agenda. But I also spoke recently to a council leader who said they were delegating less than 80% but that figure was about right given the sort of applications they received and their impact on the local area.

    This requirement seems to have been born out of an assumption that delegation will automatically speed up the process. There is as far as I am aware no correlation between the two. But it misses the point that the quality of the decision making is also important. Failure to address this issue could lead to yet further alienation for local people and less confidence in the system.

    Flexibility at local level on this issue must be right, so councils can reflect their particular needs and respond to the voice of their local communities.

    The question of officer delegation brings me to one issue that should underpin the Green Paper but which is referred to only briefly. This is the whole issue of the resources allocated to planning departments and the role and remit of planning officers.

    All the Green Paper proposals in the world are no good if the staff and resources are not there to implement them.

    The Green Paper sets out two approaches. The first is that in recognition of their expectation of “real improvements in performance from local government” they are going to set up the Local Planning Advisory Service, working with the Best Value Inspectorate. It seems to me that this is just another example of their obsession with centralisation. It will add to an already over-inflated inspection regime.

    It means more money going into central provision rather than local provision. The Green Paper touches its cap to the issue of resourcing, referring to the forthcoming comprehensive spending review.

    But many planning departments are finding it increasingly difficult to recruit sufficient planners – and not just in terms of numbers but also in terms of experience and expertise.

    I worry when I hear that at least one university is closing its planning school. Local authorities could well find themselves caught between a lack of basic supply and the more lucrative private sector. If the supply of planners reduces then local authorities will find it even more difficult competing with the private sector.

    But this is about more than just numbers. I get the feeling that too much of a planning officer’s job these days can be described as a mechanistic process of assessing applications – which rules does it meet or break – rather than a process of assessing the suitability of an application – too little attention is given, perforce because of numbers, to issues of design quality.

    I guess the key question is are our planners really planning or are they just processing according to rules set down by others?

    If we are to increase confidence in the system then surely there needs to be a re-invigoration of the planning profession as well.

    As a geography graduate who failed to go into planning I may not be best placed to address that question. As a politician dealing with planning issues I believe it is crucial – and you are well placed to consider that question.

    The Green Paper gives the opportunity to address this issue as well as the details of the planning system. Of one thing I am sure. The issue should not be ignored, although it is not simply a matter for Government but for the profession as well.

    Ladies and Gentlemen: I agree with the Government that there is a need to address the problems in our planning system that have led to a lack of confidence in the system for both many individuals and business.

    The Green Paper’s approach of removing the county structure plans yet increasing the hierarchy of plans, thus increasing the complexity of the system and possibly leading to more delay, removing some decision taking from local level and reducing the voice of local communities, and reducing the role of elected councillors does not address that need.

    The aim may have been laudable, but the Green Paper fails to deliver.

  • Eric Pickles – 2003 Speech to the National Association of Local Councils

    Eric Pickles – 2003 Speech to the National Association of Local Councils

    The speech made by Eric Pickles, the then Shadow Minister for Local Government, on 4 October 2003.

    In addressing you today I wish to make two points:

    The first is that Conservatives strongly support parish and town councils.

    We support you on the basis of your mandate and advocacy for your local community.

    We will do all in our power to make your community service easier.

    We will wind back Labour’s overbearing command state from parish and town councils – but more about this later.

    We do not see you as the Government’s branch office

    Secondly, there is a need to achieve more in large towns and cities – we wish to see an expansion of Town and Parish councils in urban and inner city areas, because rejuvenation must come from within and have a strong element of local accountability. I believe the National Association of Local Councils has a vital role to play in this aim.

    True localism: Parish and town councils shaping and guiding local communities

    Before there was new Labour and new localism there were town and parish councils.

    And when New Labour is but a distant memory there were town and parish councils

    True localism is local advocates for a local community.

    You entered public service not because it would end in Downing Street, or be part of some great ideological struggle, but because you wanted to put something into your community.

    The driving forces behind local communities are not edicts and diktats from Whitehall but the sheer energy and commitment and innovation displayed by local councillors.

    Like all generations before us, we have the ability to shape and render the society we wish to hand over to the next generation.

    Parish and town councils have a particularly important role shaping the growth of their local community.

    Yet in 2003 many of this shaping comes under what the Government allows councils to do under Labour’s freedoms. Freedoms that fit in with the other Blair’s concept of language in double-speak

    Eric Blair (George Orwell) would recognise that these are not true freedoms at all.

    In truth. The Government imprisons councils.

    You are told you are free.

    When in reality those freedoms are your prison warden. Ensuring you stay within boundaries set by the Government. Innovation is restricted. Councils are prisoners on licence of central government.

    I want to see central government retreat from its command state.

    · Retreat from telling you what local councils can and cannot do.

    · Retreat from the burdens, the targets, the statutory plans, the tick-a-box culture.

    · Retreat from the clutter of centralism.

    Labour cannot be trusted

    I have a confession to make. I had listened to what Labour had to say about local government when they were in opposition. I agreed we quite a lot of it. I was prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    But after six years it turned out to be “sound and fury signifying nothing”

    The process has been good for me, because it has given me some empathy with Labour Backbenchers – For I too know what it feels like to be betrayed by New Labour

    You cannot believe a word they say. Especially when it comes to local government.

    And I will give you an example. Indeed, a saga.

    It relates to local government finance and obviously impacts upon you.

    Capping and council taxes.

    In November last year Minister Nick Raynsford announced that councils graded as excellent by the comprehensive performance assessment will not be subject to reserve capping powers.

    In December, Nick Raynsford announced the provisional local government finance settlement.

    I could see that council tax bills for Band D homes were going to hit the £1000 bill mark. Hitting families and pensioners and those on fixed incomes.

    And I said so in the House of Commons.

    It was and is quite clear to the impartial observer that the fiddled funding saw money transferred from Tory councils to Labour councils.

    Council tax, especially in the south was going to skyrocket as councillors tried to protect public services. The ultimate stealth tax. Fiddled by Whitehall for local councillors to take the blame.

    The Government pooh-poohed Conservative claims as scare mongering.

    We continued to warn that the result of the government’s fiddled funding, combined with Labour’s ethos of burdens and targets – council tax was going to not only hit the roof. It was to put a large hole there.

    And you know what happened…

    Council tax bills went out in April.

    Band D council bills hit over £1000. Council tax went up 12.9 per cent – three times the rate of inflation.

    As councils and councillors struggle to keep up with Labour’s spending demands council tax has gone up nearly 70 per cent since 1997.

    The Government did nothing.

    Seven months later in October – only when we have the sight of pensioners preparing for jail and Chief Police Officers warning of the break down in law and order has the government stirred.

    Not acted to restore the funding to councils. Not acted to remove burdens and targets and the grime of centralism.

    They feared they had been rumbled.

    And in a moment of crisis they turned to their greatest ally – spin.

    They blamed the councils. They blamed councillors. They blamed us. We are apparently part of a conspiracy to undermine values. Councils putting up local taxes to undermined the Government. If you like, role reversal to Labour Councils in the Thatcher years. But if that was the case, Ministers would be able to cite examples of Conservative Councils giving donations to right wing causes or flooding our school libraries with Michael and John go hunting and shooting,.

    So they blamed everyone else.

    And now they will shift the blame further by renouncing their promise on no more capping and have reverted to the cap council tax.

    I don’t trust or believe Labour anymore when it comes to local councils. And frankly, nor should you.

    You don’t fit in with their project. You are an inconvenience.

    Whether it is the code of conduct, best value, the audit regime – Labour finds parish and town councils a nuisance

    The Government’s aim is to mould and shape parish and town councils into little boxes to fit neatly within Labour’s project.

    Little cubes that are the same in Devon as they are in Lancashire. Little Whitehall franchises up and down the country.

    The same size, delivering the same services regardless of local need or want.

    Little boxes that only exist because the centre grants them life.

    Little boxes all full of ticky-tacky that all look the same

    It is more subtle Labour’s last attacks on parish councils. But just as deadly

    In 1999 Labour called for parish councils to be replaced with ‘neighbourhood forums’.

    Labour then said that parish councils should include ‘neighbourhood managers’ – rather than elected representatives.

    In 2000 Labour’s Environment Minister said he was worried about the ability of parish councils to represent rural people.

    Last year former Labour Cabinet Minister, Mo Mowlam called for parish councils to be abolished to make way for regional assemblies.

    Just recently in March this year was forced to Labour revealed secret plans to eradicate parish boundaries from Ordnance Survey maps. Winston Smith would have been proud

    The Conservative Approach – A Fair Deal

    These plans and plots are to be compared and contrasted with the Conservative approach. Conservatives who will deliver a fair deal for you.

    Conservatives who value the work of parish and town councillors.

    But we fear Labour’s regulations, interference and red-tape will restrict the role of parish councils and result in a large-scale reduction in the number of people willing to be involved.

    We will deliver a fair deal for parish and town councils. We will deliver a fair deal for the thousands of parish and town councillors.

    What we will do? Put it simply – it is a question of trust

    Trust the people to make their own decisions on standards of conduct

    Trust the people to ensure that their parish and town councils operate to accepted standards.

    Trust the people to run their own villages and towns.

    So what policy commitments will we make to you?

    For the local government sector we will abolish comprehensive performance assessment.

    We will abolish Best Value. Under Conservatives, parish and town councils will not be subjected to the introduction of Best Value.

    Statutory plans…

    Most will go to the dustbin. Where they belong.

    For town and parish councils we will remove the code of conduct.

    On this point I will suggest that if the National Association for Local Councils was to recommend a voluntary code of conduct for the larger councils then that, is a matter entirely for you to decide.

    But I will not allow good people to be forced out of voluntary roles because of bad laws.

    We will have a giant bonfire of the Quangos

    I am drawing up a list that will see on average at least one Quango abolished for every week of the first Conservative Government.

    They will not be re-named or replaced with Conservative versions.

    Their powers will revert to councils and local communities.

    Conservatives want to see a power shift of function not form.

    And this real revolution involves you. It involves all of you in this room and your colleagues back home.

    While Labour are effectively imposing a blueprint of rigid conformity on parish councils Conservatives believe in diversity.

    All town and parish councils should be given freedoms automatically. It is insulting for Labour to suggest that the freedoms should be ‘earned’ through compliance with central government. Your actual existence should guarantee such rights.

    Accountability and responsibility

    And if you or your town or parish council make mistakes then like the rest of us, you learn and move on and bear the consequences

    And if you keep on making mistakes then it should not be the fear of some distant bureaucrat in Whitehall that should concern you.

    The best system of accountability will be the wrath of your community. The people you live and work with.

    I can think of no better system of accountability.

    · Responsibility by association,
    · and accountability by the ballot box

    Only at the last resort. When governance is dissolved and responsibility absolved should there be intervention from Whitehall.

    The best remedy will be to ensure that you don’t the mistakes in the first place. Conservatives support training and continuous improvement. Public perception of standards and expectations of service continue to rise. And councils must meet that challenge.

    But any system must be voluntary and must not be seen as a burden on service.

    Why should clerks with many years of sound service be obliged to undertake courses?

    Surely their attendance should be voluntary and should not reflect upon the funding status of any parish council.

    Enhanced role of town and parish councils

    I genuinely believe in the vibrance all tiers of local government.

    For too long, local councils have been treated as an extension of Whitehall – bodies through which centrally decided policies are administered rather than local communities being able to use powers and resources to decide policies of their own.

    Tied up in so much red-tape, the talent of local councils is wasted as they are turned into the agents of Whitehall rather than the strong local voice wanted by local people.

    The next Conservative Government will not be characterised by the power wielded but the power yielded.

    Conservatives will not only wind back Labour’s command state from your daily operations but also want additional reforms.

    Conservatives not only want to see power and responsibility transferred from Whitehall to county, district and metropolitan councils but even further. Where councils and communities agree and were it is practicable I envisage a devolution of power from district and county councils to parish and town councils.

    We do see a greater role for parish and town councils.

    But only if the councillors and their community want a greater role.

    Town and parish councils can be so much more. You can do so much more as advocates for your local community.

    Growth of Parish and Town Councils

    Conservatives not only want an enhanced role for existing town and parish councils we want to see new parish councils not just in rural areas – but also in urban areas, both in towns and cities.

    We want to make it easier for new parish and town councils to be established.

    In recent years our televisions have been throwing towards us lifestyle programmes concentrating on the retreat from urban life.

    Families and stressed out city types are shown to escape to the sanctuary of small towns and villages.

    Part of this is a retreat from a crumbling urban society. Failing schools, rising crime, deteriorating hospitals, inner cities in decay. Communities not just breaking down but dissipating.

    One of the main attractions for this urban flight is wanting to belong to, or feel part of a community.

    We need to do more in our cities and large towns to encourage the sense of community that we find so strong in the country and towns. A sense of community that comes through your work. A community supported by parish and town councils.

    Labour will establish a taskforce. Recommendations will precede John Prescott’s intervention. He will throw taxpayer’s money like confetti at various schemes. Schemes will fail. Followed by a Government review. Conducted by another taskforce.

    I think we could use parish and town councils as good basis to start urban regeneration. By getting the individual members of the community involved in the community we will help to develop a sense of ownership.

    Damian Green, our Shadow Education Secretary of State has already announced Conservative policies that will allow communities to take over failing state schools and establish independent schools.

    Establishing town and parish council models in inner cities will help those communities regenerate.

    Conclusion

    But we do need to do much more.

    The Conservative Party is currently undertaking a major review of all of our policies dealing with local government.

    In the next few months I will bring forward to you further proposals that build upon themes outlined in this speech.

    I would welcome any written contributions that you as councillors and guardians of your community that you may wish to make. This offer is made regardless of your political affiliation or lack of affiliation.

    · If you want a fair deal for parish and town councils.
    · If you want a massive reduction in the clutter and grime of centralism.
    · If you want parish and town councils to be trusted and respected
    · And you want your councils to be unshackled but empowered then come with me as we tear down John Prescott’s rambling and unstable empire.

  • Michael Howard – 2004 Speech to the Conservative Councillors’ Association Annual Conference

    Michael Howard – 2004 Speech to the Conservative Councillors’ Association Annual Conference

    The speech made by Michael Howard, the then Leader of the Opposition, on 9 February 2004.

    I want to start with congratulations, congratulations to all of you whose hard work and dedication have made us once again the largest party in local government. We have almost 8,000 councillors and we run 137 councils in Britain.

    These gains we made last May in the local elections owed a great deal to the leadership of Iain Duncan Smith and I take this opportunity to pay tribute to him today.

    But the credit goes to you as well, for keeping the Conservative flag flying, for making a reality of our belief that sensible Conservative policies cost you less, and for laying the foundations for our victory at the next election.

    When we win the next General Election, as I believe we can, we will never forget that it was your hard work that helped to put us there.

    Across the country, there is concern about the high levels of council tax. Since 1997 council tax has soared by 60 per cent in cash terms. Every year the average council tax increase has been almost triple what it was when we were in power. This year alone, council tax rose by almost 13 per cent – its highest ever one-off increase.

    The average council tax on Band D properties has now reached four figures – at more than £1100.

    Labour thought they could use the council tax as another stealth tax. They slipped through the back door of the council tax what they dared not pass through the front door of income tax.

    But the trouble is that people have noticed. When pensioners start to march, you know you’re in trouble.

    Labour has made the council tax shoulder a burden it was never meant to carry. They have disfigured it. Increases in national insurance and the raid on pension funds have both hit councils directly.

    Labour has piled on regulation after regulation, responsibility after responsibility, burden after burden without giving local councils the funding to do the job.

    Councils are forced to contend with rampant public sector inflation, a startling increase in litigation, additional responsibilities such as the new Licensing Act, and an ever more complex funding formula. More than half last year’s increases are caused by national pay and price inflation.

    Something has had to give, and it turns out to be the council taxpayer.

    Labour’s reaction to this home grown crisis has been one of panic and intimidation. Ministers are now threatening to cap councils the length and breadth of the country. In fact they are threatening to cap more councils in one year than the last Conservative Government capped in 18 years. When it comes to localism Labour’s actions speak far louder then their words.

    Who was it who said he was “wholly opposed to the capping of a council’s budget. It is an abuse of central power, it demeans democracy, it undermines the right of local people to decide what services they are ready and willing to pay for”?

    Those aren’t my words. They were the words of Jack Straw when Labour were in opposition. But then we know all too well that Labour say one thing and do another.

    When Labour are faced with a problem their immediate solution is to create more politicians and another expensive layer of bureaucracy.

    Across our nation, there are areas with strong regional identities. People are proud to call themselves Yorkshiremen or Cornishmen. But a Yorkshireman or a Cornishman is proud of his county, not some soulless region drawn up by Whitehall. We salute that. And we do not believe a strong regional identity is boosted by creating another tier of government.

    Labour’s plans for regional assemblies are unnecessary, expensive and out of date. At a time when more and more people are crying out for power for themselves. Labour is planning to make government even more remote.

    The regional assemblies will have vague and undefined powers and a license to meddle in the affairs of local areas. They will take crucial decisions that are much better taken at the local level. Who are they trying to fool when they say that regional assemblies, the abolition of counties, and yet another wholesale upheaval of local government would mean the devolution of power.

    People want more policemen, not more politicians; more nurses, not more political nursemaids; more teachers, not more tiers of bureaucracy.

    Of course, the Liberal Democrats fully support Labour’s plans for regional assemblies – with bells on. As well as being another layer of Government, their Regional Assemblies would be able to levy a regional income tax.

    This would come on top of their plans to replace the council tax with a Local Income Tax. It was launched with great fanfare at the local elections last year – although a briefing note left behind at their conference gave the game away.

    It said “You might be asked about the rate of local income tax…we don’t want to be drawn extensively into this!”

    Well, if the Liberal Democrats can’t or won’t answer your questions, perhaps I can.

    A local income tax would hit many more people much harder than the council tax.

    Students, currently exempt from council tax, would have their holiday earnings subject to a local income tax.

    Young people, in their first jobs but still living at home, would have their earnings subject to a local income tax.

    A young couple where both are working would both have their earnings subject to a local income tax – making them more than a £1000 a year worse off.

    Pensioners who have saved all their lives to give themselves an income in retirement would have their retirement earnings subject to a local income tax.

    Businesses would have to administer the tax – having to adjust their payroll to take account of employees who lived in different areas from each other.

    More people would avoid tax. Currently, the council tax is the most efficiently collected tax of all.

    The Liberal Democrats’ local income tax is a pickpocket’s charter, unfair, unnecessary and undemocratic.

    I know how frustrating it is to campaign against the Liberal Democrats. They claim credit for any success, and distance themselves from any failure.

    They won’t tell the public what their policies mean – so we must.

    Every one in this hall today must spread the word about the Liberal Democrat Tax.

    I recognise that there is an urgent need to find the right way forward for local government.

    People want local services locally delivered.

    Local government has come to a fork in the road. Either it is to become simply a delivery arm for central Government, or it is to be given back real powers to deliver services and raise money.

    Labour has sucked the lifeblood out of local discretion. Of all the world’s major economies, the UK government exerts the highest degree of control over local government.

    Labour’s so-called “new localism” is simply a set of new plans, new legislation, new guidance, new financial controls and bidding systems and new inspectorates. Local government inspectors now receive £1 billion a year in taxpayers’ money. The proportion of a council’s grant which is ring-fenced by central government has more than doubled since 1997. And much of the rest is hedged around with restrictions, conditions and limitations.

    Labour is addicted to targets and regulation. It simply cannot let go.

    There’s a questionnaire that’s been developed by a well known clinic. It’s designed to help people face up to their addictions. So here are some helpful questions to find out just how bad the Government’s habit really is.

    – Do you use regulation to help cope with your problems?

    – Is regulation affecting your reputation?

    – Have you lost friends since you started regulating?

    – Have you ever tried to quit or cut back regulating?

    – Do you need to regulate more than you used to in order to get the effect you want?

    Sadly I think we all know the answer.

    This huge bureaucratic burden wastes money and saps at the very heart of public service, weakening motivation and innovation. Good nurses, care workers and teachers are leaving their jobs because of the weigh of regulation and control.

    A Conservative Government will reverse this tide.

    We will halt the flood of tax and regulation which is drowning local government.

    We remain committed to abolishing the Comprehensive Performance Assessment scheme, the Best Value scheme and a substantial number of the statutory plans.

    Local government in this country used to be the engine of innovation. Councils had the power to both succeed and fail. Nearly all the public services we now take for granted were invented locally. Water, sewerage, gas, education, a safety net for the poor – all of these services for local people were pioneered by enterprising local corporations whose leaders were great men of their times and who brought real improvement to life in their cities and communities.

    We want to start the journey back to what local government used to be. We announced our review of local government finance at last year’s party conference. We will be announcing the results shortly. Our plans will be rooted in the principles of freedom, responsibility and independence. In our belief in local democracy. In our desire to bring about stability and avoid costly upheaval to local government. And in recognising the need to lighten the load of the council taxpayer.

    Together we want to deliver a winning formula to help you carry on delivering the best services for local people.

    I want to see a more balanced relationship between local and central government.

    Most people go into local government to represent their local communities. Councillors do an important job, for little or no money.

    It is time to give you back the respect you deserve for the hard work that you do.

    We have important local elections in June. And then, in all probability, there will be just 12 months until the general election.

    I did not take this job to be a caretaker or to reduce the Government’s majority. I took it to win. Not for my sake. Not for our party’s sake. Not even for the sake of the people in this room. But for the country’s sake.

    This week we saw just how urgent it is for us to win the next election when it became clear that the prime minister cannot even be bothered to ask the most basic questions about a matter as vital as our going to war.

    Tony Blair’s casual approach runs through every action of his government.

    It is a Government that is taxing and spending and failing.

    It is a Government that has lost the trust of the British people.

    It is a Government that breaks its promises to the British people.

    It is a Government that is incapable of delivering real reform.

    Tony Blair may talk about giving power back to people. But the truth is he cannot deliver. He can’t deliver because his Party won’t let him deliver; because the trade unions won’t let him deliver; and because his Chancellor won’t let him deliver.

    Sixty tax rises and no real improvements in our public services. Hospital waiting lists are still near the million mark. Truancy rates in our schools are still far too high. Crime is rising, particularly violent crime.

    It is a Government which is wasting huge sums of our money. I have asked David James to look at how to root out Government waste. You may remember him. He was the man the Government called in to sort out the Dome. In a backroom of the Dome, a place called Yard 10, he found £80 million of unused equipment.

    We believe that the Government has a Yard 10, and we are going to find it.

    We are going to look hard at the level of tax in this country. Only last month, at the Chancellor’s own enterprise summit, the chief executive of Tesco commented that “the level of taxes seems to be forever rising. The water is now above our waist. National insurance, corporate, property and employment taxes are now over 50% of our profits…What saps our strength are high taxes, excessive regulations, inflexible working practices, and the gold plating of EU directives”.

    Well, we have heard that cry and we are going to listen to it.

    Oliver Letwin, the Shadow Chancellor, has already set out the problems created by an over-complex and opaque tax system. Very soon, he will set out his strategy for dealing with the inexorable rise in Government spending.

    But our major focus in Government will be making our schools and hospitals as good as possible. I make no apology for that.

    The next Conservative Government will deliver the public services that people want. The reason I came back into front-line politics because I was genuinely shocked, from my own experience in my own constituency, about the decline in our public services.

    I want to win the next election to put that right. To give the people who use our public services – the parents and the patients – control.

    To allow them to choose where to send their children to school or when and where to have their operation.

    To see more policemen on the beat instead of behind a speed gun.

    To let people keep more of what they earn to spend on themselves and their families.

    To see Britain do better.

    We all know that the Conservative party is in good heart. Thanks to all of you here today we are back in business. You have shown that Conservative government at local level across Britain can make people’s lives better. That’s not theory, that’s reality.

    Now it is up to those of us in Parliament to show the people of Britain that a Conservative government can do the same at the national level.

    Labour have failed the people of Britain. Above all, they have the lost their trust.

    I genuinely believe that the Conservative party can bring to government a new approach to Government.

    A government that is honest.

    A government that is competent.

    And most important of all, a government that trusts the people. That is our mission. With your help I know we can achieve it.

  • Caroline Flint – 2010 Comments on Unequal Financial Support for Councils

    Caroline Flint – 2010 Comments on Unequal Financial Support for Councils

    The comments made by Caroline Flint, the then Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary, on 20 December 2010. The text in bold is from the Labour Party’s press release.

    [Sheffield hit four times as hard as Cameron’s Witney

    Caroline Flint MP, Labour’s Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary, has responded to House of Commons figures revealing that the most deprived councils in England will see a fall in revenue spending power in 2011/12 on average nearly four times as big as the least deprived councils.

    Meanwhile, Labour Party analysis shows Tory Cabinet Ministers’ constituencies getting off lighter than many other areas, including those of their Lib Dem colleagues.

    Nick Clegg’s Sheffield council will suffer a cut of 8.4% whereas David Cameron’s Witney constituents living in Oxfordshire County Council will get off with only a 1.9% reduction. Oliver Letwin’s Dorset County Council will even see its central government support rise.]

    These figures confirm what many feared – we’re not all in this together. While Sheffield council taxpayers will see their council lose eight percent of its central government support, Tory Cabinet ministers’ areas are getting off much lighter.

    The Tory-Lib Dem Government has chosen to hit the poorest councils hardest, with average cuts for the most deprived communities four times bigger than those in the better off areas. In some cases, the cuts are nearly nine times as big.

    That’s unfair and it shows just how out of touch this Government is with ordinary people.

    Eric Pickles must now explain why the hardest pressed towns and cities up and down the country are faced with spending cuts substantially greater than the best off areas.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2019 Comments on the Troubled Families Programme

    Rishi Sunak – 2019 Comments on the Troubled Families Programme

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the then Local Government Minister, on 28 March 2019.

    The success of the Troubled Families Programme is down to the tremendous efforts and tireless work of all those involved including the families themselves.

    I have seen first-hand how the programme has made a real difference for families up and down the country, with fewer children going into care, fewer adults going to prison and more adults back in work.

    When we strengthen our families, we strengthen society; because when families thrive, we all thrive.

    This government will continue to champion families at every turn, helping them play their part in a society where no one is left behind.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2019 Comments on Pocket Parks

    Rishi Sunak – 2019 Comments on Pocket Parks

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the then Local Government Minister, on 26 March 2019.

    Parks and green spaces – no matter what size – are huge assets to our towns and cities and offer us all opportunities to relax, socialise, exercise and play.

    From grabbing a quick break from the pressures of everyday life, to walking the dog, parks offer a place to get close to nature, engage with their communities and can help people overcome social isolation.

    From the creation of valuable new green spots to the day-to-day upkeep of public places, the Pocket Parks Plus Programme gives local leaders and their communities the means to better maintain, protect and enhance their treasured green spaces.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2018 Comments on Embracing Digital Technology

    Rishi Sunak – 2018 Comments on Embracing Digital Technology

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the then Minister for Local Government, on 7 December 2018.

    Embracing digital technology can revolutionise public services. Within local government, I firmly believe it has the potential to improve a range of services in a host of different ways.

    Ultimately, our aim is to make services better for users but it is likely to reduce costs for councils too. This could be by improving the experience of someone in care, streamlining the admin that comes with the stress of moving home, or offering a simpler way to license taxis.

    And these are just some of the successful ideas which I am delighted to announce government funding for today. I’m excited to see these projects come to fruition.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2018 Speech to the County Councils Network Conference

    Rishi Sunak – 2018 Speech to the County Councils Network Conference

    The speech made by Rishi Sunak, the then Local Government Minister, in Guildford on 20 November 2018.

    Introduction

    Good morning, everybody.

    Thank you – it’s a pleasure to be at my first CCN conference.

    I was reflecting back to January, when I was first appointed as Local Government Minister. It’s obviously my first ministerial job, so you make that transition from being a backbencher to joining the government. And it does make you think about who your boss now is going to be.

    As an MP, it was pretty clear my boss was the people of Richmond in my constituency, but now as a Minister and a member of the government, who was I answering to?

    Some would tell me ‘well, of course, it’s your Secretary of State’; some said to me ‘well no, no, it’s the Prime Minister’. But very quickly on the job I learned that my real boss was going to be this chap called Paul Carter.

    In all seriousness, it’s been a real pleasure getting to know Paul and the rest of you over the past several months – and I’m very grateful for everything you do to make the case for counties in Westminster. So, thank you to you, your team, and everyone else in the CCN for continuing with that fantastic and very valuable effort. It’s been a genuine pleasure working together over the past few months.

    I read an article recently making a powerful case for strong local government. The article compared national politicians and ministers like me to “generals in Tolstoy novels… moving pieces around the board, while the actual battle is nothing like they imagine”.

    That struck a chord with me. Even as a constituency MP, I have always been envious of the incredible, tangible and direct impact that you all have on people’s everyday lives.

    There are simply hundreds of services that you have to provide: from social care and children’s services to broadband and highways, from trading standards and weddings to blue badges and fostering.

    And you do all of this for 26 million people across 86% of England’s landmass and half of England’s economy. When you think about it, it really is an incredible responsibility.

    And I am the first to recognise that you have been delivering these services in what has been a very difficult financial climate.

    I think it’s fair to say that no other part of government has carried a greater share of the burden in improving the country’s finances.

    You are very much on the front-line, and you have shown unmatched leadership and creativity in delivering high quality services over the past several years. And I pay tribute to your work in this regard.

    I am genuinely honoured to be your champion in government, and today I thought I’d spend my time to touch on three themes about why I’m incredibly optimistic for what the future holds for County Councils:

    Firstly, I’m going to talk about the new fairer funding system.

    Secondly, I’ll touch on the crucial role you have in driving social mobility in our country.

    And finally, the vital role you play in helping our society’s most vulnerable.

    Fairer Funding

    Isaac Newton once said: “Nature is pleased with simplicity.”

    I think, then, we can safely assume that Nature wouldn’t be that pleased with the existing local government finance formula!

    I very much want our County Councils to be on a solid and fair financial footing for the future.

    We can’t do that without a new formula that is more accurate, simpler, and fairer.

    I can assure you that introducing this new formula is among my highest priorities.

    The opportunity for such a comprehensive, fresh look like this doesn’t come that often.

    So I am clear: we absolutely have to get this right.

    That’s why I’m extremely grateful for the thoughtful and detailed contributions that many of you and the CCN have already made to the department. I have spent a lot of time reflecting on the issues that you have been absolutely right to highlight to us.

    I just want to touch on a couple in particular:

    Deprivation. To suggest that vast areas of the country that you represent have no pockets of deprivation simply isn’t a reflection of reality. So it is right that any new formula recognises deprivation at a more local, individual level – it isn’t just something that happens in cities.

    And we are all too aware that our country’s demographics are changing. Far faster than the designers of the current formula may have even thought possible – particularly in county areas.

    The new formula must be smarter – keeping track of our rapidly changing population, giving a realistic, up-to-date picture of the pressures driving actual expenditure on the ground.

    Nor will the formula overlook how rurality creates challenges for service delivery. My own constituency in North Yorkshire has a county division with more sheep than people – and while the new formula isn’t likely to accurately capture the sheep population – it certainly should deal with the genuine cost of delivering services in more rural areas.

    I’m pleased to say that we will publish the latest round of our consultation shortly, ahead of implementation in 2020/21.

    And I am confident that a simpler formula, which recognises relative need and resources much more fairly than ever before, is a prize that is now finally within our reach.

    Social Mobility

    I am very passionate about ensuring that everybody, no matter what their background, has the opportunity to fulfil their potential.

    A fair chance to build a good life for themselves regardless of their family circumstances, or where they came from.

    Spreading opportunity and unlocking the enormous potential of our people – that’s why came into in politics and I am sure the same is true for many of you.

    But, like almost every area of public policy, without local government this ambition simply can’t be realised. So I’d like to thank you sincerely for all your work on the Social Mobility in Counties report.

    The report was absolutely right to highlight that social mobility is a particular issue for our counties.

    There is of course no one silver bullet but the work that you are doing every day is making strides towards a more socially mobile society:

    Providing the transport networks that a young apprentice might use to travel to their work placement, equipping them with the skills they need for a successful career.

    Rolling out the high-speed broadband that an entrepreneur will use to start a successful business and increase local employment.

    Investing in nursery provision to ensure high-take up of early years education – so crucial for a child’s development.

    At every step of the journey for a person to fulfil their potential, you all are there.

    I commend the CCN for using its powerful voice to show both your commitment to social mobility, and your willingness and capability to make it reality.

    As the Secretary of State rightly said at the report’s launch, the government will look closely at the recommendations you have made to see how best we can empower you to do more.

    It is clear that when it comes to spreading opportunity, you all have a vital role to play. I am delighted that you have made it such a priority and I look forward to backing all of your ambitions.

    Supporting the most vulnerable

    Now, of course it is exciting and inspiring to talk about how you are all helping to help people achieve success, but we should also remember that:

    Yours are the first hands that reach out to those who fall on hard times.

    You are the front line of how we treat the most vulnerable in our society.

    It is a really daunting responsibility that you shoulder, but you never let us down, and I thank you for all your work. But the important work that you do isn’t just about fixing the problems of today. I am more ambitious than that, and I know that you are too.

    At this very moment, your key workers are helping to bring stability to the lives of tens of thousands of families dealing with multiple complex issues through the Troubled Families Programme.

    My first visit as a Minister was spending time with some of the families that the programme has helped. It is an experience that I will never forget.

    This revolutionary way of working, this whole family support, has saved children from going into care. It has helped people find the dignity and security of employment.

    And it has ensured that families stay strong and stay together.

    It is a testament to how your intervention today prevents problems tomorrow.

    I want your councils to be free to innovate and tackle problems before they even arise. So as the spending review approaches, I think we, collectively, need to think about how best your councils can be resourced to invest in prevention.

    I am passionate about learning from all of you how central government can best support your aspirations in this area. Because your track record already shows us that you can make a major difference.

    If we can get this right in the future, working together, we can truly transform the lives of tens of thousands of the most vulnerable people in our society.

    And that really would be something to be enormously proud of.

    Conclusion

    So, while the intense debate may continue to rage at Westminster and dominate the headlines, I know that you will go on delivering for your 26 million constituents.

    Ensuring that their communities are enriching places to call home.

    I have always seen my role as being your champion in government.

    Now, of course, my voice is one of many – so I can’t promise that we will win every argument.

    But I can promise you that I will keep making your case.

    And I genuinely believe that the concerns of local government are being listened to now more than ever.

    I hope that the recent announcements in the budget were a clear sign that this approach is working.

    If we can get this right in the future, I’m incredibly positive about all the good that we can do.

    So, in conclusion, I am very proud to be your champion.

    I’m humbled by seeing everything that you have achieved.

    And I’m enormously excited about what we can achieve working together in the future – ensuring that our communities and our constituents can look forward to a safer, brighter and more prosperous future.

    Thank you.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2018 Speech at the National Association of Local Councils Conference

    Rishi Sunak – 2018 Speech at the National Association of Local Councils Conference

    The speech made by Rishi Sunak, the then Local Government Minister, on 31 October 2018.

    Introduction – importance of parish councils

    Thank you Sue for that kind introduction, and thank you for all of the vital work you do, strengthening local government.

    Firstly, I’d just like to say how fantastic it is to see so many of you here. I just spent some time outside speaking to people and there’s a real sense of excitement and energy. This is ‘parish power’ in action.

    The subject of today’s conversations – ‘shaping the future’ – is one that is close to my heart.

    Since taking up my role in January, I’ve been inspired by NALC’s ability to bring people together and represent us. And I really welcome your leadership on the ‘Big Conversation’.

    I’m personally delighted to be small part of that conversation.

    In my ministerial role, I speak to everyone from Metropolitan Mayors to Church Wardens. I’ve seen how local government can be an incredible force for good. Not faceless bureaucracies, but mirrors of our places and our people.

    And the message I often hear is: the closer the locality, the greater the trust. But I know that trust comes with great responsibility too.

    I remember something the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said recently, which will resonate with all of you. He said: “I have never had demands so acute as when I was a parish priest”.

    So it is with local government – a lot is demanded of you.

    And from my own constituency work, I can tell you, it’s often those issues closest to home that can keep me awake at night.

    And those responsibilities for you are growing further still, in a sign of the confidence that people have in your abilities.

    When it comes to neighbourhood planning, for example, parish councils are now leading the way.

    From helping to make buildings reflect local tastes and preferences to directing development to preferred sites, neighbourhood plans have been transforming communities – and helping to alleviate our housing crisis in the process.

    We’ve also seen how parishes can help our vital community assets flourish – from our village halls to our tennis courts.

    I’m so pleased to see the numerous examples of parish councils using the opportunities afforded by the Community Right Bid, nominating cherished local spaces and buildings as Assets of Community Value.

    Year on year, as the take up of this Community Right grows, I want to ensure that how this scheme operates improves for town and parish councils, community groups, local authorities and asset owners.

    That’s why we are working with partners at Power to Change and mySociety to promote a new online platform, launched in September, called Keep It in The Community, to strengthen how the scheme works by providing a digital directory of all of the Assets of Community Value that have been successfully listed across the country.

    And I’ve seen the benefits in my constituency first hand, where one of our local communities in Hudswell has taken over a local pub, the George and Dragon. It’s now won Yorkshire pub of the year 3 years in a row, so it’s clearly a winning formula!

    The Star Council Awards are a perfect reflection of just how much we achieve at a local level. Because, for all the talk of structures and processes, we’re only as good as the people who represent us.

    People who are dedicated to improving people’s lives every single day through their hard work and dedication. So, I’d like to say a big thank you to all of you in this room and our committed public servants up and down the country for everything that you do.

    And I’d like to just take a moment to celebrate, in particular, our Star Council Award winners:

    Northwich Town Council (from Cheshire, which won Council of Year)
    Councillor Nick Penny from Gloucestershire (Councillor of the year, from Coleford Town Council)
    Clerk of Year Jayne Cooper (from Gnosall Parish Council, Staffordshire)
    The County Association Project of Year, which was won by West Sussex Association of Local Councils
    Young Councillor of Year, Melissa Boyden of Asfordby Parish Council (Leicestershire)

    Please join me in saying thank you and congratulations to all of the winners.

    Your voice in government

    With all of the tremendous work that you are doing, I’m mindful of my responsibilities to all of you. And I very much see my role, as Local Government Minister, to be your voice in government and your champion in Whitehall.

    And I want to be completely honest with you: I won’t be able to win every single battle. But what I can promise you, is that I will always make your case and fight your corner at the highest levels of government.

    And I hope that you can see the results of that already.

    Shortly after I got this job, you told me that some elements of GDPR would be a significant burden on parish councils. We’ve listened and worked closely with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport to ensure the new GDPR legislation exempts parish councils from needing a data protection officer.

    You told me that Parish Polls needed reforming – we’ve listened and we’re now updating the rules to modernise them and ensure they better meet your needs. I hope to introduce new regulations on this as soon as parliamentary time allows.

    You told me that many of you wanted to bring much-needed public toilets under parish control without being stung by business rates – we’ve listened and worked with the Treasury, and I’m sure all of you will have been absolutely delighted with the Chancellor’s announcement in the Budget on Monday: 100% business rate relief when parish councils take over these facilities.

    It’s something that my officials like to call the “relief on relief”!

    You also told me that many of you wanted to refurbish your village halls, many of which were built a century ago to commemorate the sacrifice of World War One. Again, we’ve listened, and at Budget the Chancellor outlined plans to provide £8 million of funding for grants equivalent to the VAT chargeable on such refurbishment projects.

    And lastly on community governance, you told me you wanted communities to have a stronger voice and the ability to more easily create new parishes. I’ve listened, and today I can also confirm that I’m actively looking at how we can strengthen the guidance.

    Because your voice is being heard. Your voice matters. And I will continue to listen to you and support your mission to build better and stronger local government.

    Digital

    People in this country turn to that most local of levels for that anchor and representation in the places they call home. Your ultra-local knowledge is essential in building that bridge between people and government.

    As a result of that, I believe you have a vital role to play in shaping the services people use every day – services that are increasingly moving online. And I believe you have that local knowledge we need to redesign and run our digital services.

    It’s something that’s at the heart of our new Local Government Digital Declaration – which I recently announced at the Local Government Association conference – a joint initiative between my department (MHCLG) and the Government Digital Service.

    It’s about relentlessly focusing on the needs of our citizens to deliver digital services that are centred on the user.

    I was impressed to learn during that process, that the village of Scruton in my own constituency in North Yorkshire – a small parish with an annual turnover of around £20,000 – has had a website since 1998. To put that into perspective, it wasn’t actually a legal requirement to have a website until 2015!

    It goes to show that small councils can be innovative and creative too. In fact, your smaller size and entrepreneurial spirit give you the potential to be more agile than your larger neighbours.

    That ability to feed back, interact and shape services has to be the new norm – and it’s something I was particularly inspired by during my time studying, working and living in Silicon Valley, California.

    Because you can now use data in any number of ways, from developing an app to report fly-tipping, to building a platform to monitor local wildlife.

    And I’m pleased to say that we are supporting these kinds of opportunities through our new £7.5 million Digital Innovation Fund – which parishes can also sign up to.

    Loneliness

    Whilst technology can bring local government closer to people, I’m also mindful of one of the great paradoxes of this era: in this time of unprecedented connectivity, sadly many people in our country are lonelier than ever.

    There are people who can go for days, weeks or even a month without seeing a friend or family member.

    Up to a fifth of all UK adults feel lonely most or all of the time – it’s shown to be as unhealthy for you as smoking.

    It’s why the Prime Minister recently launched the first ever cross-government Loneliness Strategy.

    It represents the beginning of what we hope will be a long and far reaching social change in our country.

    The Prime Minister also appointed the first ever Minister for Loneliness, who will work collaboratively across the Commission on Loneliness and our partners in charities and businesses across the UK.

    But we all know that we’ll only be able to get to grips with these kinds of challenges when we think locally.

    At a central government level, we tend to ask: “What can we do about loneliness?”. But at parish level, you tend to ask: “How can we help Helen, or James, to feel less lonely?”

    It’s that kind of emotional intelligence that parish councils have in spades.

    I know that parish councils will play a pivotal role in understanding loneliness and its pressures on society.

    It’s something I saw just last week at a coffee morning in the village of Welbury in my constituency. The event was just the kind of community-spirited thing that can really break down barriers that can lead to social isolation and loneliness – reaching out not only to the elderly, but also young mothers in that community.

    And as the government continues to prioritise tackling loneliness, I look forward to hearing from all of you and from NALC about how, working together, we can overcome this great generational challenge.

    Conclusion

    Because when it comes to shaping the future, I have no doubt that many of you will be at the heart of that change – and we in central government have a lot to learn from all of you.

    And that’s why NALC is so important.

    Helping to sew together that patchwork so it can become greater than the sum of its parts; raising the bar; inspiring people across the country – and shaping the future.

    So thank you for everything you do.

    It is a true privilege to represent you. I am proud of everything you do. And I’m so excited to see what you achieve in the future. Thank you very much.