 |
|
Local and Central Government Relations Research 50
June 1996 Taking current proposals for regional government as its starting point, this study by The Constitution Unit sought to define key choices about the objectives and practical means of implementation. It found:
Regional government in England Current proposals for regional government in England are a response to: growing dissatisfaction with highly centralised government; a decline in the autonomy of local government and a perceived failure to address regional economic development and strategic planning needs. Discontent with rule from London has been reinforced by 17 years of single party government at Westminster, whilst interest in regional government in England has been boosted by the prospect of wider constitutional change: a regional dimension in European Union affairs; and - most acutely - the possibility of a Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and an authority for London (all advocated by the opposition parties). Both the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats have put forward plans for democratic regional assemblies in England, although their proposals differ significantly as to the speed of change, the role and functions of assemblies and their long-term constitutional status. The Conservative Party has not traditionally supported regional government, but in the last two years the current Government has carried out its own regional initiative in creating Government Offices for the Regions, integrating the regional administration of central government functions. The case for regional government A workable and durable regional tier requires clear analysis of the reasons why it is to be established and the role and function it is to perform. Arguments advanced in favour of regional government are both democratic and functional. Democratic arguments Regional identity requires democratic recognition:
Functional arguments Local authorities and other representative bodies agree that there are certain functions whose effective operation needs areas larger than local authorities but smaller than England as a whole. These are:
Options for change A number of models would increase democratic control at a sub-national level:
These are not mutually exclusive, but most promising at regional level are the models of indirectly elected Regional Chambers (a confederation of local authorities) and directly elected Regional Assemblies (an independent tier) which are adopted as the framework of this report. These broadly equate to the bodies proposed by the Labour Party and, in the case of Assemblies, to the regional authorities proposed by the Liberal Democrats. Some basic objectives Chambers need to meet the basic objectives of utility and credibility; they should have a coherent group of powers and responsibilities which would continue to make sense even if the transition to directly elected Assemblies were never made. The functions should be sufficient to give a fair test of a distinct step on the road to regional devolution. In addition, considerations of equity, distribution of power and clarity need to be kept in mind when establishing both Chambers and Assemblies. National standards may need to be balanced against regional autonomy. The relationships between new regional bodies and existing institutions must be clear and well understood if they are to be useful and command support. The process of establishment Creating directly elected and powerful devolved assemblies in England would be a major leap from the present situation. Given the necessary political will, it would be possible to move straight to directly elected Assemblies. However, the uneven support for regional government points to a period of transition which could vary considerably from region to region and would involve the establishment of Chambers as an interim stage. A key choice, with practical implications, is between a process of rapid transition and one which allows for a staged process of development.
Regional Chambers A credible national pattern of Chambers would need a number of decisions by Government on the following issues. Functions The functions of Regional Chambers would be likely to include strategic co-ordination of land-use planning, transport, environmental and economic development and European funding bids. Central to this approach would be the development of a regional strategy. Such a strategy would be linked with strategic planning guidance and transport plans for the region. Regional Development Agencies - if established - would have a key role in implementation in partnership with the Government Offices, and with other regional actors: regional quangos, the business community, the voluntary sector, and training and educational bodies. The other main function proposed for Chambers is democratic oversight of quangos and related bodies at a regional level. As quangos are responsible to and funded by central government, a decision to make them regionally accountable would require a Government-initiated review of their terms of reference to establish whether, and if so how, they are to be more responsive to regional requirements. Two main models for democratic oversight of quangos have been advanced: scrutiny and partnership. There is an inherent difficulty in proposing that the Chambers should act in partnership with regional quangos and other agencies, while at the same time scrutinising them and possibly invoking sanctions as a consequence. Partnership would be easier to secure with a collaborative version of the scrutiny role. The Government Offices for the Regions exist to co-ordinate and deliver central government functions in the regions: their instructions and resources are provided by Ministers. Even with the establishment of a regional tier of government, there will be a continuing need for central government presence in the regions. These central government operations can give an account but cannot be called to account by indirectly elected Regional Chambers; their accountability must follow their lines of control upwards to Whitehall and ministers. Boundaries If progress is to be made quickly, there is a strong case for adopting an existing pattern of boundaries for the Chamber stage. Where there are differences between the boundaries of the Government Offices and regional associations, a short period of consultation should be provided for deciding about Cumbria, Merseyside and the North West; and the South East. Assuming that a new strategic authority is established for London, a key requirement in the South East is that the regional structure should provide for effective resolution of the major land use planning decisions of the region as a whole, including London. Representation Membership of the Chambers should provide a sense of regional ownership, ensuring the representation of sub-regional interests, of different types of local authority and reflecting the political balance of the region. A decision is required on how to provide for the representation of non-elected members in recognition of the need for Chambers to work with partners in the business and voluntary sectors, as local authorities have increasingly done in recent years. Finance The strategic and deliberative nature of Chambers' functions means their expenditure would be small, but greater than that of the existing regional associations. They should be financed, if there is legislation, by precepting on local authorities, and be subject to the same rules on expenditure limitation as existing local authorities. Is legislation required? A White Paper could support progress to Regional Chambers by publicly committing a government and including a clear statement of intent about further stages. However, without some legislative backing there would be significant limitations on what Chambers could achieve. They would lack the authority which legislative establishment provides, funding would depend on voluntary agreement and the extent of their activities must derive from their constituent local authorities' powers and could be disputed. There would be a substantial advantage in giving legislative backing to Chambers at an early stage. This need contain only minimum provisions for establishing Chambers. Regional Assemblies Direct election of Regional Assemblies would make significant devolution of central government functions feasible. Direct election of a regional body would produce lines of decision-making and accountability that would make possible the exercise of executive powers at a regional level. Without clear definition of such powers, it is doubtful whether a transition from indirectly elected Chambers to directly elected Assemblies would be justified or would command enough support from the electorate in the regions. Functions There are a number of possible models for Regional Assemblies, involving different degrees of decentralisation. Further public debate is needed before decisions are made. A fundamental decision will be the extent to which central government is prepared to give up powers to a regional tier. Directly elected bodies could in theory take on only the functions of Regional Chambers, but little would be gained by the time and effort involved. There could even be a net loss because, unlike Chambers, Assemblies would not provide a forum for local government co-operation. A second major decision is how far the Assemblies would assume the function of allocating resources between local authorities: the latter would not welcome this. In legislating for Regional Assemblies, a decision would need to be taken about whether variation between the regions could be tolerated and, if so, in which areas and to what extent. It would be necessary to determine whether there are areas of activity or issues relating to the composition, structures and organisation of Assemblies which demand uniform treatment; and whether there are items where variation would be possible or even positively desirable. Boundaries The main decision required in relation to boundaries is whether the same boundaries should be maintained for Chamber and Assembly stages, and, if there is a change, who should decide the new boundaries and how. Proposed boundaries could be subject to a referendum, which in some regions may be the only practical way in which decisions about boundaries could gain sufficient recognition to safeguard their long-term acceptance. Representation The geographical distribution of party political support strengthens the possibility of one-party domination at regional level. There is therefore a strong case for electing Regional Assemblies by a system of proportional representation. Finance The method of funding Regional Assemblies needs to be appropriate in light of their functions. Funding should follow functions allocated to the Assemblies. There are various feasible sources of finance for Regional Assemblies, principally: a block grant from central government, a regional income or sales tax, a precept or a combination of these. Legislation The uneven progression to Regional Assemblies which seems likely will make framing the legislation difficult. In particular, it would have to accommodate the establishment of Assemblies at different times, and may also need to allow for the creation of Assemblies with different sets of powers. About the study The full report, Regional Government in England, is published by the Constitution Unit, a research project set up in April 1995 to conduct an independent inquiry into the implementation of constitutional reform. In the preparation of the report, the Unit was advised by a Consultative Group, chaired by Paul McQuail, comprising: Sir Jeremy Beecham, David Edmonds, Professor Malcolm Grant, Rita Hale, John Harwood, Pat Kneen, Professor Janice Morphet, Professor Gerry Stoker and Tony Travers. However, the conclusions and recommendations of the report are those of the Constitution Unit alone. Further information Regional Government in England is one of a series of reports being published by the Constitution Unit during 1996. Others deal with the establishment of devolved assemblies in Scotland and Wales, reform of the House of Lords, human rights legislation and the conduct of referendums. Further information, and copies of all reports, are available from the Constitution Unit, 4 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9RA, Tel: 0171 209 1162. Each report costs £10. The information in this Findings also appears in the Constitution Unit's series of Briefings, available free of charge from the Unit. |
