NLGN Debate - After devolution: building a new contract between citizen and state

And what a debate I attended last night - I don’t think I’ve ever heard so many ideas and points of view in and hour and a half, never mind trying to write them all down!

With David Aaronovitch, Columnist in The Times, chairing the event, the Rt Hon Hazel Blears MP (Chair of the Labour Party and Minister without Portfolio) giving the keynote address with contributions also from Richard Wilson, Director, NLGN (New Local Government Network), there was plenty to talk about with yet further free-flowing comments and questions from the audience.

As well as what the NGLN reported from her keynote address, she raised a number of additional points, including that:

• Gordon Brown, as incoming Prime Minister, admits he’s changing and understands the need for further devolution to the local level
• politics, both local and national, should be celebrated - people shouldn’t be afraid to say they are actively involved in politics - but this is at a time when many people are anti-politics/politicians
• councils need to look further at the use of citizens juries and panels as well as local party political activities
• more local accountability is needed through organisations such as Primary Care Trusts and police forces, especially at Basic Command Unit (BCU) level
• the proposed Citizens Centre planned for Westminster shouldn’t be another tourist attraction for visitors to say ‘I’ve been there’ but a place where citizens can find out more about engaging with and lobbying their local and nation politicians
• the reform of the House of Lords needs to look at the focus and purpose rather than just who’s in it.

Richard Wilson commented on three particular aspects of such a contract between the state and the citizen: connection, empowerment and capacity.

• connection - people don’t have the time to get involved in active politics but they do want to change and influence the things that matter to them.  At the same time, the state wants to get people involved to enhance legitimacy and credibility of decisions to get these things done.  
• capacity - the Local Government White Paper is full of great ideas for involving local people more, e.g. Community Call for Action, but local government doesn’t have the skills and capacity it once had to enable this, particularly through the Gershon efficiency agenda and outsourcing of functions - skills are now outside rather than within local authorities.  

Dick Sorabji then commented on the fundamental problem of citizens’ trust in politics and politicians being down to three things: delivery (needs devolving down to a local partnership), accountability and collective choice (we musn’t avoid this, especially that typically only the loudest voices are heard, so we need more politicians to represent the concerns of all). 

But whilst they weren’t mentioned, I think it’s worth giving the work of the Power Commission a mention, whose report proposed recommendations based on three major shifts in political practice:

• a rebalancing of power away from the executive and unaccountable bodies towards Parliament and local government

• the introduction of greater responsiveness and choice into the electoral and party systems

• allowing citizens a much more direct and focused say over political decisions and policies.

Even though the report wasn’t mentioned, it’s quite striking the connection nevertheless with these discussions.

Likewise, the Together We Can government campaign aims to bring government and people closer together, encouraging public bodies to do more to enable people to influence local decisions. It is led by Communities and Local Government and is closely linked to the Local Government White Paper’s aim of giving local people and local communities more influence and power to improve their lives.