Tuesday 15th February
Parking Ticket challenge
Robin De Crittenden's story which was covered in this week's 'Christopher Booker's Notebook' in the Sunday Telegraph (read it here) attracted excitement from the BBC's lunchtime Jeremy Vine Show. In a call to the office yesterday, researcher Philip McCreery was fascinated with the story and wanted more background. He remarked that this could be opening a massive can of worms. He was given Robin's number to be able to put some more background together.
When Robin called in the afternoon he too remarked that the BBC were keen to run the story and had booked him into the BBC Birmingham studio for a half hour slot. He would be up against London Assembly Member, Conservative Brian Coleman in the broadcast which was to go out at 12.45pm until 1.15pm.
However, Robin called the office this morning to say that the BBC had cancelled because of 'other matters.'
I will let you draw your own conclusions. Unfortunately, the lid cannot go back on the can of worms whether the BBC chooses to ignore it or not.
To read the defence used against the Parking Ticket please click here
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Monday, February 14, 2005
Scathing report urges public inquiry to measure investment return from regional agencies
Yorkshire Post 14th February 2005
William Green
Political Correspondent
A PUBLIC inquiry into regional quangos is needed, as billions of pounds spent on them appears to be "almost entirely wasted", new research says.
Regional development agencies get more than £1.8bn of funding but a think-tank report says there is no assessment of the return of such investment. This region's development agency, Yorkshire Forward, had nearly £300m of public funding in the last financial year.
The report says other regional quangos must also be investigated through a public inquiry, such as Yorkshire Culture, which receives around £200,000 of taxpayers' money a year to co-ordinate the work of sport and tourism bodies.
There is also a warning that many quangos are duplicating each other's efforts, especially in areas of the environment, energy, sport and tourism.
The Efficiency in Government Unit is also calling for a wider overhaul of such bodies – of which there are 529 in Britain – to improve their accountability.
Report author Dan Lewis said: "Any Minister would be hard-pressed to tell you with absolute certainty exactly how many quangos there are in Britain today, even in his or her own Department.
"Since 1997, at least 113 new quangos have been set up, including Yorkshire Culture and Yorkshire Forward."
Mr Lewis, director of the Efficiency in Government Unit, added: "They are all no doubt, well-intentioned individuals who want the best for Yorkshire. But it seems nevertheless sensible to ask – is this a good use of taxpayers money?"
Mr Lewis said a full Government inquiry could show exactly what the return is on the investment in the regional development agencies, measured in sustainable private sector jobs they create compared with the benefits of a regional tax rebate.
Bradford Council Cabinet member Simon Cooke also backed the call for a review of regional quangos, saying: "I certainly think that there is too much of it and it's not accountable and it costs a lot of money.
"I think the best thing would be to stop the delivery of expensive regional government by stealth, which the Government is doing."
However the chairman of Yorkshire Culture, Clive Leach, insisted his organisation was carrying out a useful role for the region – although he acknowledged concerns about the number of quangos in existence.
Mr Leach said his group coordinated the work of other quangos in the region involved in areas such as the arts and sport, as well as being a voice for Yorkshire to the Government on culture issues.
He said: "I think there are a number of organisations you have to seriously consider whether there are too many of them. But I believe Yorkshire Culture is doing a good job."
Yorkshire Forward's executive director of strategy and policy, Tom Riordan, said it was "inaccurate" to say there was no assessment of the return from RDA funding.
He said: "The National Audit Office, several Parliamentary Select Committees, Department of Trade and Industry and regional assembly scrutiny exercises provide a body of evidence which confirms that we are making a positive difference to people's lives and to business competitiveness."
He added that recent efficiency reports said the RDAs should continue their work because they worked successfully for the regions.
william.green@ypn.co.uk
William Green
Political Correspondent
A PUBLIC inquiry into regional quangos is needed, as billions of pounds spent on them appears to be "almost entirely wasted", new research says.
Regional development agencies get more than £1.8bn of funding but a think-tank report says there is no assessment of the return of such investment. This region's development agency, Yorkshire Forward, had nearly £300m of public funding in the last financial year.
The report says other regional quangos must also be investigated through a public inquiry, such as Yorkshire Culture, which receives around £200,000 of taxpayers' money a year to co-ordinate the work of sport and tourism bodies.
There is also a warning that many quangos are duplicating each other's efforts, especially in areas of the environment, energy, sport and tourism.
The Efficiency in Government Unit is also calling for a wider overhaul of such bodies – of which there are 529 in Britain – to improve their accountability.
Report author Dan Lewis said: "Any Minister would be hard-pressed to tell you with absolute certainty exactly how many quangos there are in Britain today, even in his or her own Department.
"Since 1997, at least 113 new quangos have been set up, including Yorkshire Culture and Yorkshire Forward."
Mr Lewis, director of the Efficiency in Government Unit, added: "They are all no doubt, well-intentioned individuals who want the best for Yorkshire. But it seems nevertheless sensible to ask – is this a good use of taxpayers money?"
Mr Lewis said a full Government inquiry could show exactly what the return is on the investment in the regional development agencies, measured in sustainable private sector jobs they create compared with the benefits of a regional tax rebate.
Bradford Council Cabinet member Simon Cooke also backed the call for a review of regional quangos, saying: "I certainly think that there is too much of it and it's not accountable and it costs a lot of money.
"I think the best thing would be to stop the delivery of expensive regional government by stealth, which the Government is doing."
However the chairman of Yorkshire Culture, Clive Leach, insisted his organisation was carrying out a useful role for the region – although he acknowledged concerns about the number of quangos in existence.
Mr Leach said his group coordinated the work of other quangos in the region involved in areas such as the arts and sport, as well as being a voice for Yorkshire to the Government on culture issues.
He said: "I think there are a number of organisations you have to seriously consider whether there are too many of them. But I believe Yorkshire Culture is doing a good job."
Yorkshire Forward's executive director of strategy and policy, Tom Riordan, said it was "inaccurate" to say there was no assessment of the return from RDA funding.
He said: "The National Audit Office, several Parliamentary Select Committees, Department of Trade and Industry and regional assembly scrutiny exercises provide a body of evidence which confirms that we are making a positive difference to people's lives and to business competitiveness."
He added that recent efficiency reports said the RDAs should continue their work because they worked successfully for the regions.
william.green@ypn.co.uk
STAFF LEVELS AT ASSEMBLY REVEALED
This is Plymouth
Calls for the scrapping of the South West Regional Assembly have been re-ignited after it was revealed it employs the second highest number of staff of any of England's assemblies and has cost £4.8 million in grants from taxpayers' cash. Local Government Minister Nick Raynsford, in response to a question from Totnes MP Anthony Steen, revealed the assembly employed 56 full-time staff by the end of March 2004.
This represented the second highest payroll of England's eight assemblies .
Nationally, the assemblies employ more than 300 people, even though they have only been set up in shadow form. Labour's dream of elected assemblies in the English regions appears to have been scuppered by last year's rejection of the idea in a referendum in the North-East.
Mr Steen said: "This shows an enormous amount of money has been spent on something that has no statutory responsibility at all. They have this large, full-time staff for what is just a talking club."
Calls for the scrapping of the South West Regional Assembly have been re-ignited after it was revealed it employs the second highest number of staff of any of England's assemblies and has cost £4.8 million in grants from taxpayers' cash. Local Government Minister Nick Raynsford, in response to a question from Totnes MP Anthony Steen, revealed the assembly employed 56 full-time staff by the end of March 2004.
This represented the second highest payroll of England's eight assemblies .
Nationally, the assemblies employ more than 300 people, even though they have only been set up in shadow form. Labour's dream of elected assemblies in the English regions appears to have been scuppered by last year's rejection of the idea in a referendum in the North-East.
Mr Steen said: "This shows an enormous amount of money has been spent on something that has no statutory responsibility at all. They have this large, full-time staff for what is just a talking club."
Sunday, February 13, 2005
Legal twist exposes 'miscarriage of justice' for the Metric Martyrs
Sunday Telegraph
Christopher Booker's Notebook
13th February 2005
Pensioner challenges the power to penalise without trial
Two years ago, when Robert de Crittenden, a pensioner, emerged from Sandwell council offices in the west Midlands, he was irritated to find a £30 fixed penalty ticket on his windscreen. He little realised he was embarking on a battle which calls into question the legality of the entire principle of automatic penalties, which now earn local authorities and government departments hundreds of millions of pounds a year.
As a student of constitutional law, Mr de Crittenden was aware that under the 1689 Bill of Rights, it is fundamental to British law that no one may be fined or financially penalised unless they have been convicted by a court. When he inquired into the power of traffic authorities to levy automatic fines, he found it had been created by the Road Traffic Act 1991, in contradiction of the Bill of Rights.
But Mr de Crittenden was also aware of the historic judgment in the "Metric Martyrs" case in 2002, in which Lord Justice Laws pronounced that there were certain "constitutional statutes", such as the Bill of Rights, which cannot be set aside by subsequent legislation unless this is specifically stated. This was crucial to the argument whereby Laws upheld the conviction of the Metric Martyrs.
The law making it a criminal offence to sell goods in pounds and ounces was issued under the European Communities Act 1972. But the Martyrs' defence was that this had been overridden by the Weights and Measures Act 1985, which authorised continued selling in non-metric measures. By ancient tradition, when one Act says something different from another, the later Act, by the principle of "implied repeal", takes precedence. But Laws ruled that, since the European Communities Act was a "constitutional statute", it could not be overridden by the 1985 Act, since this had not made the point explicit.
After conferring with the British Weights and Measures Association (BWMA) and Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund, Mr de Crittenden concluded that, if Lord Justice Laws was right, the 1991 Road Traffic Act could not implicitly repeal the relevant clause of the Bill of Rights, because, as Laws stated, this was a "constitutional statute". Either the automatic penalty system was illegal; or Laws was wrong, in which case the Metric Martyrs should not have been found guilty.
Using this argument, Mr de Crittenden refused to pay his fine unless Sandwell took him to court. Two years later they have still not done so. But the significance of his challenge can scarcely be overestimated. Since his legal argument began to be widely circulated, ever more motorists have similarly refused to pay fixed penalties in towns all around the country – for example in Sunderland, where Mr de Crittenden was last week given another parking ticket, when he drove up to confer with Mr Herron in connection with this story.
The dilemma facing councils is stark. If they obey the law as it stands, they cannot impose parking tickets on hundreds of thousands of motorists without taking them to court. But if they do so, the court system would rapidly collapse. Furthermore the same applies to all the other official bodies that have jumped on the "fixed penalty" bandwagon, such as the Inland Revenue, which imposes an automatic £100 penalty for a late tax return.
If all these bodies imagine that, under the Laws judgment, they have a simple remedy – namely to rush through an Act of Parliament explicitly overruling the Bill of Rights – Mr de Crittenden has another trick up his sleeve. The Bill of Rights may have been enshrined in an Act of Parliament, but the Declaration of Rights on which it was based was a contract between the sovereign and the people. It is by that Declaration that the monarch occupies her throne and by which Parliament enjoys its power, and it cannot be repealed. Thus, if Laws is right, fixed penalties without conviction cannot be legalised. Either that, or the Metric Martyrs were innocent.
Anyone wishing to know more can contact the BWMA (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/exit.jhtml?exit=http://www.bwmaonline.com/) or the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund at PO Box 526, Sunderland SR1 3YS.
Christopher Booker's Notebook
13th February 2005
Pensioner challenges the power to penalise without trial
Two years ago, when Robert de Crittenden, a pensioner, emerged from Sandwell council offices in the west Midlands, he was irritated to find a £30 fixed penalty ticket on his windscreen. He little realised he was embarking on a battle which calls into question the legality of the entire principle of automatic penalties, which now earn local authorities and government departments hundreds of millions of pounds a year.
As a student of constitutional law, Mr de Crittenden was aware that under the 1689 Bill of Rights, it is fundamental to British law that no one may be fined or financially penalised unless they have been convicted by a court. When he inquired into the power of traffic authorities to levy automatic fines, he found it had been created by the Road Traffic Act 1991, in contradiction of the Bill of Rights.
But Mr de Crittenden was also aware of the historic judgment in the "Metric Martyrs" case in 2002, in which Lord Justice Laws pronounced that there were certain "constitutional statutes", such as the Bill of Rights, which cannot be set aside by subsequent legislation unless this is specifically stated. This was crucial to the argument whereby Laws upheld the conviction of the Metric Martyrs.
The law making it a criminal offence to sell goods in pounds and ounces was issued under the European Communities Act 1972. But the Martyrs' defence was that this had been overridden by the Weights and Measures Act 1985, which authorised continued selling in non-metric measures. By ancient tradition, when one Act says something different from another, the later Act, by the principle of "implied repeal", takes precedence. But Laws ruled that, since the European Communities Act was a "constitutional statute", it could not be overridden by the 1985 Act, since this had not made the point explicit.
After conferring with the British Weights and Measures Association (BWMA) and Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund, Mr de Crittenden concluded that, if Lord Justice Laws was right, the 1991 Road Traffic Act could not implicitly repeal the relevant clause of the Bill of Rights, because, as Laws stated, this was a "constitutional statute". Either the automatic penalty system was illegal; or Laws was wrong, in which case the Metric Martyrs should not have been found guilty.
Using this argument, Mr de Crittenden refused to pay his fine unless Sandwell took him to court. Two years later they have still not done so. But the significance of his challenge can scarcely be overestimated. Since his legal argument began to be widely circulated, ever more motorists have similarly refused to pay fixed penalties in towns all around the country – for example in Sunderland, where Mr de Crittenden was last week given another parking ticket, when he drove up to confer with Mr Herron in connection with this story.
The dilemma facing councils is stark. If they obey the law as it stands, they cannot impose parking tickets on hundreds of thousands of motorists without taking them to court. But if they do so, the court system would rapidly collapse. Furthermore the same applies to all the other official bodies that have jumped on the "fixed penalty" bandwagon, such as the Inland Revenue, which imposes an automatic £100 penalty for a late tax return.
If all these bodies imagine that, under the Laws judgment, they have a simple remedy – namely to rush through an Act of Parliament explicitly overruling the Bill of Rights – Mr de Crittenden has another trick up his sleeve. The Bill of Rights may have been enshrined in an Act of Parliament, but the Declaration of Rights on which it was based was a contract between the sovereign and the people. It is by that Declaration that the monarch occupies her throne and by which Parliament enjoys its power, and it cannot be repealed. Thus, if Laws is right, fixed penalties without conviction cannot be legalised. Either that, or the Metric Martyrs were innocent.
Anyone wishing to know more can contact the BWMA (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/exit.jhtml?exit=http://www.bwmaonline.com/) or the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund at PO Box 526, Sunderland SR1 3YS.
Friday, February 11, 2005
'Talking shop' funds are cut
Northern Echo 11/02/2005
COUNCILS have voted to cut their subscriptions to the "bureaucratic" Yorkshire and Humber Assembly by half.
The decision by the Association of Local Authorities (ALA) means the assembly will lose £750,000.
Harrogate Borough Council leader Mike Gardner welcomed the move.
He said: "We are pleased to have agreed this reduction in our subscription. We believe that the assembly wastes time and money on endless conferences, committees, research initiatives, publications and consultations. The money spent on bureaucracy would be better spent on improving transport and public services."
Richmondshire District Council leader John Blackie also backed the decision.
He said: "The regional assembly has grown too fast for its own good. For Richmondshire, the glossy reports that it produces have virtually no relevance to our district and are heavily dominated by the urban authorities."
It is not thought the move will jeopardise the assembly, which received most of its £4.7m budget for this year from the Government.
The decision was taken after several authorities withdrew from the assembly amid claims it had become a talking shop.
Clive Leach, the deputy chairman of the assembly, said local councils had a vital role to play in the future of the assembly.
He said: "We respect the right of local authorities to review their subscriptions, but we must ensure the excellent partnership working established at a regional level is not lost."
A review will be carried out of how the money given to the assembly by authorities is spent.
ALA chairwoman Margaret Eaton said the lower contributions would ensure local authorities kept their membership. She said: "It is vitally important that the region's local authorities and other partners work together in the best interests of the region."
COUNCILS have voted to cut their subscriptions to the "bureaucratic" Yorkshire and Humber Assembly by half.
The decision by the Association of Local Authorities (ALA) means the assembly will lose £750,000.
Harrogate Borough Council leader Mike Gardner welcomed the move.
He said: "We are pleased to have agreed this reduction in our subscription. We believe that the assembly wastes time and money on endless conferences, committees, research initiatives, publications and consultations. The money spent on bureaucracy would be better spent on improving transport and public services."
Richmondshire District Council leader John Blackie also backed the decision.
He said: "The regional assembly has grown too fast for its own good. For Richmondshire, the glossy reports that it produces have virtually no relevance to our district and are heavily dominated by the urban authorities."
It is not thought the move will jeopardise the assembly, which received most of its £4.7m budget for this year from the Government.
The decision was taken after several authorities withdrew from the assembly amid claims it had become a talking shop.
Clive Leach, the deputy chairman of the assembly, said local councils had a vital role to play in the future of the assembly.
He said: "We respect the right of local authorities to review their subscriptions, but we must ensure the excellent partnership working established at a regional level is not lost."
A review will be carried out of how the money given to the assembly by authorities is spent.
ALA chairwoman Margaret Eaton said the lower contributions would ensure local authorities kept their membership. She said: "It is vitally important that the region's local authorities and other partners work together in the best interests of the region."
Thursday, February 10, 2005
Regions miss out on EU concessions
Feb 10 2005
By Robert Merrick, Daily Post
SCOTLAND and Wales are outmuscling Merseyside to change Brussels policies in their favour because there is no devolution to the English regions, a study has found.
The Edinburgh Parliament and Welsh Assembly had successfully won concessions from the European Union, particularly in the areas of rural and farming policy, it concluded.
In contrast, regions such as the North West - where a planned referendum on setting up an elected assembly was scrapped last year - were missing out.
Its lobbying resources were much smaller than those of Scotland, Wales and, before the suspension of its assembly, Northern Ireland.
Martin Burch, professor of government at Manchester Univertity, said the researchers found "growing concern" at the imbalance within the English regions.
He added: "This is particularly true over EU structural funds, which support regional development, but it is also increasingly the case with rural and trade policies.
"Most English regions have far less impact in Brussels than the better resourced offices set up by the devolved administrations.
"And, at home, they find themselves having to lobby Whitehall to influence the UK's approach to EU issues, too."
The research is the first to examine the effects of devolution to Scotland and Wales since deputy prime minister John Prescott axed the North West referendum last July. Up to 25 of the region's Labour MPs warned Mr Prescott that humiliating defeat was inevitable and that the fallout would wound them in the coming General Election.
Officially, the poll was "postponed", but the overwhelming "No" vote in the North East referendum killed off the prospect of any further votes for many years.
Supporters of the assembly claimed it would give the North West extra muscle, but opponents insisted what was on offer was a pale imitation of the Scottish model in any case.
The study found that ministers and civil servants of Scotland and the other devolved administrations had been "substantially drawn in" to EU policy making.
In contrast, the English regional development agencies (RDAs) and unelected assemblies were not "part of the formal UK EU policy process" and were "treated as consultee rather than partner".
The only area in which they enjoyed formal responsibilities in negotiations within the European Union was on applications for regional aid, to attract investment.
The researchers said: "The result is that so far the impact of the English regions on UK EU policy handling, beyond structural funds, has been marginal.
"In essence, they have to use the lobbying tactics of the outsider in order to make their voices heard on European and other issues."
By Robert Merrick, Daily Post
SCOTLAND and Wales are outmuscling Merseyside to change Brussels policies in their favour because there is no devolution to the English regions, a study has found.
The Edinburgh Parliament and Welsh Assembly had successfully won concessions from the European Union, particularly in the areas of rural and farming policy, it concluded.
In contrast, regions such as the North West - where a planned referendum on setting up an elected assembly was scrapped last year - were missing out.
Its lobbying resources were much smaller than those of Scotland, Wales and, before the suspension of its assembly, Northern Ireland.
Martin Burch, professor of government at Manchester Univertity, said the researchers found "growing concern" at the imbalance within the English regions.
He added: "This is particularly true over EU structural funds, which support regional development, but it is also increasingly the case with rural and trade policies.
"Most English regions have far less impact in Brussels than the better resourced offices set up by the devolved administrations.
"And, at home, they find themselves having to lobby Whitehall to influence the UK's approach to EU issues, too."
The research is the first to examine the effects of devolution to Scotland and Wales since deputy prime minister John Prescott axed the North West referendum last July. Up to 25 of the region's Labour MPs warned Mr Prescott that humiliating defeat was inevitable and that the fallout would wound them in the coming General Election.
Officially, the poll was "postponed", but the overwhelming "No" vote in the North East referendum killed off the prospect of any further votes for many years.
Supporters of the assembly claimed it would give the North West extra muscle, but opponents insisted what was on offer was a pale imitation of the Scottish model in any case.
The study found that ministers and civil servants of Scotland and the other devolved administrations had been "substantially drawn in" to EU policy making.
In contrast, the English regional development agencies (RDAs) and unelected assemblies were not "part of the formal UK EU policy process" and were "treated as consultee rather than partner".
The only area in which they enjoyed formal responsibilities in negotiations within the European Union was on applications for regional aid, to attract investment.
The researchers said: "The result is that so far the impact of the English regions on UK EU policy handling, beyond structural funds, has been marginal.
"In essence, they have to use the lobbying tactics of the outsider in order to make their voices heard on European and other issues."
REGIONAL ASSEMBLY
Northern Echo Letters 10.02.05
I AM deeply concerned that Councillor Chris Foote-Wood should continue to believe (HAS, Feb 5) that my comments regarding the abolition of the North-East Assembly are a personal attack on him.
This is simply not true. I am merely offering the public facts about what I see as a gross misuse of taxpayers' money.
I respect the fact that the assembly was part of a 30-year dream for Coun Foote-Wood, but in a democratic society we have to abide by results. So the councillor finds himself in the awkward position of sitting on a North-East Assembly against the wishes of the overwhelming no result. It makes him look rather hypocritical.
Rather than demonising those who voted 'no', he may be afforded more respect if he resigned from the assembly. - Jim Tague, Bishop Auckland Conservatives.
COUNCILLORS should respect the wishes of the people (HAS, Feb 5) and disband the unelected assemblies.
Unfortunately, the local parties are merely mirroring their Westminster party policies.
Another example of our shoddy representation in England is in the case of the English student who is going to the European Court of Justice because she is being discriminated against in Scotland over tuition fees.
How did English MPs allow this to happen when a majority of them were against tuition fees? So we have unelected devolved MPs running English departments, unelected and possibly illegal regional assemblies and quangos running amok throughout the country.
If Tony Blair was never keen on elected regional assemblies why is he continuing to support unelected ones?
This Government has been kicking England around since devolution for Wales and Scotland and it's time it stopped. - K Young, Darlington.
I AM deeply concerned that Councillor Chris Foote-Wood should continue to believe (HAS, Feb 5) that my comments regarding the abolition of the North-East Assembly are a personal attack on him.
This is simply not true. I am merely offering the public facts about what I see as a gross misuse of taxpayers' money.
I respect the fact that the assembly was part of a 30-year dream for Coun Foote-Wood, but in a democratic society we have to abide by results. So the councillor finds himself in the awkward position of sitting on a North-East Assembly against the wishes of the overwhelming no result. It makes him look rather hypocritical.
Rather than demonising those who voted 'no', he may be afforded more respect if he resigned from the assembly. - Jim Tague, Bishop Auckland Conservatives.
COUNCILLORS should respect the wishes of the people (HAS, Feb 5) and disband the unelected assemblies.
Unfortunately, the local parties are merely mirroring their Westminster party policies.
Another example of our shoddy representation in England is in the case of the English student who is going to the European Court of Justice because she is being discriminated against in Scotland over tuition fees.
How did English MPs allow this to happen when a majority of them were against tuition fees? So we have unelected devolved MPs running English departments, unelected and possibly illegal regional assemblies and quangos running amok throughout the country.
If Tony Blair was never keen on elected regional assemblies why is he continuing to support unelected ones?
This Government has been kicking England around since devolution for Wales and Scotland and it's time it stopped. - K Young, Darlington.
Regional Assemblies
Mr. Steen: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many (a) full-time and (b) part-time staff are employed in each regional assembly; how much funding from council tax went to each regional assembly in 2003–04; and how much public funding the South West Regional Assembly has received since it was established. [215544]
Mr. Raynsford: Regional Assemblies employed the equivalent of 301.7 full-time staff at the end of March 2004 as detailed in the following table.
Regional assembly Staff employed (at end of March 2004)
East 38.5
East Midlands 21
North East 28
North West 78
South East 32
South West 56
West Midlands 11
Yorkshire and Humber 37.2
Total 301.7
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister made grants totalling £4,814,000 to the South West Regional Assembly between April 2001 and to date.
9 Feb 2005 : Column 1586W
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister does not hold any information relating to how much council tax funding went to each regional assembly in 2003–04 and it could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Raynsford: Regional Assemblies employed the equivalent of 301.7 full-time staff at the end of March 2004 as detailed in the following table.
Regional assembly Staff employed (at end of March 2004)
East 38.5
East Midlands 21
North East 28
North West 78
South East 32
South West 56
West Midlands 11
Yorkshire and Humber 37.2
Total 301.7
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister made grants totalling £4,814,000 to the South West Regional Assembly between April 2001 and to date.
9 Feb 2005 : Column 1586W
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister does not hold any information relating to how much council tax funding went to each regional assembly in 2003–04 and it could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Ringing endorsement for assembly by Government
THE Government has underlined its commitment to regional assemblies in a letter to Epping Forest District Council where councillors, by 36 votes to eight, voted to call on Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott to abolish the controversial bodies.
John Powell, from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, has told the council the Government remains "firmly committed to improving economic performance and quality of life across all regions".
"To achieve this it will continue local government reform and an active regional policy to decentralise power and strengthen the regions." The letter added: "The regional assemblies have an important influence on housing, planning, transport, economic development and skills and training in their region. These regional bodies play a co-ordinating, strategic role with the full involvement of local authorities and other representatives of the region drawing up the regional spatial, transport and waste strategies."
The Government "continues to have a clear policy to decentralise and improve performance in local government and strengthening all the English regions, not just through elected assemblies. That will carry on in the East of England".
Mr Powell, from the regional authorities division, said the assemblies "allow serious discussion of difficult planning and housing issues". He added: "There are difficult issues and conflicting pressures in the eastern and other regions, as serious commentators recognise. They can't be solved within the boundaries of a single authority."
John Powell, from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, has told the council the Government remains "firmly committed to improving economic performance and quality of life across all regions".
"To achieve this it will continue local government reform and an active regional policy to decentralise power and strengthen the regions." The letter added: "The regional assemblies have an important influence on housing, planning, transport, economic development and skills and training in their region. These regional bodies play a co-ordinating, strategic role with the full involvement of local authorities and other representatives of the region drawing up the regional spatial, transport and waste strategies."
The Government "continues to have a clear policy to decentralise and improve performance in local government and strengthening all the English regions, not just through elected assemblies. That will carry on in the East of England".
Mr Powell, from the regional authorities division, said the assemblies "allow serious discussion of difficult planning and housing issues". He added: "There are difficult issues and conflicting pressures in the eastern and other regions, as serious commentators recognise. They can't be solved within the boundaries of a single authority."
Wednesday, February 09, 2005
Devolution 'could spark EU power struggle'
A power struggle between Westminster, Brussels and the UK's devolved bodies could be looming, suggests a new study.
Academics have found devolved administrations are strongly influencing EU policy to advance the interests of their areas of control.
While the devolved bodies and the UK government share a broadly similar approach to EU relations the situation is stable but things could change for the worse if different agendas were pursued.
The study also found that English regions were missing out because their lobbying resources were much smaller than those of Scotland, Wales and, before suspension, Northern Ireland.
The report - drawn up by researchers from the Universities of Manchester, Edinburgh and Glasgow - concludes that this will have important consequences for the UK's negotiations with the EU.
Researchers found the administrations in Scotland and Wales had been able to win concessions from the EU particularly in the areas of rural and farming policy.
Even though all EU relations are a reserved UK power, each devolved administration and each English region has an office in Brussels where they lobby for their own interests.
Priorities
Martin Burch, professor of government at Manchester, said: "What has happened since devolution is that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have acquired greater policy-making resources of their own and a clearer sense of priorities with which to influence EU policy in their territorial interest.
"But they may also find themselves at a disadvantage in that their civil servants are somewhat more outside the informal Whitehall network which has an important role to play in UK policy formation.
"However, while the Scottish and Welsh offices always had full access to the Whitehall network in the past, it is doubtful that they had the resources or priorities to make full use of it."
Nevertheless, the devolved administrations are better placed in these new arrangements than English regional assemblies and development agencies.
"We have found growing concern with European issues in the RDAs and the assemblies", added Burch.
"This is particularly true over EU structural funds, which support regional development, but it is also increasingly the case with rural and trade policies.
"However, most English regions have far less impact in Brussels than the better resourced offices set up by the devolved administrations. And, at home, they find themselves having to lobby Whitehall to influence the UK’s approach to EU issues, too."
Burch questioned what may happen in the future if different agendas are pursued by different tiers of government.
"The current relationships reflect the fact that the administrations share a broadly similar approach to the European Union, and that, as a result the UK government seems happy to allow the devolved administrations to have the input they do," he said.
"But what happens if there are changes in the parties in power in some of the parliaments and assemblies, and that trust starts to break down?
"That could prove a real test of the strength of the relationships between the devolved administrations, Whitehall and Brussels."
Academics have found devolved administrations are strongly influencing EU policy to advance the interests of their areas of control.
While the devolved bodies and the UK government share a broadly similar approach to EU relations the situation is stable but things could change for the worse if different agendas were pursued.
The study also found that English regions were missing out because their lobbying resources were much smaller than those of Scotland, Wales and, before suspension, Northern Ireland.
The report - drawn up by researchers from the Universities of Manchester, Edinburgh and Glasgow - concludes that this will have important consequences for the UK's negotiations with the EU.
Researchers found the administrations in Scotland and Wales had been able to win concessions from the EU particularly in the areas of rural and farming policy.
Even though all EU relations are a reserved UK power, each devolved administration and each English region has an office in Brussels where they lobby for their own interests.
Priorities
Martin Burch, professor of government at Manchester, said: "What has happened since devolution is that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have acquired greater policy-making resources of their own and a clearer sense of priorities with which to influence EU policy in their territorial interest.
"But they may also find themselves at a disadvantage in that their civil servants are somewhat more outside the informal Whitehall network which has an important role to play in UK policy formation.
"However, while the Scottish and Welsh offices always had full access to the Whitehall network in the past, it is doubtful that they had the resources or priorities to make full use of it."
Nevertheless, the devolved administrations are better placed in these new arrangements than English regional assemblies and development agencies.
"We have found growing concern with European issues in the RDAs and the assemblies", added Burch.
"This is particularly true over EU structural funds, which support regional development, but it is also increasingly the case with rural and trade policies.
"However, most English regions have far less impact in Brussels than the better resourced offices set up by the devolved administrations. And, at home, they find themselves having to lobby Whitehall to influence the UK’s approach to EU issues, too."
Burch questioned what may happen in the future if different agendas are pursued by different tiers of government.
"The current relationships reflect the fact that the administrations share a broadly similar approach to the European Union, and that, as a result the UK government seems happy to allow the devolved administrations to have the input they do," he said.
"But what happens if there are changes in the parties in power in some of the parliaments and assemblies, and that trust starts to break down?
"That could prove a real test of the strength of the relationships between the devolved administrations, Whitehall and Brussels."
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Bringing order to the regions, Paperclip policy takes the biscuit
Tuesday, February 08, 2005 9:33 AM
Yorkshire Post - bringing order to the regions
IN his reforms of public services, Tony Blair has repeatedly emphasised the concept of "value for money".
Yet, against this backdrop of prudence, Ministers appear to have had no qualms about allowing the spending of shadowy, quangos to spiral significantly, with few controls in place to ensure that they deliver real returns to the taxpayer.
A classic example continues to be the unelected Yorkshire and Humber Assembly. It is facing allegations today that senior managers are more concerned with the use of paperclips, and the type of biscuits served, than delivering tangible economic advances.
The concerns raised about the assembly's management style are serious, and require further investigation. However, the very trivial nature of some of the complaints poses a far more serious question about the organisation's future, and that of the Government's long-term policy towards the English regions.
It must be remembered that the Wakefield-based body was created as a forerunner to the elected regional assemblies that were planned under John Prescott's devolution blueprint.
The organisation quietly amassed a £3.7m annual budget and recruited 39 staff to, ostensibly, develop planning policies and monitor the economic regeneration work of Yorkshire Forward; coincidentally another unelected quango that has considerable spending power. The assembly, which also has a Brussels office, cannot point to one job that it has directly created.
However, concerns about the organisation's role only came to a head last summer when cash-strapped local councils belatedly questioned their own financial input, leading to the damaging claim that it was little more than a glorified "talking shop".
So far, Mr Prescott has been ominously silent on the future of the unelected assemblies, even though his devolution plans were unceremoniously dumped after last November's referendum defeat in the North-East.
Yet, it is not as if the Deputy Prime Minister has quietly forgotten about the issue of regional government. Far from it. Instead of attempting to bring some clarity to the table, Mr Prescott has only managed to complicate matters even further.
He has now approved the creation of the The Northern Way, yet another taxpayer-funded quango that he intends to revitalise the North. At the same time, he has paved the way for local councils to involve individual communities in the decision-making process.
At face value, these are potentially worthwhile initiatives. However, there is a danger that they will all soak up valuable public funds while achieving very little. And there are also concerns that their work will be duplicated.
With a General Election looming, Mr Blair should pull rank and halt his loyal deputy's muddled proposals. He then needs to appoint a Minister who can genuinely deliver a more co-ordinated approach, and one which the public can have confidence in.
The embarrassment that this will cause in the short-term maybe a small price to pay to ensure that even more money does not go to waste on ill-conceived political whims.
Yorkshire Post - bringing order to the regions
IN his reforms of public services, Tony Blair has repeatedly emphasised the concept of "value for money".
Yet, against this backdrop of prudence, Ministers appear to have had no qualms about allowing the spending of shadowy, quangos to spiral significantly, with few controls in place to ensure that they deliver real returns to the taxpayer.
A classic example continues to be the unelected Yorkshire and Humber Assembly. It is facing allegations today that senior managers are more concerned with the use of paperclips, and the type of biscuits served, than delivering tangible economic advances.
The concerns raised about the assembly's management style are serious, and require further investigation. However, the very trivial nature of some of the complaints poses a far more serious question about the organisation's future, and that of the Government's long-term policy towards the English regions.
It must be remembered that the Wakefield-based body was created as a forerunner to the elected regional assemblies that were planned under John Prescott's devolution blueprint.
The organisation quietly amassed a £3.7m annual budget and recruited 39 staff to, ostensibly, develop planning policies and monitor the economic regeneration work of Yorkshire Forward; coincidentally another unelected quango that has considerable spending power. The assembly, which also has a Brussels office, cannot point to one job that it has directly created.
However, concerns about the organisation's role only came to a head last summer when cash-strapped local councils belatedly questioned their own financial input, leading to the damaging claim that it was little more than a glorified "talking shop".
So far, Mr Prescott has been ominously silent on the future of the unelected assemblies, even though his devolution plans were unceremoniously dumped after last November's referendum defeat in the North-East.
Yet, it is not as if the Deputy Prime Minister has quietly forgotten about the issue of regional government. Far from it. Instead of attempting to bring some clarity to the table, Mr Prescott has only managed to complicate matters even further.
He has now approved the creation of the The Northern Way, yet another taxpayer-funded quango that he intends to revitalise the North. At the same time, he has paved the way for local councils to involve individual communities in the decision-making process.
At face value, these are potentially worthwhile initiatives. However, there is a danger that they will all soak up valuable public funds while achieving very little. And there are also concerns that their work will be duplicated.
With a General Election looming, Mr Blair should pull rank and halt his loyal deputy's muddled proposals. He then needs to appoint a Minister who can genuinely deliver a more co-ordinated approach, and one which the public can have confidence in.
The embarrassment that this will cause in the short-term maybe a small price to pay to ensure that even more money does not go to waste on ill-conceived political whims.
LEADER ANGERED BY POWER OF ASSEMBLY
Herts Essex News, 8th February 2005
THE leader of Epping Forest Council wants the authority to pull out of the East of England Regional Assembly in protest at plans to let it control traveller sites.
John Knapman (Ind) said on Monday it was unacceptable that the unelected EERA will be allowed to control the number of traveller sites in the region.
The move is proposed in a Government report published last Thursday which states that regional housing boards – controlled by the unelected assemblies – will allocate local authorities targets for the number of sites they should provide.
But Mr Knapman strongly criticised the move and will now urge fellow district councillors to contemplate quitting EERA when they next meet.
“John Prescott has acted true to form to completely ignore the wishes of electors concerning regional assemblies and has proceeded to give even more power to these quangos,” he complained. “It’s not a decision which should rest with bureaucrats at Bury St Edmonds, Suffolk. I find it difficult to argue that we should consider £12,000 a year in membership fees to a body which is being castigated by a large majority of councillors.”
His comments were made in the same week the North Weald Airfield Users Group reported it had secured more than £3,000 in just three weeks in donations for its campaign to save the site from redevelopment, with the Epping and North Weald Model Flying Club handing over £1,118.
EERA withdrew its support for the East of England Plan in December but has nevertheless put it out for public consultation. The controversial plan proposes the airfield accommodate 6,000 new homes, an industrial zone and a rail link.
Airfield users group member Martin Williams said: “The group has been overwhelmed by the generosity of local residents, airfield users and many other supporters, some even from the USA.”
Meanwhile, North Weald Parish Council chairman Bob Wood has called for wider consultation on the plan.
He said members of his and other councils were determined to inform as many people as possible of the scheme, adding: “The parish council believes that there is a clear need for public meetings to fulfil this need.”
The council has made a written request to EFDC for help, suggesting a public event be held at the airfield for residents who want to know more about the major developments proposed.
THE leader of Epping Forest Council wants the authority to pull out of the East of England Regional Assembly in protest at plans to let it control traveller sites.
John Knapman (Ind) said on Monday it was unacceptable that the unelected EERA will be allowed to control the number of traveller sites in the region.
The move is proposed in a Government report published last Thursday which states that regional housing boards – controlled by the unelected assemblies – will allocate local authorities targets for the number of sites they should provide.
But Mr Knapman strongly criticised the move and will now urge fellow district councillors to contemplate quitting EERA when they next meet.
“John Prescott has acted true to form to completely ignore the wishes of electors concerning regional assemblies and has proceeded to give even more power to these quangos,” he complained. “It’s not a decision which should rest with bureaucrats at Bury St Edmonds, Suffolk. I find it difficult to argue that we should consider £12,000 a year in membership fees to a body which is being castigated by a large majority of councillors.”
His comments were made in the same week the North Weald Airfield Users Group reported it had secured more than £3,000 in just three weeks in donations for its campaign to save the site from redevelopment, with the Epping and North Weald Model Flying Club handing over £1,118.
EERA withdrew its support for the East of England Plan in December but has nevertheless put it out for public consultation. The controversial plan proposes the airfield accommodate 6,000 new homes, an industrial zone and a rail link.
Airfield users group member Martin Williams said: “The group has been overwhelmed by the generosity of local residents, airfield users and many other supporters, some even from the USA.”
Meanwhile, North Weald Parish Council chairman Bob Wood has called for wider consultation on the plan.
He said members of his and other councils were determined to inform as many people as possible of the scheme, adding: “The parish council believes that there is a clear need for public meetings to fulfil this need.”
The council has made a written request to EFDC for help, suggesting a public event be held at the airfield for residents who want to know more about the major developments proposed.
Monday, February 07, 2005
400,000 homes in North face demolition
By Charles Clover, Environment Editor The Telegraph
Up to 400,000 homes are to be demolished across the north of England, equivalent to a city the size of Birmingham.
Demolition will take place over the same 15-year period as John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, is planning to squeeze 200,000 more affordable homes than planners say are needed into the South East.
The homes to be demolished in the North were mostly built pre-1919. Many will currently be occupied.
They have been identified, however, as being in areas of "low demand" and "market failure" under an action plan for the North drawn up by three regional development agencies and launched by Mr Prescott at the Sustainable Communities conference in Manchester last week.
The plan, the latest refinement of a strategy called the Northern Way, has enraged conservationists fighting to save the North's Victorian terraces by calling for "clear financial incentives to facilitate clearance rather than repair".
Demolition goes directly against advice to the Government from English Heritage that renovating Victorian terraces is cheaper, more environmentally friendly and better for the social fabric than demolition.
Critics accuse Mr Prescott of using the regional bodies – which are not democratically elected – as a vehicle with which to bypass English Heritage, the Culture Department, its sponsor department, the Department for the Environment, the Treasury or local authorities.
The Government's first mention of the number of homes that it plans to demolish in the North lies buried in the 80-page strategy Moving Forward: the Northern Way. The vast majority of delegates at the conference will not have read it.
The document says that 1.5 million homes in the North are in areas of "market failure" or abandonment. It quotes, approvingly, the Centre for Urban and Regional Studies, which suggests that up to 400,000 should be replaced.
The document continues: "Based on current rates, over the next 10 years some 167,000 homes will be cleared. This is well below the rate required." Sir Graham Hall, the chairman of the Northern Way steering group, described the plan as "a once in a lifetime chance for the North to shape its own destiny by bringing about change".
Mr Prescott described the action plan as "a major milestone in our efforts to close the prosperity gap between the northern regions and the rest of the country".
But Adam Wilkinson, of SAVE Britain's Heritage, said: "I am astounded by the figure of 400,000 homes to be demolished. It represents a colossal loss of heritage.
"It is extraordinary that the Government say they need to subsidise demolition when that money could be better spent repairing and rehabilitating buildings."
Caroline Spelman, the Tory spokesman for local government, said: "If you want to destroy the character of our northern towns and cities this is the way to go about it. We appear to have learnt nothing. John Prescott's plan to shift economic regeneration south is going to help no one."
Henry Oliver, of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said: "The sheer folly of these plans is breathtaking. Slash and burn now seems to be the key instrument of Government policy."
A spokesman for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister said: "This is the Northern Way's report. We have not responded to that particular issue – the number of houses to be demolished.
"We have asked them to come back in April with a full business plan of all the things they need funding for, whether that is demolition or refurbishment."
Up to 400,000 homes are to be demolished across the north of England, equivalent to a city the size of Birmingham.
Demolition will take place over the same 15-year period as John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, is planning to squeeze 200,000 more affordable homes than planners say are needed into the South East.
The homes to be demolished in the North were mostly built pre-1919. Many will currently be occupied.
They have been identified, however, as being in areas of "low demand" and "market failure" under an action plan for the North drawn up by three regional development agencies and launched by Mr Prescott at the Sustainable Communities conference in Manchester last week.
The plan, the latest refinement of a strategy called the Northern Way, has enraged conservationists fighting to save the North's Victorian terraces by calling for "clear financial incentives to facilitate clearance rather than repair".
Demolition goes directly against advice to the Government from English Heritage that renovating Victorian terraces is cheaper, more environmentally friendly and better for the social fabric than demolition.
Critics accuse Mr Prescott of using the regional bodies – which are not democratically elected – as a vehicle with which to bypass English Heritage, the Culture Department, its sponsor department, the Department for the Environment, the Treasury or local authorities.
The Government's first mention of the number of homes that it plans to demolish in the North lies buried in the 80-page strategy Moving Forward: the Northern Way. The vast majority of delegates at the conference will not have read it.
The document says that 1.5 million homes in the North are in areas of "market failure" or abandonment. It quotes, approvingly, the Centre for Urban and Regional Studies, which suggests that up to 400,000 should be replaced.
The document continues: "Based on current rates, over the next 10 years some 167,000 homes will be cleared. This is well below the rate required." Sir Graham Hall, the chairman of the Northern Way steering group, described the plan as "a once in a lifetime chance for the North to shape its own destiny by bringing about change".
Mr Prescott described the action plan as "a major milestone in our efforts to close the prosperity gap between the northern regions and the rest of the country".
But Adam Wilkinson, of SAVE Britain's Heritage, said: "I am astounded by the figure of 400,000 homes to be demolished. It represents a colossal loss of heritage.
"It is extraordinary that the Government say they need to subsidise demolition when that money could be better spent repairing and rehabilitating buildings."
Caroline Spelman, the Tory spokesman for local government, said: "If you want to destroy the character of our northern towns and cities this is the way to go about it. We appear to have learnt nothing. John Prescott's plan to shift economic regeneration south is going to help no one."
Henry Oliver, of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said: "The sheer folly of these plans is breathtaking. Slash and burn now seems to be the key instrument of Government policy."
A spokesman for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister said: "This is the Northern Way's report. We have not responded to that particular issue – the number of houses to be demolished.
"We have asked them to come back in April with a full business plan of all the things they need funding for, whether that is demolition or refurbishment."
Council set to pull plug on assembly
By David Jackman
EPPING Forest district councillors could be asked to vote on whether the district council should sever its ties with the controversial regional assembly.
The council has already voted in favour of asking Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott to abolish the body which has been making key decisions over plans for thousands of new homes across the region, including some 11,000 in the Epping Forest district.
But now, following a reported move by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to give the assemblies more power to decide on traveller sites in district council areas, Epping Forest Council leader John Knapman says it is time for the district council to reconsider its position.
Commenting on a national newspaper article that said the assemblies had been given the power to dictate to district councils how many sites should be allocated to travellers in their areas, Mr Knapman said: "This is unacceptable. Epping Forest Council is already examining its provision of sites for travellers and is actively considering where new sites need to be provided. That should be a decision for this council or Essex County Council. It's not a decision which should rest with the bureaucrats at Bury St Edmunds."
He added: "This has caused me to consider the council's position as far as maintaining its membership of the East of England Regional Assembly is concerned. I find it difficult to argue that we should continue to spend £12,000 a year in membership fees to a body which is being castigated by a large majority of councillors.
"I shall be discussing with members this view and am considering bringing a report to council that we withdraw from the East of England Regional Assembly."
The council, in the current financial year, paid over £10,000 in its subscription to the East of England Regional Assembly which, as already reported in your local Guardian, has an annual budget of some £2m yet meets only fully about twice a year.
EPPING Forest district councillors could be asked to vote on whether the district council should sever its ties with the controversial regional assembly.
The council has already voted in favour of asking Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott to abolish the body which has been making key decisions over plans for thousands of new homes across the region, including some 11,000 in the Epping Forest district.
But now, following a reported move by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to give the assemblies more power to decide on traveller sites in district council areas, Epping Forest Council leader John Knapman says it is time for the district council to reconsider its position.
Commenting on a national newspaper article that said the assemblies had been given the power to dictate to district councils how many sites should be allocated to travellers in their areas, Mr Knapman said: "This is unacceptable. Epping Forest Council is already examining its provision of sites for travellers and is actively considering where new sites need to be provided. That should be a decision for this council or Essex County Council. It's not a decision which should rest with the bureaucrats at Bury St Edmunds."
He added: "This has caused me to consider the council's position as far as maintaining its membership of the East of England Regional Assembly is concerned. I find it difficult to argue that we should continue to spend £12,000 a year in membership fees to a body which is being castigated by a large majority of councillors.
"I shall be discussing with members this view and am considering bringing a report to council that we withdraw from the East of England Regional Assembly."
The council, in the current financial year, paid over £10,000 in its subscription to the East of England Regional Assembly which, as already reported in your local Guardian, has an annual budget of some £2m yet meets only fully about twice a year.
FPB: Scrap ‘abject’ regional assemblies and save £23m
February 7 2005
A leading business pressure group is challenging the Government to scrap the eight unelected regional assemblies in England, after finding overwhelming hostility to them among its membership (see member quotes below).
The Forum of Private Business (FPB), which represents 25,000 small and medium-sized firms, says businesses have delivered a damning verdict on the assemblies and would rather the £23m it costs to run them each year was spent on improving public services.
The FPB’s National Chairman Len Collinson said the assemblies had abjectly failed to communicate with small businesses, despite the fact they have a remit to drive the economy of the regions.
“Our members are scathing about the performance of regional assemblies,’ he said. “Many businesses do not even know they exist. The assemblies have failed to inform businesses about who they are, where they are and what they do, even though they cost tens of millions of pounds to run and were set up way back in 1998. Employers are telling us loud and clear that this money would be better spent on improving transport and public services – not creating more pen pushers in plush offices. The FPB believes the assemblies have had enough chance to prove themselves. Their record is lamentable. They must go.“
Mr Collinson said he has personal experience of the assemblies, having led the walk out of the FSB, CBI and IoD from the North West Assembly three years ago after concerns it was failing to listen to the private sector.
“The assemblies waste time and money on endless conferences, committees, research initiatives, publications and consultations,’ he said “They operate in a bureaucratic bubble that has no relevance to the real world. Just how much will the North West region, for example, benefit from a youth website that offers ‘online polls’ providing ‘instant feedback on topical issues such as smoking in public places, hunting with dogs and votes at 16’? And just how is it necessary to spend £60,000 over the next two years ‘to project the image and importance of the North West Regional Assembly as constituted in the minds of the public, key regional partners and stakeholders’?”
A selection of FPB member quotes from each region:
Kathy Evans, Managing Director of Vendetta IT Business Services, Gateshead, North East said: “I can honestly say I do not even know where the North East Assembly is. You could ask everyone on this street and they’d probably say they did not even know it existed! In fact, they’d probably say they voted against it last year in the elected regional assembly referendum! My question is, what does it do? It has had no impact on my business at all. The money could be better spent elsewhere on public services.”
Anthony Capstick, Managing Director, Instant Search, Clitheroe, Lancashire, North West said: “I have no idea what the North West Assembly stands for, what it does or what it’s supposed to do. I have had no contact with it whatsoever. I’m completely in the dark and in that sense it has failed utterly to communicate with the business community about what its role is.”
Phillip Ogden, of Peckett Ogden & Co, York, North East said: “I’ve never heard of it. It’s a waste of time and money. There’s just no need for it – it’s not doing anything that other people can’t do, and that can be covered by existing agencies. The transport in York is terrible – we desperately need an urban transport system. The money would be better spent on transport.”
Richard Gayfor, Managing Director, Scanfit Ltd, Norwich, East of England: “I’ve never heard of the East of England Assembly. Does it have any clue about business? We don’t need quangos and pen pushers – we need solutions from people who have a knowledge and understanding of business. Over five years, how much money does the assembly cost? Why not abolish the assembly and plough the saved millions into dualling the A11? That would have an enormous impact on economic growth in Norfolk. At a stroke, it would slash the journey time to London by an hour. I talk to people in the Midlands and they say its such a drag driving to Norfolk because the roads are so atrocious. The Assembly should be tackling matters like this, the glaringly obvious. But it doesn’t seem to have the wherewithal to even tell businesses that it exists.”
Esperanza Bevan, Anchorstone Rest Home, Farnham, South East said: “The regional assembly is another layer of taxation and management. I totally disagree with the concept. I have had no correspondence from them – they only want to do things for themselves, not for me. I want them scrapped. The millions would be better spent on the NHS. We are already paying for local councils, county councils, these assemblies, parliament and MEPs – where does it all end? There are just too many chiefs and not enough Indians - we need more Indians. I have very vehement feelings about this – I’d go on national television to talk about it.”
Roy Stacey, Lynwood Guest House, Penzance, South West said: “I’ve never really heard of it – it’s obviously not doing its job as it can’t justify itself. The South West is too big for one assembly anyway – the money gets lost in Devon and then Cornwall misses out. The cash should be spent on proper transport links. Newquay airport needs to carry on as there is a risk the military may leave in three years. As a guesthouse, I rely on the airport as many people fly in from Europe to Newquay. This is what matters to me and my business. I would like to see the regional assembly scrapped. We are bombarded with forums. They start up with lots of expensive buildings and equipment and then spend the money on themselves.”
Scott Greenway, Greenways, Erdington, Birmingham, West Midlands said: “I’ve never heard of it, which doesn’t reflect well on it. It’s an utter waste of money, one of those things that sounds great, but never comes to anything. The money would be better spent on redevelopment programmes in Erdington. Erdington is becoming increasingly impoverished. Also, I have a CCTV camera pole outside my shop, but no street camera on top of it because the local council can’t afford it, yet millions are being lavished on this talking shop.”
Richard Linnett, Managing Director, Anchor Print Group Ltd, Syston, Leicester, East Midlands said: “I would not know the East Midlands Assembly existed. How can they be of any use if businesses have not heard of them? If it is costing millions, I would like to see what it has done and what it has achieved. Leicester is crying out for investment. It has some of the worst roads in the country and that hampers everyone in the county. But the roads aren’t improved because there is supposedly no money. Public transport here is also appalling. What is this assembly doing about that? Does it have any grasp of the key problems in this area? Instead of creating jobs for paper pushers, we should be investing money in solving these problems.”
Notes to editors
Background on regional assemblies
The unelected regional chambers or assemblies were created by John Prescott in 1998, at the same time as the regional development agencies.
They are not elected and not directly accountable to any body, apart from John Prescott’s Government Offices for the Regions. They are composed of councillors (nominated by their local authorities) and ‘community stakeholders’ – such as trade unions, ‘cultural networks’ and pressure groups. They were clearly intended to pave the way for elected regional assemblies.
The Deputy Prime Minister’s Office has said that the present assemblies “have wide-ranging powers to attract new investment and business to the region, support business, enterprise and the growth of jobs, regenerate areas and drive forward the economy”. The FPB believes that the assemblies have not focused or delivered on these tasks.
The FPB is politically neutral and its stance should not be seen as support for the Conservative Party, which also want to scrap regional assemblies
THE NORTH WEST
In the North West, most major business organisations, including the Federation of Small Businesses, the CBI and the Institute of Directors, left the Regional Assembly three years ago because of poor management and a failure to listen to the private sector. “The performance of this assembly has not impressed the businesses”, said Len Collinson, who led the business walkout.
Labour-led Lancashire County Council left the Assembly over concerns that it was spending public money to campaign for an elected assembly. And last week, it was announced that Cheshire County Council was on the verge of giving 12 months' notice to quit the Assembly. The Assembly’s budget for the next financial year is over £3m and it employs a staff of 70.
THE NORTH EAST
In the North East, a campaign is being waged to abolish the present assembly by those who fought against an elected assembly. The budget for the Assembly for 2003 to 2004 was £2.25m and it employs 32 people. There is now a proposal to split the Association of North East Councils from the Assembly, which critics see as a precursor to a reduction or withdrawal of local government funding.
YORKSHIRE AND HUMBER
The budget of the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Assembly for 2003 to 2004 was £2.57m and it employs 46 people. Councils are cutting their subscriptions by a half and there is to be a review of the work of the Assembly.
THE EAST OF ENGLAND
The budget for the East of England Regional Assembly for 2003 to 2004 was £3.6m and it employs 45 people.
EAST MIDLANDS
The budget for the East Midlands Regional Assembly 2003 to 2004 was £16m and it employs 24 people.
SOUTH EAST
The budget for the South East Regional Assembly 2003 to 2004 was more than £3m and it employs 39 people.
WEST MIDLANDS
The budget for the West Midlands Regional Assembly 2003 to 2004 was £16m and it employs about 20 people.
THE SOUTH WEST
The budget for the South West Regional Assembly 2003 to 2004 was more than £4m and it employs 72 staff.
ends
FPB BACKGROUND:
The Forum of Private Business (FPB) was formed in 1977 and is a pressure group fighting on behalf of private businesses. The FPB represents approximately 25,000 UK-based businesses employing in excess of 600,000 people, and is a powerful lobbying voice in both the UK and the European Union.
The FPB, as the only full UK member of UEAPME – the organisation that represents small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Europe – is the most prominent advocate of UK SMEs in Brussels and has a track record of positively affecting legislation prior to its introduction in the UK.
The FPB also provides a range of business services aimed at increasing member efficiency and profitability. Visit www.fpb.org
MEDIA CONTACTS:
Ben Pinnington, media manager
Mob: 07887 562900
Email: ben.pinnington@fpb.org
Kieron Hayes, press officer
Mob: 07775 756308
Email: kieron.hayes@fpb.org
FPB press office:
Tel: 01565 634709
Fax: 0870 241 9570
Head Office:
Ruskin Chambers
Drury Lane
Knutsford
Cheshire
WA16 6HA
FPB, Ruskin Chambers, Drury Lane, Knutsford, Cheshire WA16 6HA
Any views or opinions are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the Forum of Private Business (FPB), unless this is stated specifically. This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended solely for the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, contact the above-named sender.
A leading business pressure group is challenging the Government to scrap the eight unelected regional assemblies in England, after finding overwhelming hostility to them among its membership (see member quotes below).
The Forum of Private Business (FPB), which represents 25,000 small and medium-sized firms, says businesses have delivered a damning verdict on the assemblies and would rather the £23m it costs to run them each year was spent on improving public services.
The FPB’s National Chairman Len Collinson said the assemblies had abjectly failed to communicate with small businesses, despite the fact they have a remit to drive the economy of the regions.
“Our members are scathing about the performance of regional assemblies,’ he said. “Many businesses do not even know they exist. The assemblies have failed to inform businesses about who they are, where they are and what they do, even though they cost tens of millions of pounds to run and were set up way back in 1998. Employers are telling us loud and clear that this money would be better spent on improving transport and public services – not creating more pen pushers in plush offices. The FPB believes the assemblies have had enough chance to prove themselves. Their record is lamentable. They must go.“
Mr Collinson said he has personal experience of the assemblies, having led the walk out of the FSB, CBI and IoD from the North West Assembly three years ago after concerns it was failing to listen to the private sector.
“The assemblies waste time and money on endless conferences, committees, research initiatives, publications and consultations,’ he said “They operate in a bureaucratic bubble that has no relevance to the real world. Just how much will the North West region, for example, benefit from a youth website that offers ‘online polls’ providing ‘instant feedback on topical issues such as smoking in public places, hunting with dogs and votes at 16’? And just how is it necessary to spend £60,000 over the next two years ‘to project the image and importance of the North West Regional Assembly as constituted in the minds of the public, key regional partners and stakeholders’?”
A selection of FPB member quotes from each region:
Kathy Evans, Managing Director of Vendetta IT Business Services, Gateshead, North East said: “I can honestly say I do not even know where the North East Assembly is. You could ask everyone on this street and they’d probably say they did not even know it existed! In fact, they’d probably say they voted against it last year in the elected regional assembly referendum! My question is, what does it do? It has had no impact on my business at all. The money could be better spent elsewhere on public services.”
Anthony Capstick, Managing Director, Instant Search, Clitheroe, Lancashire, North West said: “I have no idea what the North West Assembly stands for, what it does or what it’s supposed to do. I have had no contact with it whatsoever. I’m completely in the dark and in that sense it has failed utterly to communicate with the business community about what its role is.”
Phillip Ogden, of Peckett Ogden & Co, York, North East said: “I’ve never heard of it. It’s a waste of time and money. There’s just no need for it – it’s not doing anything that other people can’t do, and that can be covered by existing agencies. The transport in York is terrible – we desperately need an urban transport system. The money would be better spent on transport.”
Richard Gayfor, Managing Director, Scanfit Ltd, Norwich, East of England: “I’ve never heard of the East of England Assembly. Does it have any clue about business? We don’t need quangos and pen pushers – we need solutions from people who have a knowledge and understanding of business. Over five years, how much money does the assembly cost? Why not abolish the assembly and plough the saved millions into dualling the A11? That would have an enormous impact on economic growth in Norfolk. At a stroke, it would slash the journey time to London by an hour. I talk to people in the Midlands and they say its such a drag driving to Norfolk because the roads are so atrocious. The Assembly should be tackling matters like this, the glaringly obvious. But it doesn’t seem to have the wherewithal to even tell businesses that it exists.”
Esperanza Bevan, Anchorstone Rest Home, Farnham, South East said: “The regional assembly is another layer of taxation and management. I totally disagree with the concept. I have had no correspondence from them – they only want to do things for themselves, not for me. I want them scrapped. The millions would be better spent on the NHS. We are already paying for local councils, county councils, these assemblies, parliament and MEPs – where does it all end? There are just too many chiefs and not enough Indians - we need more Indians. I have very vehement feelings about this – I’d go on national television to talk about it.”
Roy Stacey, Lynwood Guest House, Penzance, South West said: “I’ve never really heard of it – it’s obviously not doing its job as it can’t justify itself. The South West is too big for one assembly anyway – the money gets lost in Devon and then Cornwall misses out. The cash should be spent on proper transport links. Newquay airport needs to carry on as there is a risk the military may leave in three years. As a guesthouse, I rely on the airport as many people fly in from Europe to Newquay. This is what matters to me and my business. I would like to see the regional assembly scrapped. We are bombarded with forums. They start up with lots of expensive buildings and equipment and then spend the money on themselves.”
Scott Greenway, Greenways, Erdington, Birmingham, West Midlands said: “I’ve never heard of it, which doesn’t reflect well on it. It’s an utter waste of money, one of those things that sounds great, but never comes to anything. The money would be better spent on redevelopment programmes in Erdington. Erdington is becoming increasingly impoverished. Also, I have a CCTV camera pole outside my shop, but no street camera on top of it because the local council can’t afford it, yet millions are being lavished on this talking shop.”
Richard Linnett, Managing Director, Anchor Print Group Ltd, Syston, Leicester, East Midlands said: “I would not know the East Midlands Assembly existed. How can they be of any use if businesses have not heard of them? If it is costing millions, I would like to see what it has done and what it has achieved. Leicester is crying out for investment. It has some of the worst roads in the country and that hampers everyone in the county. But the roads aren’t improved because there is supposedly no money. Public transport here is also appalling. What is this assembly doing about that? Does it have any grasp of the key problems in this area? Instead of creating jobs for paper pushers, we should be investing money in solving these problems.”
Notes to editors
Background on regional assemblies
The unelected regional chambers or assemblies were created by John Prescott in 1998, at the same time as the regional development agencies.
They are not elected and not directly accountable to any body, apart from John Prescott’s Government Offices for the Regions. They are composed of councillors (nominated by their local authorities) and ‘community stakeholders’ – such as trade unions, ‘cultural networks’ and pressure groups. They were clearly intended to pave the way for elected regional assemblies.
The Deputy Prime Minister’s Office has said that the present assemblies “have wide-ranging powers to attract new investment and business to the region, support business, enterprise and the growth of jobs, regenerate areas and drive forward the economy”. The FPB believes that the assemblies have not focused or delivered on these tasks.
The FPB is politically neutral and its stance should not be seen as support for the Conservative Party, which also want to scrap regional assemblies
THE NORTH WEST
In the North West, most major business organisations, including the Federation of Small Businesses, the CBI and the Institute of Directors, left the Regional Assembly three years ago because of poor management and a failure to listen to the private sector. “The performance of this assembly has not impressed the businesses”, said Len Collinson, who led the business walkout.
Labour-led Lancashire County Council left the Assembly over concerns that it was spending public money to campaign for an elected assembly. And last week, it was announced that Cheshire County Council was on the verge of giving 12 months' notice to quit the Assembly. The Assembly’s budget for the next financial year is over £3m and it employs a staff of 70.
THE NORTH EAST
In the North East, a campaign is being waged to abolish the present assembly by those who fought against an elected assembly. The budget for the Assembly for 2003 to 2004 was £2.25m and it employs 32 people. There is now a proposal to split the Association of North East Councils from the Assembly, which critics see as a precursor to a reduction or withdrawal of local government funding.
YORKSHIRE AND HUMBER
The budget of the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Assembly for 2003 to 2004 was £2.57m and it employs 46 people. Councils are cutting their subscriptions by a half and there is to be a review of the work of the Assembly.
THE EAST OF ENGLAND
The budget for the East of England Regional Assembly for 2003 to 2004 was £3.6m and it employs 45 people.
EAST MIDLANDS
The budget for the East Midlands Regional Assembly 2003 to 2004 was £16m and it employs 24 people.
SOUTH EAST
The budget for the South East Regional Assembly 2003 to 2004 was more than £3m and it employs 39 people.
WEST MIDLANDS
The budget for the West Midlands Regional Assembly 2003 to 2004 was £16m and it employs about 20 people.
THE SOUTH WEST
The budget for the South West Regional Assembly 2003 to 2004 was more than £4m and it employs 72 staff.
ends
FPB BACKGROUND:
The Forum of Private Business (FPB) was formed in 1977 and is a pressure group fighting on behalf of private businesses. The FPB represents approximately 25,000 UK-based businesses employing in excess of 600,000 people, and is a powerful lobbying voice in both the UK and the European Union.
The FPB, as the only full UK member of UEAPME – the organisation that represents small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Europe – is the most prominent advocate of UK SMEs in Brussels and has a track record of positively affecting legislation prior to its introduction in the UK.
The FPB also provides a range of business services aimed at increasing member efficiency and profitability. Visit www.fpb.org
MEDIA CONTACTS:
Ben Pinnington, media manager
Mob: 07887 562900
Email: ben.pinnington@fpb.org
Kieron Hayes, press officer
Mob: 07775 756308
Email: kieron.hayes@fpb.org
FPB press office:
Tel: 01565 634709
Fax: 0870 241 9570
Head Office:
Ruskin Chambers
Drury Lane
Knutsford
Cheshire
WA16 6HA
FPB, Ruskin Chambers, Drury Lane, Knutsford, Cheshire WA16 6HA
Any views or opinions are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the Forum of Private Business (FPB), unless this is stated specifically. This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended solely for the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, contact the above-named sender.
Sunday, February 06, 2005
'In a Nutshell'...the Government's Dilemma £1billion pay back or Metric Martyrs innocent?
In a Nutshell:-
"Either the Metric Martyrs judgement is struck down, or local government has to repay £1,000 million in parking fines."
Read the full hearing where the Bill of Rights brought the Metric Martyrs' convictions under very close scrutiny here
Government now firmly wedged between a rock and a hard place.
"Either the Metric Martyrs judgement is struck down, or local government has to repay £1,000 million in parking fines."
Read the full hearing where the Bill of Rights brought the Metric Martyrs' convictions under very close scrutiny here
Government now firmly wedged between a rock and a hard place.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
NORTH-EAST ASSEMBLY
I HAVE tabled a motion, to be debated at 10am today at County Hall, Durham, that Durham County Council withdraws its subscription of £84,800 from the North-East Assembly. This is an unelected Government quango which, if allowed, is going to restrict the growth and prosperity of County Durham through its Regional Spatial Strategy.
If all councils cease to fund it, it clearly cannot function.
As 78 per cent of the voters in this county voted against a regional assembly, I would encourage members of the public to make sure their local county councillor supports my motion.
- County Councillor John Shuttleworth, Durham
THE unelected North-East Assembly should be scrapped. Now that an overwhelming popular vote has proved the widespread unpopularity of even democratically representative "regional governance", there can be no excuse for raising our council tax to fund the unrepresentative kind.
"Consultation", with carefully selected pressure groups and "stakeholders", is no substitute for direct representation by councillors who actually live within walking distance of your house, when controversial matters are involved.
Why on earth, for instance, should the imposed assembly be in charge of something called "regional spatial planning"?
The North-East is not an empty space. Its towns, villages and counties are inhabited by a couple of million individuals, all with their own particular needs and preferences. To treat these individuals' homes and neighbourhoods as if they were "spaces" ripe for development along the lines preferred by a handful of superior beings who feel they are all-seeing enough to dictate the future is an insult to the families and communities whose lives will be affected.
We must take back powers from central government, and increase local accountability. Planning over wider areas should not be the job of a permanent "regional" body, elected or unelected, but of delegations from local councils given temporary power to deal with each specific project.
Let's hope our councils have the sense to honour the wishes of those who elected them and withdraw all support, financial and otherwise, from the unwanted quango.
- Gillian Swanson, Whitley Bay.
COUNCILLOR Shuttleworth's motion (Echo, Jan 27) and Judith Wallace's letter (HAS, Jan 27) focus on the continuing existence of the unelected regional assembly almost three months after the electorate in the North-East massively rejected the proposal in the referendum for elected regional government.
This existing unelected assembly of place-men has been given a key role by Government in the planning process that includes responsibility for the preparation of a spatial strategy for the guidance of developers, covering developments such as housing projects and wind farms.
Decisions on these major projects have been taken out of the hands of our local authorities. This is undemocratic and should be of major concern to all in the North-East.
With an early General Election likely, Darlington voters, who voted by four to one that they do not want anything to do with regional government, might legitimately ask their MP, Alan Milburn, who has been given a key role in drafting the Labour Party's manifesto, what his party's intentions are to meet his constituents' demands. -
A Speirs, Democracy Movement NE, Northumberland.
If all councils cease to fund it, it clearly cannot function.
As 78 per cent of the voters in this county voted against a regional assembly, I would encourage members of the public to make sure their local county councillor supports my motion.
- County Councillor John Shuttleworth, Durham
THE unelected North-East Assembly should be scrapped. Now that an overwhelming popular vote has proved the widespread unpopularity of even democratically representative "regional governance", there can be no excuse for raising our council tax to fund the unrepresentative kind.
"Consultation", with carefully selected pressure groups and "stakeholders", is no substitute for direct representation by councillors who actually live within walking distance of your house, when controversial matters are involved.
Why on earth, for instance, should the imposed assembly be in charge of something called "regional spatial planning"?
The North-East is not an empty space. Its towns, villages and counties are inhabited by a couple of million individuals, all with their own particular needs and preferences. To treat these individuals' homes and neighbourhoods as if they were "spaces" ripe for development along the lines preferred by a handful of superior beings who feel they are all-seeing enough to dictate the future is an insult to the families and communities whose lives will be affected.
We must take back powers from central government, and increase local accountability. Planning over wider areas should not be the job of a permanent "regional" body, elected or unelected, but of delegations from local councils given temporary power to deal with each specific project.
Let's hope our councils have the sense to honour the wishes of those who elected them and withdraw all support, financial and otherwise, from the unwanted quango.
- Gillian Swanson, Whitley Bay.
COUNCILLOR Shuttleworth's motion (Echo, Jan 27) and Judith Wallace's letter (HAS, Jan 27) focus on the continuing existence of the unelected regional assembly almost three months after the electorate in the North-East massively rejected the proposal in the referendum for elected regional government.
This existing unelected assembly of place-men has been given a key role by Government in the planning process that includes responsibility for the preparation of a spatial strategy for the guidance of developers, covering developments such as housing projects and wind farms.
Decisions on these major projects have been taken out of the hands of our local authorities. This is undemocratic and should be of major concern to all in the North-East.
With an early General Election likely, Darlington voters, who voted by four to one that they do not want anything to do with regional government, might legitimately ask their MP, Alan Milburn, who has been given a key role in drafting the Labour Party's manifesto, what his party's intentions are to meet his constituents' demands. -
A Speirs, Democracy Movement NE, Northumberland.
Prescott focuses on local level in U-turn
William Green
Political Correspondent,Yorkshire Today
JOHN Prescott drove the final nail into the coffin of his regional
assembly dream yesterday - by declaring that the future of local
government lay with local residents.Instead of all-powerful regional government, the Deputy Prime Minister unveiled a plan for neighbourhoods to run their own finances, aided by "How To" booklets.
Mr Prescott's U-turn on how he believed towns and cities should be run
was immediately condemned as "tinkering" - and he was told to return
powers to existing local councils that his quangos had stripped away
over the past seven years. At the heart of Mr Prescott's blueprint for local government is a new breed of "super mayors" with new powers over transport and regeneration,
but they were also condemned for posing the risk that mavericks unable
to deliver services could be voted in. Mr Prescott, speaking at the start of a three-day "sustainable communities" conference in Manchester, said: "We want people to help
share the local public services they receive and we want them to become more involved in the democratic life of their community. "By action at a neighbourhood level people everywhere can make a significant difference to the quality of our country's public services." Mr Prescott emphasised the strategy would not be a "one-size-fits-all"
policy but would allow people to customise services to the community's needs.
He said consultations would begin on creating extra mayors with additional powers to transform major cities, although it will be up to local people to decide in a referendum whether to have one. The Government is also "attracted" to moving to whole council elections every four years and wants to strengthen the role of councils in leading
their areas. But the Tory leader of Leeds Council, Andrew Carter, accused Mr Prescott
of being unable to stop "tinkering" after last year's defeat in the North-East referendum for an elected regional assembly."If he returned some of the powers to local government that his unelected quangos have taken away in the past seven years, he would find
it would do more to restore public confidence in local government than any amount of his tinkering," Coun Carter added. The Liberal Democrat leader of York Council, Steve Galloway, warned against elected mayors with more powers because it could lead to a
maverick unable to deliver services. He backed handing more powers to neighbourhoods provided "responsibilities" went with it, to ensure money was well spent and in
line with agreed priorities. Under the Government's proposals, neighbourhoods could be given budgets and power to manage some services directly, and the right to raise extra
money for local priorities following a community vote. They could own and manage playgrounds and community centres and use "trigg-ers" to force the local council to improve failing services. A Neighbourhoods Charter will set out people's powers over the running of their community and what results they can expect. A £5m programme of "how to" guides will be produced to help local people and authorities spend resources more effectively.
william.green@ypn.co.uk
Political Correspondent,Yorkshire Today
JOHN Prescott drove the final nail into the coffin of his regional
assembly dream yesterday - by declaring that the future of local
government lay with local residents.Instead of all-powerful regional government, the Deputy Prime Minister unveiled a plan for neighbourhoods to run their own finances, aided by "How To" booklets.
Mr Prescott's U-turn on how he believed towns and cities should be run
was immediately condemned as "tinkering" - and he was told to return
powers to existing local councils that his quangos had stripped away
over the past seven years. At the heart of Mr Prescott's blueprint for local government is a new breed of "super mayors" with new powers over transport and regeneration,
but they were also condemned for posing the risk that mavericks unable
to deliver services could be voted in. Mr Prescott, speaking at the start of a three-day "sustainable communities" conference in Manchester, said: "We want people to help
share the local public services they receive and we want them to become more involved in the democratic life of their community. "By action at a neighbourhood level people everywhere can make a significant difference to the quality of our country's public services." Mr Prescott emphasised the strategy would not be a "one-size-fits-all"
policy but would allow people to customise services to the community's needs.
He said consultations would begin on creating extra mayors with additional powers to transform major cities, although it will be up to local people to decide in a referendum whether to have one. The Government is also "attracted" to moving to whole council elections every four years and wants to strengthen the role of councils in leading
their areas. But the Tory leader of Leeds Council, Andrew Carter, accused Mr Prescott
of being unable to stop "tinkering" after last year's defeat in the North-East referendum for an elected regional assembly."If he returned some of the powers to local government that his unelected quangos have taken away in the past seven years, he would find
it would do more to restore public confidence in local government than any amount of his tinkering," Coun Carter added. The Liberal Democrat leader of York Council, Steve Galloway, warned against elected mayors with more powers because it could lead to a
maverick unable to deliver services. He backed handing more powers to neighbourhoods provided "responsibilities" went with it, to ensure money was well spent and in
line with agreed priorities. Under the Government's proposals, neighbourhoods could be given budgets and power to manage some services directly, and the right to raise extra
money for local priorities following a community vote. They could own and manage playgrounds and community centres and use "trigg-ers" to force the local council to improve failing services. A Neighbourhoods Charter will set out people's powers over the running of their community and what results they can expect. A £5m programme of "how to" guides will be produced to help local people and authorities spend resources more effectively.
william.green@ypn.co.uk
People of the region were frightened by scare stories
Today's Voice of the North
The Journal 02/02/2005
Another roar of pain from your front page on Saturday:” A Vision of 2030-forecast paints a bleak picture of North-East.”
This follows hard on the heels of the story of the closure of our last pit and every day brings more stories of doom for the North East.
These are just the kind of issues an elected assembly would have been able to tackle and give priority.
However, the people of the North-East, frightened by scare stories from the “No” brigade about higher local taxes and jealous at the thought of fat cat councillors, voted “No”.
Meanwhile, the people who led the “No” vote have disappeared into the woodwork satisfied to have squashed the assembly initiative-and having put nothing in its place.
Their parting shot was that they would set up a think-tank. This would exclude the talent from other groups in the region.
Paul Linford on your inside pages appears vaguely in favour of an assembly but happy the vote went against it.
I quote him: “ A case for the North establishing an elected assembly to take up the cudgels on the region’s behalf…” and “a properly empowered assembly as opposed to the fig leaf on offer last November.”
The point is the offer was there and we failed to grasp the opportunity. It would have been a launching pad. Increased powers could have been worked for and developed and it would have been a body to negotiate through rather than only via our representatives in Westminster who also have as part of their duty national and international concerns.
It is unrealistic to expect our MPs should show favouritism to the region in a national forum. Think of the delighted cried of “corruption” which would emerge from the Tories.
Yet another media war would erupt leaving little time for the real business of government. I would like to say to the “No” think tank and all those who voted “No”: what are you going to do now to help the North-East? What have you to put in the place of the assembly?
May I just add I am not a member of the “Yes” campaign but an ordinary taxpayer, born, bred and working in the region-and I am disappointed in it.
Heather Ging
The Journal 02/02/2005
Another roar of pain from your front page on Saturday:” A Vision of 2030-forecast paints a bleak picture of North-East.”
This follows hard on the heels of the story of the closure of our last pit and every day brings more stories of doom for the North East.
These are just the kind of issues an elected assembly would have been able to tackle and give priority.
However, the people of the North-East, frightened by scare stories from the “No” brigade about higher local taxes and jealous at the thought of fat cat councillors, voted “No”.
Meanwhile, the people who led the “No” vote have disappeared into the woodwork satisfied to have squashed the assembly initiative-and having put nothing in its place.
Their parting shot was that they would set up a think-tank. This would exclude the talent from other groups in the region.
Paul Linford on your inside pages appears vaguely in favour of an assembly but happy the vote went against it.
I quote him: “ A case for the North establishing an elected assembly to take up the cudgels on the region’s behalf…” and “a properly empowered assembly as opposed to the fig leaf on offer last November.”
The point is the offer was there and we failed to grasp the opportunity. It would have been a launching pad. Increased powers could have been worked for and developed and it would have been a body to negotiate through rather than only via our representatives in Westminster who also have as part of their duty national and international concerns.
It is unrealistic to expect our MPs should show favouritism to the region in a national forum. Think of the delighted cried of “corruption” which would emerge from the Tories.
Yet another media war would erupt leaving little time for the real business of government. I would like to say to the “No” think tank and all those who voted “No”: what are you going to do now to help the North-East? What have you to put in the place of the assembly?
May I just add I am not a member of the “Yes” campaign but an ordinary taxpayer, born, bred and working in the region-and I am disappointed in it.
Heather Ging
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Tory wants Assembly out
By David Jackman,Citizen
SHADOW Chancellor Oliver Letwin has spoken of the Conservative Party's wish to abolish the controversial regional assemblies, including the East of England body which is behind plans for thousands of new homes in the Bishop's Stortford area.
The unelected East of England Regional Assembly receives over £500,000 a year in subscriptions from local authorities, including over £12,000 a year from East Herts District Council.
The assembly, which has made key decisions about thousands of homes being built in the east of England in the next 16 years, including some 11,000 in the Epping Forest district, has a £2m annual budget, yet meets fully only about twice a year.
None of its 106 members, covering Bedfordshire, Essex, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, Norfolk and Suffolk, is directly elected.
Two-thirds are from local authorities with the remainder community stakeholders' from the world of business and other organisations including the Rail Passengers Committee, NHS Confederation and National Housing Federation.
Mr Letwin having announced the party's plan to abolish the eight regional assemblies in the country as part of its spending plan said their work could easily be done by other local authorities.
Mr Letwin said: "Nowhere in Britain is there a better example of wasteful and unnecessary bureaucracy than the so-called unelected, unnecessary regional assemblies.
"There is nothing that these bodies do that couldn't better be done by somebody else, and getting rid of them will be a benefit all round.
"There's a cost (of having them), a talking shop, and no useful result."
He added: "We're determined to focus spending on people's priorities and to get better for value for taxpayers money by cutting back on the rest of Government so that we can eliminate wasteful and unnecessary bureaucracy and cut taxes."
The East of England Regional Assembly drew up the regional plan which earmarks thousands of homes for east Herts and neighbouring Harlow.
Mr Letwin said abolishing the assemblies would save some £18m, with decision-making on key issues taken by people with closer links to the areas under discussion.
"We think decisions on matters like planning and transport are much better taken at a local level and where there is a need for co-ordination between councils it is perfectly possible for them to arrange to talk to one another.
"We simply don't believe there is any basis for creating another layer of government in Britain."
SHADOW Chancellor Oliver Letwin has spoken of the Conservative Party's wish to abolish the controversial regional assemblies, including the East of England body which is behind plans for thousands of new homes in the Bishop's Stortford area.
The unelected East of England Regional Assembly receives over £500,000 a year in subscriptions from local authorities, including over £12,000 a year from East Herts District Council.
The assembly, which has made key decisions about thousands of homes being built in the east of England in the next 16 years, including some 11,000 in the Epping Forest district, has a £2m annual budget, yet meets fully only about twice a year.
None of its 106 members, covering Bedfordshire, Essex, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, Norfolk and Suffolk, is directly elected.
Two-thirds are from local authorities with the remainder community stakeholders' from the world of business and other organisations including the Rail Passengers Committee, NHS Confederation and National Housing Federation.
Mr Letwin having announced the party's plan to abolish the eight regional assemblies in the country as part of its spending plan said their work could easily be done by other local authorities.
Mr Letwin said: "Nowhere in Britain is there a better example of wasteful and unnecessary bureaucracy than the so-called unelected, unnecessary regional assemblies.
"There is nothing that these bodies do that couldn't better be done by somebody else, and getting rid of them will be a benefit all round.
"There's a cost (of having them), a talking shop, and no useful result."
He added: "We're determined to focus spending on people's priorities and to get better for value for taxpayers money by cutting back on the rest of Government so that we can eliminate wasteful and unnecessary bureaucracy and cut taxes."
The East of England Regional Assembly drew up the regional plan which earmarks thousands of homes for east Herts and neighbouring Harlow.
Mr Letwin said abolishing the assemblies would save some £18m, with decision-making on key issues taken by people with closer links to the areas under discussion.
"We think decisions on matters like planning and transport are much better taken at a local level and where there is a need for co-ordination between councils it is perfectly possible for them to arrange to talk to one another.
"We simply don't believe there is any basis for creating another layer of government in Britain."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
