‘Citizens and communities want more power and influence over their services and in their neighbourhoods’ – so finds the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
We should be ready to meet this demand. One of the earliest New Labour commitments in office was to ‘neighbourhood renewal’. A series of high-profile reports called for neighbourhood working that would cut inequality, improve services and build democracy. Out would go producer-led departmental silos. Instead, joined-up services would follow priorities set by local people. In 2006 the Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG) confirmed that ‘the promotion of localism and neighbourhood working is a government priority’. Since then we’ve had David Miliband’s ‘double devolution’ and Hazel Blears’ passion for empowerment.
The result now is a pretty comprehensive set of tools for devolving power. The parish level of government has been extended so that any neighbourhood that wishes can demand its own local council. Ownership and management of assets and services can be transferred to local trusts, co-ops and partnerships. Neighbourhood charters can set standards and uphold accountability.
But if Rowntree has some good news (the public want it) there is also some bad news: confusion. There is ‘confusion about the reasons’ for engaging neighbourhoods. Even more ‘confusing’ is ‘the number and complexity of local governance processes and structures, and the speed at which they change.’ So we think we know what we want to achieve, but service providers and residents don’t understand why, when or how we are trying to do it.
What’s the problem? Clues are in the latest CLG progress report on community empowerment. Current highlights include ‘customer-led transformation’ leading to ‘whole system innovation in local area delivery,’ ‘interactive websites,’ and ‘online deliberative approaches.’ All most worthy, but the political vision is painfully eroded.
So how can ambitious policies for neighbourhood empowerment be translated into legible political narrative? The centralist, command and control culture that dominated earlier New Labour is being dismantled. Public sector providers – having been rewarded for performing to targets – will instead learn how to empower localities to set and achieve their own ambitions. Neighbourhoods govern themselves by serving populations of ten thousand at most, with the ability to connect down to street level. Target-driven providers have preferred a scale where middle managers can form multi-agency teams – which drives neighbourhood working up to ‘area management’ serving twenty thousand and above. On whose terms does bottom-up meet top-down? Devolving to neighbourhoods means suppliers adapting to respond to users, not the other way round.
If there are administrative barriers there are also political ones. Party managers (of all colours) see local democracy as an arena for party messages to be battle-tested, and elected office as the way to reward and occupy their activists. In empowered neighbourhoods, party interest is a distraction. Devolved power challenges parties to learn a more subtle political art, calmly co-operating not just with opponents but – often more difficult – with the many who are alienated by party tribalism.
The clear message needed now is for ‘neighbourhood rights’. Wherever they live, people are entitled to expect safe, clean and well kept neighbourhoods. If they wish, they can run their own services through non-party neighbourhood and parish councils, co-operatives and land trusts. They can hold providers to account through charters and local deals. They can take community ownership of public land and buildings. Services will devolve control to neighbourhoods as far as practical.
It will not suffice for this message to be reflected in policies, legislation and party programmes. It will need to be communicated in the day to day contact that residents have with local services, tenants with landlords, community groups with local authorities and councillors – and be backed by training, capacity building and mutual respect.
This government has done much to make empowerment possible. The next few months will see if that potential can become a compelling vision for democratic communities, able and equipped to direct their own destinies.