The localism agenda

2 downloads 0 Views 54KB Size Report
Jul 27, 2016 - David Cameron, has spoken of the need to radically reshape ... article, David Boyle argues that the target ... Matthew Flinders and David Moon.
Editorial Local Economy 26(8) 625–626 ! The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0269094211422186 lec.sagepub.com

The localism agenda Deian Hopkin London South Bank University, UK

Hugh Atkinson London South Bank University, UK

Localism is the focus of this special edition of Local Economy. Localism and its close relative, the ‘Big Society’, have become a central part of the lexicon of the coalition government since it came to power in May 2010. Coalition government rhetoric puts great stress on the need to decentralize power to local government and local communities (localism) which, in turn, will help build the ‘Big Society’ of engaged local communities and individuals. This heralds the promise of a new dawn, both for local democracy and dynamic and invigorated communities. Yet a word of caution is needed here, for we have been here before. A brief survey of the countless initiatives of the previous Labour government’s 13 years in office highlights a good deal of rhetoric about strengthening local democracy, developing a new localism and empowering local communities, yet the reality often fell well short of this rhetoric. Central government may talk big about the need to decentralize power to the local level, but its hands invariably stay firmly gripped to the levers of power. To be fair, the current coalition government has been in power only for some 18 months. Therefore we can only make some tentative conclusions about its localism agenda. Such an analysis is also compounded by the fact that both localism and the ‘Big Society’ are concepts whose meaning and application are hotly contested.

However, there have been some interesting developments. Giving local councils a power of general competence (as proposed in the Decentralisation and Localism Bill) is potentially a significant advance for local government autonomy, yet this new power comes with many limits and restrictions. This raises many questions about the substantive impact that it may have. In addition, as part of its promotion of the ‘Big Society’, the coalition government and in particular, David Cameron, has spoken of the need to radically reshape local services by bringing in new providers from the voluntary sector and local community groups – yet confusion and hesitancy reign in this area. The recently published white paper on the reform of public services is of interest not so much for what it says, but for what it does not say. In the world of local government finance there have been some potentially promising developments. For example, there has been a reduction in the ring-fencing of central government grants to local government, giving local councils greater discretion in how they spend these monies. In addition, the government has brought forward proposals for some relocalizing of the business Corresponding author: Hugh Atkinson, London South Bank University, 103 Borough Road, London SE1 0AA, UK. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from lec.sagepub.com by guest on July 27, 2016

626

Local Economy 26(8)

rate. Yet the extent to which this will map out into a new policy still remains uncertain. Furthermore, these tentative steps towards more financial autonomy for local councils have to be seen in a broader context. As a consequence of the government’s Comprehensive Spending Review, local councils have seen their budgets reduced by around 30 percent over the next four years, significantly restricting their room for manoeuvre. This special issue brings together a range of contributions looking at localism from a number of perspectives. In his viewpoint article, David Boyle argues that the target culture that developed in the UK over the last two decades, which was meant to improve the quality of public services, simply increased bureaucracy and complexity. A new approach, payment by results, claims to avoid such pitfalls, but in reality they still remain. Among the feature articles, Stuart WilksHeeg talks of the growing cross-party consensus for the principles of localism. However, the coalition government’s radical devolution agenda, in particular the frontloading of cuts to local authority budgets, looks set to provoke a set of tensions in central–local relations not seen since the 1980s. Matthew Flinders and David Moon argue that the current government’s rhetorical commitment to a shift from a ‘big state’ to a ‘Big Society’ could well flounder over its inability to reconcile the forces of devolution and localism with those of political accountability and public expectations. Sarah Skerratt and Clare Hall focus their analysis on the drive within policy and practice in the UK towards ownership of local facilities by local communities. They cast a critical eye on the rhetoric surrounding such asset ownership with its emphasis on community

empowerment, inclusion and sustainable development. In the first of a series of In Perspectives, Michael Ward focuses on the coalition government’s radical changes to the institutions of local economic development in England. He talks of the sharp regional differences between the North and the South that still remain, and argues that the new arrangements are unlikely to achieve the coalition’s objective of rebalancing the economy. In his piece, Mike Curtis looks at some of the key central elements of the government’s localism agenda, in particular as it relates to local government finance. In his view, there is a genuine attempt on the part of government to free up local authorities to control their own resources and to innovate, but the toxic political climate and continuing emphasis on central guidance may well undermine it. In his contribution, Andy Westwood explores the interconnections between the coalition government’s objectives for the ‘Big Society’, localism and a rebalanced economy. Specifically, he analyses the prospects for achieving these objectives within the context of a continuing weak economic climate. Paul Hildreth then explores a number of analytical models that seek to contextualize debates around localism and its meaning. Tim May and Beth Perry’s In Perspective analyses the role of cities in knowledgebased development in the context of the relationship between science, technology and innovation and economic growth. There are many sides to the debate about localism. It is the aim of this special edition to help stimulate this debate. It is a debate about the nature of our democracy, our social and economic well-being, the relationship between the citizen and the state, and the shape of public services in the 21st century.

Downloaded from lec.sagepub.com by guest on July 27, 2016