If the demands of competing in the global economy require us to have well-run local authorities that citizens believe have both the power and ability to deliver for communities, we need them to:

• Engage citizens in politics and their communities.
• To encourage good candidates to stand for office.

These are crucial to deliver on:

• Public services and decision-making that reflects the needs and desires of local communities.
• “Place shaping” and joined up public service.

And ultimately deliver value to the taxpayer for funding local government.

Limiting the power of local government limits local government’s ability to deliver on the above. This seems out of step with current policy rhetoric from all the major political parties.

Control from CLG:

• Negate local choices at elections
• Favour one size fits all solutions

Neither of which give local authorities the scope to deliver on what is needed

CLG is not able to deal with all aspects of local authority activity currently.

Local authorities need to deal with almost every part of Government already, DfES, DWP, Housing Corporation, DEFRA etc already.

The IDeA are already delivering on capacity building.

The Audit Commission provides scrutiny.

LGA are lobbying with a common voice.

And the local electorate should be providing the targets.

Then what role does direction from CLG play?

Would empowered local authorities be able to deal with Whitehall on their own terms? if they had strong leaders attracted by the scope to deliver for their communities perhaps they might.

Would central government  let go of that amount of control? I don’t think so.