Lancashire devolution - is it good or bad?

[Tangled Metal]

I am asking that because AIUI the legal instgruments that set it up and allows for devolved powers to go to it are signed off now. It is developed by I think 4 councils all based to the south. AIUI The CCA that is the new body has Blackburn, Burnley and Lancshire County Council with Ribble Valey and one other district council. There are no councils out of the smaller ones like Lancaster that actually covers a larger area and others. I think mostr of the councils in Lancashire are not involved. AIUI those three councils and two district councils appoint their representatives to the CCA to make the decisions for all councils areas in Lancashire.

So IMHO as someone who used to live in north Lancahsire and now live in a consituency that is represented by a councillor in Lancashire but I am in Cumbria so perhaps I have skin in the game. I am bot sure this is a fair devolution. What do you think?

WHat a\re the other devolved bodies like? Scottish, Welsh and N. Ireland devolved bodies I think are represented by direct election so not comparable. What about the metro mayors and authorities? Are they elected or appointed like the Lancashire CCA? Is this devolution really devoilution or a stitch up to get iit on the cheap and quickly? Kind of PR for the Governement to say they are creaating more democracy when really they are setting up a fix??

As you can tell I am not for it in the present form. I think all tbose councils not represented have protested when Labour first promoited the idea.So I am not alone.

[Nearholmer]

It’s meant to involve transferring powers from Westminster to this new (in most places) tier of government, the key ones (IMO) being transport and strategic plannng. The mayor of each of these strategic authorities will be elected, but the underlying councils (re-grouped to form unitary authorities where they aren’t already) remain place, and are supposed to interact under the mayor’s “chairpersonship”.

I know next door to nothing about Lancashire (I did study at Lancaster Uni, and enjoyed my sojourns there, except when a strong wet wind was blowing from the west), but I get the impression that many areas are “mentally unprepared” for this. Certainly where I live, the several unitary authorities that are meant to work together as a strategic area under a mayor seem a bit bedazzled by it, and there seems some misalignment between the intended area of the strategic authority, and the practical axis of strategic development. I sense that there is a problem of the councils that are meant to cooperate having historically been parts of three different counties, and the strategic area that is being created having no historic standing; it’s like getting three blokes from different tables in a pub to turn-around, away from their old mates, and form a new table-group, leaving their old ones in the process. That sort of thing might not become a problem where the new authority maps onto an area that has fairly strong historic bonds.

Personally, I’m well in favour of the concept of creating these strategic areas, but I reckon that it’s going to throw-up a whole mass of “birth pangs”, probably of different nature in different places.

[Tangled Metal]

It is like a stitch up by the three biggest councils and two District councils, possibly these are where the councillors on the new committee live. As in ribble Valley has done well to do people living there so they're represented by someone but the other district councils have nobody involved.

I just think that if you're creating another, more powerful body to decide on an area then you should have the whole area equally represented.

It is like the house of commons being set up without any MPs for London or the big cities but in reverse. Why not have Parliament made up of MPs from London only? Would that ever be accepted? Should any level of state authority exclude representation of most of the area it is going to make decisions on?

I think the rush for devolving powers has been a mess. Even the national devolved bodies is a mess. No joined up thinking. If one body got more powers than other bodies then doesn't that affect democracy of the whole? It's why I think the union should become a federation with equal power through the union. I just think that however your split the power down into areas then the people should not be put into a position where one group feels less represented in that power split than others. If you get my meaning.

[mjr]

I am asking that because AIUI the legal instgruments that set it up and allows for devolved powers to go to it are signed off now. It is developed by I think 4 councils all based to the south. AIUI The CCA that is the new body has Blackburn, Burnley and Lancshire County Council with Ribble Valey and one other district council.

Where did you get that from? It looks to me like the County Combined Authority has been set up by the three county-level councils: Lancs CC and the two unitaries (Blackpool and Blackburn). See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c30dr937738o

The next steps will be to absorb all the districts and rejig the split into three more equal size councils, then elect new councillors and a mayor to cover all three.

You're much further on than we are in Norfolk, where we still don't know whether we'll all be ruled from remote County Hall, whether the city and two boroughs will take the lead (and get eaten for breakfast by private contractors, as small councils seem to), or if they can work together like adults and set up a CCA.

[Tangled Metal]

I am asking that because AIUI the legal instgruments that set it up and allows for devolved powers to go to it are signed off now. It is developed by I think 4 councils all based to the south. AIUI The CCA that is the new body has Blackburn, Burnley and Lancshire County Council with Ribble Valey and one other district council.

Where did you get that from? It looks to me like the County Combined Authority has been set up by the three county-level councils: Lancs CC and the two unitaries (Blackpool and Blackburn). See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c30dr937738o

The next steps will be to absorb all the districts and rejig the split into three more equal size councils, then elect new councillors and a mayor to cover all three.

You're much further on than we are in Norfolk, where we still don't know whether we'll all be ruled from remote County Hall, whether the city and two boroughs will take the lead (and get eaten for breakfast by private contractors, as small councils seem to), or if they can work together like adults and set up a CCA.

There are three unitary councils (Blackbuern and Blackpool are at the level of Lancashire CC in the two tier system. However the CCA has Ribble District Council represented and Chorley district council, with those being on the same second tier as the other 10 district councils not part of the devolution directly. I cannot fully place my doubt over this body but I am guessing partly it is nominated members from teh LCC and the unitary councils of Blackburn and Blackpool. Then thee 12 district councils have nominated councillors from Chorley and Ribble Valley Why them? Why appointed and not directily elected?

It is interesting to think that Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and the Lancashire CCA represents about the same number of people. Lancashire CCA is made up of three unitary council representatives and 2 out of 12 district council represejtatives. Liverpool is represented by the leaders of the 6 local councils and the elected Mayor. That sounds better as each of them are elected to represent their local areas or the whole CA area in the case of the Mayor. To my POV that gives reepresentation down to the individual council areas. You could affect change at the next local elections. In say Lancaster you have less say in the members of the CCA than those in Ribble who has two votes (for district representative and county council representatives of which there are two on the CCA.

I do not really agree with devolution since it is so piecemeal around the country and the UK. I do agree with the idea of taking powers from Westminster to local areas but I think devolutoin should be even acros the whole of the UK. The Lancashire CCA is setting up more unevenness in the devolution of powers. Is it time to consider a federal system of governance?

[mjr]

I am asking that because AIUI the legal instgruments that set it up and allows for devolved powers to go to it are signed off now. It is developed by I think 4 councils all based to the south. AIUI The CCA that is the new body has Blackburn, Burnley and Lancshire County Council with Ribble Valey and one other district council.

Where did you get that from? It looks to me like the County Combined Authority has been set up by the three county-level councils: Lancs CC and the two unitaries (Blackpool and Blackburn). See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c30dr937738o

The next steps will be to absorb all the districts and rejig the split into three more equal size councils, then elect new councillors and a mayor to cover all three.

You're much further on than we are in Norfolk, where we still don't know whether we'll all be ruled from remote County Hall, whether the city and two boroughs will take the lead (and get eaten for breakfast by private contractors, as small councils seem to), or if they can work together like adults and set up a CCA.

There are three unitary councils (Blackbuern and Blackpool are at the level of Lancashire CC in the two tier system. However the CCA has Ribble District Council represented and Chorley district council,

Where are you getting this from? No district council representatives are mentioned on https://lancashire-cca.gov.uk/who-we-are

It sounds like someone may be spreading misinformation in hope to divide and conquer the electorate.

[Tangled Metal]

Where did you get that from? It looks to me like the County Combined Authority has been set up by the three county-level councils: Lancs CC and the two unitaries (Blackpool and Blackburn). See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c30dr937738o

The next steps will be to absorb all the districts and rejig the split into three more equal size councils, then elect new councillors and a mayor to cover all three.

You're much further on than we are in Norfolk, where we still don't know whether we'll all be ruled from remote County Hall, whether the city and two boroughs will take the lead (and get eaten for breakfast by private contractors, as small councils seem to), or if they can work together like adults and set up a CCA.

There are three unitary councils (Blackbuern and Blackpool are at the level of Lancashire CC in the two tier system. However the CCA has Ribble District Council represented and Chorley district council,

Where are you getting this from? No district council representatives are mentioned on https://lancashire-cca.gov.uk/who-we-are

It sounds like someone may be spreading misinformation in hope to divide and conquer the electorate.

https://lancashire-cca.gov.uk/governance/our-members

This page of the CCA's own website so hardly spreading misinformation about themselves. There are two non-constituent members. further down the page and there are photos and names of those two. The first listed is Councillor Alistair Bradley from Chorley council, the second is Councillor Stephen Atkinson from Ribble Valley council.

They are representatives of the District Council Leaders group so 12 district councils have representatives from 2 of their number. If the leaders group decide on how those two are to vote I have no idea but if that is the way it happens then it is convoluted way that I can not see being a good way personally. Why not increasing it to include leaders from all 12 district councils with the 3 unitary ones? That would result in 16 heads at the table not 6 as currently designed. Two LCC and one each from Blackburn and Blackpool. That is Liverpool format for their combined auithority.

However they do it, the point is to get more localised decision making. AIUI those 6 members of the CCA in Lancashire are mosly from the more populous parts except for Councillor Phillippa Williamson who is Lancaster and rural north ward of the LCC.That lessens some of my concerns because I get the feeling the current government favours towns and cities that are more likely to be labour. Also rural wards and council areas often have different issues to towns. I guess I just do not trust Labour era devolution since the way tit was so randomly set uop across the UK.

[mjr]

There are three unitary councils (Blackbuern and Blackpool are at the level of Lancashire CC in the two tier system. However the CCA has Ribble District Council represented and Chorley district council,

Where are you getting this from? No district council representatives are mentioned on https://lancashire-cca.gov.uk/who-we-are

It sounds like someone may be spreading misinformation in hope to divide and conquer the electorate.

https://lancashire-cca.gov.uk/governance/our-members

This page of the CCA's own website so hardly spreading misinformation about themselves. There are two non-constituent members. further down the page and there are photos and names of those two. The first listed is Councillor Alistair Bradley from Chorley council, the second is Councillor Stephen Atkinson from Ribble Valley council.

Except both are there from the "District Council Leaders group", not only their councils. That's the misinformed bit, I think.

They are representatives of the District Council Leaders group so 12 district councils have representatives from 2 of their number. If the leaders group decide on how those two are to vote I have no idea but if that is the way it happens then it is convoluted way that I can not see being a good way personally. Why not increasing it to include leaders from all 12 district councils with the 3 unitary ones? That would result in 16 heads at the table not 6 as currently designed. Two LCC and one each from Blackburn and Blackpool. That is Liverpool format for their combined auithority.

16 heads sounds like a great way to ensure that nothing ever gets done! I expect after the districts are absorbed into 3 new unitary councils, it'll be 2 from each of those, making 6, plus the new Mayor for a total of 7. Liverpool City Region Combined Authority has 7 members, not 16.

[...] I guess I just do not trust Labour era devolution since the way tit was so randomly set uop across the UK.

Are you sure that it doesn't have more to do with it being Labour?

Anyway, CCAs like Lancashire are the result of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, not a Labour-era move. Let's see if Labour's current English Devolution Bill sorts out some of the worst inconsistencies.

[Tangled Metal]

Where are you getting this from? No district council representatives are mentioned on https://lancashire-cca.gov.uk/who-we-are

It sounds like someone may be spreading misinformation in hope to divide and conquer the electorate.

https://lancashire-cca.gov.uk/governance/our-members

This page of the CCA's own website so hardly spreading misinformation about themselves. There are two non-constituent members. further down the page and there are photos and names of those two. The first listed is Councillor Alistair Bradley from Chorley council, the second is Councillor Stephen Atkinson from Ribble Valley council.

Except both are there from the "District Council Leaders group", not only their councils. That's the misinformed bit, I think.

They are representatives of the District Council Leaders group so 12 district councils have representatives from 2 of their number. If the leaders group decide on how those two are to vote I have no idea but if that is the way it happens then it is convoluted way that I can not see being a good way personally. Why not increasing it to include leaders from all 12 district councils with the 3 unitary ones? That would result in 16 heads at the table not 6 as currently designed. Two LCC and one each from Blackburn and Blackpool. That is Liverpool format for their combined auithority.

16 heads sounds like a great way to ensure that nothing ever gets done! I expect after the districts are absorbed into 3 new unitary councils, it'll be 2 from each of those, making 6, plus the new Mayor for a total of 7. Liverpool City Region Combined Authority has 7 members, not 16.

[...] I guess I just do not trust Labour era devolution since the way tit was so randomly set uop across the UK.

Are you sure that it doesn't have more to do with it being Labour?

Anyway, CCAs like Lancashire are the result of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, not a Labour-era move. Let's see if Labour's current English Devolution Bill sorts out some of the worst inconsistencies.

The point of the leaders group is that 2 out of 12 from that are involved. So in the CCA meeting when decisions are made it is just those two with input at that time. The Liverpool system has the involvement of all councils within the area.

So 16 is too many to decide anything? So let us cut down the number of MPs too. A bit of a joke comment I know but look at it this way, AIUI 1 MP represents about 55k people in the UK. This CCA it is 1 person represents 255k people. Making decisions local but not that local I guess. For 16 it is 1 to 95k or so. That is irrelevant though. What I am saying is the liverpool CA includes all councils withing the region directly, Lancashire does not. It is set up differently. Is that good or bad? Perhaps Liverpool should have been the city mayor and two other council leaders with a second tier where the other council leaders can discuss things that the main two get to put to the CA?

My point is that there is not system or order to devolution. No system to devolve power equally across the UK or across the England. I guess this piecemeal devolution is the way the Government is handling the unequal national devolution. England has no cevolved assembly to do this so they are setting up what are extra council style bodies. Perhaps a better system is a system like the Scottish devolution for Wales, Northern/Central/Southern regions of England. A federal system or equal devolution is my main point. This is piecemeal devolution that is not a good way to increase democracy and localise decisions IMHO. That is not misleading but the actual system, piecemeal devolution or super councils type strructures.

BTW I do think England is too populous to have one unique assembly / Parliament like Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. That is why I think we do need England to be split into smaller assemblies equivalent to Scottish parliament or welsh assembly. These super council CAs are not a great solution IMHO. I guess you feel it is a good thing from your posts.

[mjr]

The point of the leaders group is that 2 out of 12 from that are involved. So in the CCA meeting when decisions are made it is just those two with input at that time.

That's always how it is when representatives are appointed. It's up to those 2 to keep the other 10 informed and solicit their input as needed. You could just as easily gripe that your local councillor isn't amongst the 12 and argue that all 700ish should be involved directly, couldn't you?

The Liverpool system has the involvement of all councils within the area.

But there are only 6 councils within the area. It seems that in future in Lancashire, there will be only 3 councils. The 12 piddling little councils are vestigal and not of future relevance. I suspect they've only got representation now so that the unitary councils don't each have the same representation as the rest of Lancashire.

So 16 is too many to decide anything? So let us cut down the number of MPs too. A bit of a joke comment I know but look at it this way, AIUI 1 MP represents about 55k people in the UK. This CCA it is 1 person represents 255k people.

For Liverpool CRCA, 1 person represents 224k on average, so 1 per 255k seems in a similar ratio.

[...] That is irrelevant though. What I am saying is the liverpool CA includes all councils withing the region directly, Lancashire does not. It is set up differently.

Only for now. Remember, the 12 lower-level councils are for the chop. Lancs CCA already includes all councils which are likely to continue, plus two extra reps.

My point is that there is not system or order to devolution. No system to devolve power equally across the UK or across the England. I guess this piecemeal devolution is the way the Government is handling the unequal national devolution.

I agree with that and more, but I'd note it's the way past governments at least as far back as Blair have handled it, each adding a few bits to the picture until we've ended up with a postcode lottery. I think the last lot adding County Combined Authorities to the mix was an addition too far. Maybe the English Devolution Bill will harmonise things, but it's too soon to tell.

[...] These super council CAs are not a great solution IMHO. I guess you feel it is a good thing from your posts.

Not really, but I think it's too soon to tell. Unlike you, I don't have much faith in the 2/3/4-tier system of overlapping responsibilities and endless pass-the-buck, but I've also seen the damage done by having a too-small unitary council without enough skilled councillors to form effective cabinets and that gets fleeced by big contractors far too often. The devil will be in the details and there are very few details near me yet!

I am currently a strong believer in directly-elected mayors leading cabinets as the main power of local government. It seems much better than the traditional English rural council system of getting stuck led by either some councillor from the other end of the district/borough/county who dislikes the main town making all the decisions because the villages all elected that party, or a councillor from one of the towns neglecting the villages because their party managed to win all the dormitory belt as well as the towns, each with a cabinet made up of their allies from random places rather than the best councillors for each portfolio.

I think I'd go further and require mayors to resign their party whip while in power and swear to act as their electorate's champion. If they want to run for another office (such as MP) for a party, it's time to resign.