So you thought the Elected Mayors saga was over with. Not yet it isn't!
I'm the first to admit that I hadn't got much of a clue when I started investigating this subject but as time goes on I find out a little bit more and learn even more than that.
Just to refresh the memory.
I said in a letter to the Bolton News that I would contact the Secretary of State to see if the Consultation Guidelines (58 pages) applied to the 2009 Consultation and this I duly did by e-mail. I also circulated this to the Local MP's.
My MP, Dr Brian Iddon replied with a copy of a letter he had received from Alan Eastwood in answer to a similar query from another of his constituents. Since this contained the stock answer that the Guidelines didn't apply I asked Dr Iddon to chase this up with the Secretary of State.
This he did and I duly received a letter from the Minister for Local Government, Ms Rosie Winterton which effectively just stated the position that Bolton Council was maintaining. She said it was a legal matter and it would not be appropriate for her to intervene.
This being completely unacceptable I wrote back to her saying that I knew what the 'Law according to Alan Eastwood' was but wanted to know what the 'Law according to the Secretary of State' was.
Not yet having received an acknowledgement or reply I have just re-approached Dr Iddon to see if he would be so kind as to chase it up.
In the meantime I ploughed through the Bolton Council Website and came up with the following.
__________________________________________________
On 24 August 2009, Alan Eastwood submitted a report on 'Executive Arrangements' to the Executive which laid out the requirements of the 2007 Amendment to the 2000 Act.
In relation to Consultation he wrote the following.
3.1 The 2000 Act provides that “before drawing up its proposals” a change to the form of the Executive, the Council “must take reasonable steps to consult with the Local Government electors for and other interested persons in” the Council’s Area.
3.2 The Department for Communities and Local Government has confirmed that it does not intend to issue any guidance to Local Authorities as to what will constitute “reasonable steps” to consult Local Government electors, and since the 2000 Act does not provide for “specified period of consultation, nor detailed requirements – the Authority has the flexibility to decide the appropriate level of consultation”.
Paragraph 3.2 above is basically stating the Council's stance on Guidance with which it persists.
But he also wrote this.
"3.5 It is proposed that the consultation should include the following:
• Send a copy of the consultation document to Members of the Citizens Panel.Putting an article in Bolton Scene outlining the Consultation and inviting responses.
• Putting a public notice in the Bolton News announcing the beginning of the consultation period and inviting a response to the document.
• Putting copies of the consultation document in public buildings such as local libraries, area offices and One Stop Shops.
• Putting a copy of the Consultation document and on-line response form on the Council’s website.
• Using any existing forms where the Council communicates with local electors and other interested persons (including Area Forums, CBS and Community Groups. Particular attention should be paid to hard to reach groups to ensure that the consultation does not exclude them."
The report amongst other things recommended that the Executive -
"1. Delegate the drawing up of a consultation document and the finalisation of the consultation process to the Director of Chief Executive’s in consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Leaders of the opposition parties."
The Executive approved the report.
_________________________________________________
The report was then submitted to a meeting of the whole Council on 2nd September on a motion that was passed by the Council.
This, I suggest, was passed by the Councillors on the basis that should all of the above means of Consultation be incorporated into the Consultation Process then indeed the Council would have done all that could be reasonably expected of them.
Five days later the Consultation started using all the above means except those in the last paragraph.- ie
"• Using any existing forms where the Council communicates with local electors and other interested persons (including Area Forums, CBS and Community Groups. Particular attention should be paid to hard to reach groups to ensure that the consultation does not exclude them."
Now forgive me for thinking that although drawing up of the Consultation document and finalisation of the process was delegated, it was delegated on the basis that all the proposed methods would be included.
To my mind, the passing of the motion by the whole Council endorsing the whole report was tantamount to an instruction to Mr Eastwood and the Leaders of the party groups to implement the entire contents of the report - not to leave out bits they didn't like.
It wasn't a lack of money. The Council had approved a budget for this of up to £20,000. According to Alan Calvert the figure actually spent was £4,300.
The amazing thing is that had the means of communication contained in the last paragraph of the proposals been incorporated in the Consultation Process, then the original Guidance would have damned near been met.
Why was this paragraph left out????
Surely there was no intention to mislead the entire body of Councillors._
___________________________________________________
Note also that Mr Eastwood in his report refers only to the 2000 Act and the 2000 Act as amended. So, in his own words he is agreeing with me that the legislation is the 2000 Act.
There is no doubt that the Guidance (58 pages) applies to the 2000 Act so how can he say it doesn't.
___________________________________________________
As above he says:-
"The Department for Communities and Local Government has confirmed that it does not intend to issue any guidance to Local Authorities as to what will constitute “reasonable steps” to consult Local Government electors, and since the 2000 Act does not provide for “specified period of consultation, nor detailed requirements – the Authority has the flexibility to decide the appropriate level of consultation”.
When he reports back to the Executive and subsequently the Council on the results of the Consultation on 28 October 2009 he again states
1.2.2 However, the 2000 Act does not provide either for any specific form of public consultation or for any specific consultation period.
In addition, the Department for Communities and Local Government decided not to issue any guidance to Local Authorities as to what the Department considers would constitute “reasonable steps”. In relation to the public consultation required by the 2000 Act. As a result each Local Authority has had to reach its own decision as to the form and level of public consultation that it considers to be appropriate.
(First of all the 2000 Act does provide for the public consultation to follow the Guidelines (58 pages))
_________________________________________________
In regards to the statements above (that the DCLG has confirmed that it doesn't intend to issue Guidance) and (the DCLG decided not to issue any Guidance) I have submitted a Freedom of Information request to Bolton Council in relation to the above as follows.
"Could you please provide me with copies of any communication, printed, written, or in e-mail form, or details of any verbal communication by any means, between the Department for Communities and Local Government and Bolton Council which conveys and confirms to Bolton Council the following information :-
1) ....... "that it (the DCLG) does not intend to issue any guidance to Local Authorities as to what will constitute “reasonable steps” to consult Local Government electors" as stated in Paragraph 3.2. above.
2) that it (the DCLG)...... "decided not to issue any guidance to Local Authorities as to what the Department considers would constitute “reasonable steps In relation to the public consultation required by the 2000 Act”. as stated in Paragraphs 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 above."
I await the reply with interest.
As a belt and braces approach I intend to submit a Freedom of information request asking for the same information from the Department for Communities and Local Government since the odds are that Bolton Council will try to block the first one.
__________________________________________________
Area Forum.
At the last Area Forum for Little Lever and Darcy Lever I submitted the following question (or rather statement).
"That the Area Forum, as one of, if not the, principal means of connection between the Council and the Electors, regrets it was not included in the Consultation on change of Governance in Sept-Oct 2008 (Elected Mayors). Further to this could the Area Forum request that the author of the Consultation, the Director of the Chief Executives Department,Mr Alan Eastwood, attend the next Area Forum to explain why this was the case and why he felt that our Area Forum wasn't important enough to be included."
The minutes of this meeting have yet to appear and have to go through an 'approval' process and I am uncertain whether the above statement will get as far as being included.
If it does then I will suggest that other Area Forums should act in a similar fashion.
If it doesn't, I'll be bloody annoyed.
___________________________________________________
This got me thinking about the status of the Area Forum so I went back to the Council Constitution.
In Part 7 of the Constitution - The Council's Management Structure, we find the following.
Area Forums
(1) To encourage and promote discussion on and involvement in the way in which
Council and other services are planned and delivered within the area.
(2) To positively engage local people, organisations and businesses in the work of the area forum and to ensure that their views are represented to the Council and other partners.
(3) The provision, management and review (in accordance with approved Council
policy, standing orders and financial regulations) of those services activities and
resources allocated to the Forum by the Council.
(4) To refer to the Council (or Executive, Executive Member, Scrutiny Committee or
other committee or group, as appropriate) any matter concerning the Council which
has been raised at a meeting of the Forum and is not within the responsibilities
allocated to the Forum.
(5) To be consulted in relation to the exercise of any function of the provision of any service (by or on behalf of the Council, or in partnership between the Council and any other organisation) which specifically relates to or affects the Forum area and (where appropriate and practicable) the impact on the Forum area of any corporate
policy or other matter.
Firstly it could be argued that Paragraph 5 requires that the Area Forum should have been included in the Consultation .
It could further be argued that my question/ statement should be included in the minutes and acted upon by virtue of possibly Paragraph 2 and certainly Paragraph 4.
Let us see what all this flushes out.
Paul
No comments:
Post a Comment