At risk councils need Community Budgets first says Cockell

Community Budgets work and money should be allocated first to the councils facing the toughest cuts according to Sir Merrick Cockell, who spoke at the Commons Select Committee on Community Budgets this week.

Cockell said that it was clear from Local Government Association research that 86 councils would have 85p for every pound they currently have under cuts expected in the next spending round. “We think that is a significant reduction,” said Cockell. “Those at 85p for every 100p at the moment could be at a tipping point where some of their statutory responsibilities could be at risk … Many of those areas are ones which don’t get New Homes Bonus (and) which don’t get a sniff of any of the business rate retention because there isn’t any business growth in their area … Our view to Government would be if you were going to focus support on the areas most in need you should be looking towards those 86 areas because the impact of Community Budgets is going to be greater there than elsewhere.”

Also speaking to the Committee Laura Wilkes, policy manager for the Local Government Information Unit, said that councils had to have a clear plan for what they would do with any Community Budget money from Whitehall departments.

Cockell said that Community Budgets were difficult to operate when many funding streams and schemes were involved. Skills is an obvious area where this is the case, he added: “You have so many pots and triggers to access them … we would look toward a simplification.” Some departments had been more helpful than others during the Community Budget pilots such as the one in the Tri-Borough (Westminster, Hammersmith & Fulham and RBKC), he explained, but the Department of Health had been working particularly well on them.

When asked whether the Treasury had “bought in” to the concept Cockell said he thought that they were “firmly part of this”. Work done by Ernst & Young in validating the savings estimated in the pilots was crucial to Treasury buy in, he told the Committee.

The meeting also discussed how money would be put into Community Budgets from Government departments. The idea of a ring-fenced fund, as per the Heseltine suggestions, was brought up, with Committee members asking how much departments would be required to put aside for Community Budgets and how much a total pot might amount to. One of the models that the Local Government Information Unit has suggested for accessing Community Budgets is the lock and key system where the government would have money set aside and then ask local authorities to apply with Community Budget project ideas.

Sir Merrick told the Committee that local government’s role in Community Budgets would be crucial, even though central government stands to benefit the most financially. “Most of the savings – 80% – fall on the Whitehall side so you could say to local government ‘what is the incentive?’” said Cockell. “But I think it is part of our responsibility over our Whole Place leadership of our area.

“We are the conductor of the orchestra that can bring people together and that has been proved very effectively in the pilots. The difficulty is for all councils to realise this isn’t something someone else is doing. All of local government needs to be looking to how their plans are going to make Community Budgets work because there are going to be very few options in the next spending round and the one after that … If there are ways of providing public services better and getting better value for every pound spent and improving those services at the same time that is a very persuasive argument for any authority or community … The alternatives are simply close down services.”