David Parsons looks at feedback from the Local Government Group’s recent consultation into sector self-regulation and improvement

The strength of feeling couldn’t be clearer. More than 120 councils have replied to the LGA’s ‘Freedom to lead’ campaign, and spoken with one voice. We want to clear away swathes of regulation and instead, work out ways to supervise ourselves.

I suspected this campaign would find fertile ground. But, as chair of the Local Government Group’s improvement programme board, I was struck by the volume of the feedback.

It is clear that councils are demanding a simpler way of managing themselves which is adaptable to local circumstances – and involves local people. In the main, councils responding to us believe the approach and tools being devised by the Local Government Group – albeit a work in progress – represents light at the end of an onerous regulatory tunnel.

It is worth recapping on why councils want to phase out that previous regime. In Leicestershire, for example, research carried out for the Total Place report revealed that across the county, the public sector was reporting on more than 3,000 performance datasets a year – a mammoth task involving more than 90 staff and with a bill of £3.7m.

That picture was replicated across the country. Luton Council and Central Bedfordshire Council, to take another instance, identified more than 60 staff across the local public sector involved in completing 1,838 statutory returns at a cost of almost £2.2m.

Small wonder, then, that councils responded to our proposals to vastly reduce national indicators, axe multiple systems of inspection, and introduce robust peer challenges.

One metropolitan district in the North East told us: ‘The council is supportive of the proposals for a sector-owned approach... the principles would further enhance the delivery of improved outcomes for local people, specifically taking into account local views and needs.’

A South Eastern council said the LGA’s role in devising a toolkit of self-regulation proposals would ‘allow councils to easily compare with each other, and to use best practice in the production of the tools’.

A metropolitan district in the North East was dryly understated. ‘As an alternative to the 10-day inspection model that is potentially disruptive to service delivery, it [the Local Government Group’s approach] has many merits,’ it said.

A county in the South West welcomed the proposal to engage local communities in assessing their councils more, suggesting this could ‘help foster a new culture of openness and trust’.

One East of England county, rightfully, saw elected members as crucial in this process. It said: ‘Any model for self-regulation must propose a stronger and clearer role for local councillors in strengthening accountability, monitoring and challenging performance and driving improvement.’

But we need to translate this groundswell into practical action, and I see two hurdles ahead.

First, while we have to admit we have seen some reduction in the inspection burden, I still believe the Government can go further – in particular, by making safeguarding inspections more risk-based and proportionate.

Second, we have seen no reduction in data burdens – and this has to change. We know central government is drawing together a single list of all the data requirements it makes of local authorities, but we want it to have sharply reduced that list by early April, when the current performance framework draws to a close – and it is when our self-regulation tools will be available for councils to use. Otherwise, we run the risk of a kind of local government Groundhog Day, where we simply substitute one raft of indicators for another.

Vast tiers of local authority regulation now feel like something from another era – one before the spending cuts forced councils into decisions previously unthinkable.

Light touch regulation will be good for local democracy and represents financial sanity.

And, as the feedback to our campaign shows, this vehicle for change is accelerating – and it has no reverse gear. 

David Parsons is chairman of the Local Government Group improvement programme board, deputy chairman of the LGA, & leader of Leicestershire CC