PluggedIN: Bordering on the irrelevant
Author: Alex Thomson, in the MJ |
As the current prime minister of India, Manmohan Singh, once remarked: ‘Borders cannot be redrawn, but we can work towards making them irrelevant ? towards making them just lines on a map.’
It may not surprise you to learn that the prime minister was talking about the long-disputed region of Kashmir rather than the geography of English local government. But his words are worth considering anyway.
Most borders mean nothing to most people. Labour markets, housing markets, and residents’ definition of where they live don’t stop and start where the local authority boundaries do.
And, in a world of unprecedented budget pressures, combined with a substantial range of responsibilities being either delivered or influenced locally, co-operation between neighbouring authorities has never been more important. Unfortunately, tales of mistrust and often, downright loathing between nearby town halls are legion.
Like all good feuds, the causes of grudges are often lost in the sands of time. It becomes institutional, tribal almost ? for both officers and members ? much like the irrational but unshakeable rivalry between supporters of nearby football teams.
Not that there aren’t some cogent reasons for enmity ? raw politics (both big and small ‘p’), conflicting spheres of responsibility and influence, even the current funding system which pitches local authorities against each other ? every pound gained by one authority in the settlement will be coveted by many others.
So, can anything be done to help dampen the fires of these age-old rivalries? With the devolution of many services down to neighbourhood level and beyond to personal budgets, the old world of one council, one service becomes ever more distant.
At the same time, the increasing trend towards local authorities and other public sector bodies sharing and commissioning services together makes administrative boundaries less relevant.
The fact is that the twin drivers of increasing localism and reducing budgets are changing the face of local government in more ways than one. This evolution cannot be simplified into a move towards unitary reorganisation or forcing the sharing of back office services.
The logical conclusion must be a patchwork quilt of variable geographies for a variety of needs, directed and determined by local politicians.
Before long, of course, we may see a fundamental rethink of local government geography ? although you would be a brave man or woman to bet too much on it. But, until that time, many of the lines on the map are likely to become ever-less relevant.