Agenda item

Philip Clifford, Senior Adviser, introduced the item. The paper gave an overview of current devolution work which had taken place since the last board meeting. Since then, the LGA had commissioned research from New Economy Manchester, and were now looking at engaging the community in the devolution process.

Going forward, the LGA’s submission on the autumn statement would focus on priorities for devolution, industrial strategy and adult social care all of which directly impact on rural areas. In the coming year, work would potentially focus on fiscal devolution, trade and inward investment, the governance digital technology and the role of LEPs.

Members were informed that the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government had been invited to attend a board meeting to discuss devolution and the progress of deals in rural areas.

In the discussion which followed, members made the following points:

·         There was concern around the lack of progress of devolution in two-tier areas. Members urged the LGA to continue to press the government for clarity on this issue and on the debate around elected mayors.

·         Referring to point 10 of the paper, members asked who the research produced by the New Economic Foundation would be shared with and who would attend the event on the 17^th October. Officers responded that the work would be shared on the LGA’s ‘Devohub’ website and that an invitation to the event would be circulated to Board members.

·         Members discussed the position of the Prime Minister and the new Chancellor of the Exchequer on devolution and suggested that the board invite the Communities Secretary to clarify this. Proposals for him to visit all devolution deal areas were also discussed.

·         The LGA could do more lobbying work to help non-metropolitan areas take devolution deals forward. Members felt not enough was being done collectively. The devolution green paper produced for the LGA 2016 conference (which was not taken forward) was discussed.

·         Governance arrangements were discussed. Members felt the government was unlikely to agree to different governance models unless there was a strong alternative model to the mayor. It was suggested there should be a discussion on the different arrangements government had agreed to.

·         The mayoral problem was cited as a reason for the lack of momentum with devolution deals. There was huge potential to drive change but the debate on governance models had halted the process. Members felt the missed opportunities relating to the slow progress in devolving responsibilities to non-metropolitan areas could be highlighted.

·         There would also need to be a reflection on the problems the EU exit may cause for devolution.

·         Members discussed forthcoming changes in industrial strategy for local government and asked where LEPs would sit in devolution deals. This was currently unclear.

·         Members expressed concern about confusion caused by having several different governing bodies making policies in one area as a result of the devolution process.

·         Members asked about current support for devolution from MPs.

·         The LGA could make a point to government about the lack of citizen participation in devolution and that the process needed to be more open.

·         Members requested that officers share proposed lobbying points on devolution with the board’s lead members.

Decision:

1.    Members noted the update.

Action:

1.    Officer to take forward work in line with members’ steer, including:

1.1  Sharing proposed lobbying points on taking the devolution process forward with the board’s lead members.