Plan to pass EU fines on to councils “unfair, unworkable, dangerous and unconstitutional”, says LGA
The Local Government Association (LGA) has strongly criticised the proposal in the Localism Bill that would force English councils to pay parts of fines imposed on the UK national government by the EU, describing the policy as “unfair, unworkable, dangerous and unconstitutional”.
In its response to the Localism Bill, ahead of its second reading in the Commons on Monday, 17th January, the LGA complained that these measures, contained in clauses 30-34 of the bill, had not been consulted on prior to inclusion in the bill and that it would be “impossible for the government to accurately and fairly judge the proportion of a fine that the council should be forced to pay”. “This proposal would also put in place an entirely new regime for the government to impose fines on councils extra-judicially, which is fundamentally unconstitutional,” the LGA said.
The LGA unreservedly welcomed many other provisions of the bill, including the power of general competence, the end of the predetermination rule, and the ability for councils to return to the committee system. However, it said that in some areas, the Localism Bill, as presently drafted, would fail to deliver true localism in many respects.
“We strongly support the aim of helping people at neighbourhood level have greater control over public services and planning. However, in some areas the Bill text demonstrates how challenging it has been for the Whitehall machine to translate Ministers’ policies into legislation. We want to see a Bill that fully reflects the localist agenda Ministers have previously supported and reduces, rather than adds to, red tape and complex processes facing local people and councils,” the LGA said.
In particular, the LGA said that the proposal in the bill to give the Secretary of State the power to impose a “shadow mayor” onto local authorities before a local referendum is held was “wholly against the spirit of localism”. On similar grounds, the LGA called for more detail on the powers that would be granted to elected mayors and criticised the power for the Secretary of State to make regulations on how local referendums should operate and what constitutes a “local issue”.
The LGA also expressed concern about the proposed reforms to the housing finance system. While it welcomed the abolition of the housing revenue account, it said that discretion given to the Secretary of State to change the settlement payment and determine the level of housing debt that councils could take on was “dangerous” if it meant that the amounts that councils would have to pay to buy themselves out of the replacement scheme were liable to change.
“The reform of housing finance is designed to give councils independence and financial certainty,” the LGA said. “As drafted, the bill gives them neither. We are concerned that powers for Whitehall to reopen what is supposed to be a clean break settlement would stop councils managing their housing assets for the benefit of local residents, and they should be reconsidered.”
The LGA's response criticised some aspects of the clauses on the Community Right to Challenge and the Community Right to Buy. Of the former, it said that the legislation risked being over-prescriptive and that powers envisaged for the Secretary of State to make further regulations in this area should be removed. Of the latter, the LGA said that the proposed procedures were too complex and that the Secretary of State's should not be given the power to make regulations on, amongst other issues, how long assets should remain on the 'moratorium list' and what constitutes “land of community value”.
Other areas covered by the Localism Bill which the LGA said needed to be looked at again were the powers for the Secretary of State to determine how Community Infrastructure Levy are distributed locally and the over-complex and “untransparent” plans for a new neighbourhood planning system.
Read the full Localism Bill 2nd Reading briefing from the Local Government Association
