Districts call for guidance to make clear government intervention will only be “last resort”

District councils have said Best Value guidance should make it clearer that Government intervention will be used only as a last resort where an authority is in difficulties.

The District Council Network (DCN) said in its response to the Government’s consultation on statutory guidance on the Best Value duty, that this overall achieved the right balance and set out both “the hallmarks of best value and identifies indicators of potential failure”.

Government intervention at a council would sometimes be appropriate, but should also be proportionate.

DCN said: “The guidance should be even clearer that the Department [of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities] should not intervene if only one or a very small number of indicators of failure are engaged.

“Counting the number of indicators alone is not a sufficient basis for intervening. The guidance should be clearer that formal intervention should always be a last resort when problems are not capable of being expediently resolved by other means and when meaningful early dialogue with the local authority has taken place.”

DCN said it should not be possible for central government to intervene “on grounds that are flimsy, overly subjective or politically motivated”.

It also expressed concern about recent moves by Whitehall to increase control over councils’ performance.

Examples included the creation of the Office for Local Government and tightening of restrictions on councils’ ability to borrow and invest commercially.

“The desire to protect the taxpayer and the exchequer is understandable,” DCN said.

“But we urge the Government to remember that the vast majority of councils are well run and to consider ways in which councils can be given greater freedom and discretion to deliver their services.”

It strongly agreed with the principle outlined in the guidance that local accountability should primarily be to residents and businesses.

Best Value was introduced by the Labour government in 1999 after the abolition of compulsory competitive tendering.

DCN said it was designed then as an improvement tool for local councils “and not as an intervention tool”.

It added: “By focusing heavily on intervention in the new guidance, the Government misses a good opportunity to revise guidance on all of the ‘4Cs’ at the centre of the original Best Value approach (challenge, compare, consult and compete)”.

A list given in the guidance of potential indicators of failure “should be treated as comprehensive and should not be purely illustrative”, DCN said.

"The Secretary of State should not be able to intervene for any other reasons. If there are indicators that the department has overlooked, they should be added to the guidance rather than giving the Secretary of State license to intervene for reasons that are not included.”

Guidance should also explicitly state that early engagement between the department and a local authority “must happen in private and that any concerns should not be put in the public domain at least until the local authority has had the time to give an initial response to the concerns”, DCN said.

The network also voiced concern at the concept of a ‘non-statutory Best Value Notice’, issued by a senior civil servant requiring a local authority to take action.

“No unelected official should have the power to require action of a democratically elected authority by means of a non-statutory letter,” it said.

"As a minimum, it should be explicit in the guidance that any such letter could be sent only following explicit direction by a minister.”

The Local Government Association last week made a separate response to the consultation.

Mark Smulian