Agenda item

The Bill initially refers to the new Council areas that are to operate from 1 April 2020.

Newport is included in a new Local Government area along with the county of Monmouthshire and the county boroughs of Blaenau Gwent, Caerphilly and Torfaen. Elections will be held in May 2019 and the new authorities will operate in Shadow form until April 2020.

The Draft Bill outlines:

·             The establishment of new Counties by the merger of existing Counties and County Boroughs; and

·             A new and reformed legislative framework for Local Government democracy, accountability, performance and finance;

The accompanying documentation seeks further views on other proposals which have not as yet been drafted as legislation. The preparatory work and consultation around the Draft Bill will provide a new Welsh Government a ‘ready-made’ reform bill which could be introduced soon after the Assembly elections.

The Democratic Services Committee was asked if it wished to make a non-party political response to the Consultation document. Clearly the political groups will wish to make their own submissions.

To assist the discussion, the responses made by the Welsh Local Government Association were included in the report.

In producing the Draft Bill, the Welsh Government had responded to many of the concerns and views expressed by councils during the White Paper consultation. There are therefore a number of proposals that would be welcomed by councils including:

·             The non-introduction of some of the more controversial White Paper proposals such as term limits for councillors, review of members’ remuneration and elections by thirds;

·             Proposed power of general competence;

·             The proposed clarification and simplification of authorities’ executive and full council functions;

·             Improving and streamlining of some existing burdens and duties on councils, including remote attendance and community polls; and

·             A reformed improvement regime based on self-improvement and proportionate external regulation.

Members considered that some proposals were overly-prescriptive and would create additional burdens, resource implications and/or complexity for local authorities. There were also some proposals which will have an impact on local democracy and are inconsistent with expectations and arrangements of other tiers of government.  Such proposals include:

·             ‘Performance duties’ for councillors;

·             Establishment of ‘Community Area Committees’ (CACs);

·             Introduction of ‘improvement requests’;

·             Councils’ duties over other public bodies, such as provision of training to community councils and public participation duties over fire and rescue and national park authorities;

·             The consistency of the proposed improvement and corporate planning regime with the new duties of the Wellbeing and Future Generations Act.

·             Ministerial powers to direct or issue guidance to local authorities, for example on workforce matters.

The establishment of new Counties by the merger of existing Counties and County Boroughs remains an issue under debate and discussions are continuing in relation to the proposed merger plans. Nevertheless the consultation document sets out a number of other proposals that impact on the governance arrangements of the Council and therefore fall within the remit of the Democratic Services committee.  The views of the WLGA were included in this report.

Several concerns in addition to those raised by the WLGA were raised by the Committee:

1. Community Area Committees (CACs) appear to be another tier of government bridging the gap between the public and the larger merged councils.
2. Concerns that there could be a conflict of interest with members of Public Service Boards defining the community areas for CACsand that the pattern of CACs will be agreed by a mainly non-elected body.
3. Concern on the practicality of broadcasting all meetings, in addition to the pressure on resources both in terms of staff and monies.
4. Both self and peer assessment needed to be consistent across all authorities.  Assessments could vary enormously if carried out by different people, as opposed to one appointed body.

Agreed

Head of Democratic Services to draft a reply in line with the WLGA response plus additional points raised by the Committee.  The reply would be circulated to committee members.