The Localism Act – over to you

Last Wednesday the Local Government Information Unit (LGiU) collaborated with Bristol City Council to run a major one-day conference on the Localism Act, which is now rapidly moving towards implementation. The audience comprised primarily local authority elected members and senior officers. The conference was kicked off by Barbara Janke, the Liberal Democrat Leader of Bristol City Council. The day’s discussions were bookended by wide ranging presentations from Westminster Liberal Democrat politicians: Lord Shipley in the morning and Andrew Stunell, our man at the Ministry, in the afternoon.

The Localism Act is huge – both physically and in the range of topics it addresses. The LGiU event tried to capture the key developments: neighbourhood planning and neighbourhood forums; housing; and community rights. Along the way the discussion touched upon other important developments such as the localisation of business rates, the Community Infrastructure Levy, and the possibilities and powers of elected mayors, a topic high on the agenda in Bristol as we move towards a referendum.

Yet, several speakers saw the key change as lying elsewhere. The new local authority general power of competence was identified as fundamental. While it can be argued that this doesn’t, in practice, broaden local authorities’ scope for action dramatically, it has clear symbolic significance. No longer is a local authority’s starting point for discussion whether it is allowed to do something. Rather the question is whether there is anything to stop it doing so. This was identified as an opportunity to show civic leadership. In a time of austerity, the need for such leadership is ever more apparent. We face unprecedented challenges – such as providing care and support for a rapidly ageing society – that require local innovation and experimentation to identify effective responses.

Andrew Stunell argued that the Localism Act is potentially a once in a generation change to our political system. Its underlying objective is “cascading power down the system”. It is breaking with the idea that Whitehall knows best. There are new powers for local authorities, communities and individuals.

But, Stunell argued, this potential will only be realised if local authorities and communities grab the opportunity. They must embed localism in practice so that reversing this trend away from the centre becomes unthinkable. Yet, localism isn’t going to come with a guidebook crafted in Whitehall. No code of practice is going to emanate from Eland House. Local authorities and communities have been given powers. It is for them to use those powers as they see fit.

Localism no doubt has potential. But it is already clear that it presents risks. And much of the detail on components of the new system – such as the final version of the National Planning Policy Framework – has yet to emerge. We should expect a lot of the missing information to become available over the next couple of months.

We are entering a new era in the relationship between local authorities and the communities they seek to serve. And it will be arriving at a Town Hall near you very shortly.

Tomorrow I will look briefly at some of the more detailed issues that emerged during the day’s discussions.

* Alex Marsh is Professor of Public Policy at the University of Bristol, a Member of Bristol North Liberal Democrats, and blogs at

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in News.


  • Tony Greaves 13th Feb '12 - 8:12pm

    Don’t get too carried away. I don’t want to put a damper on enthusiasm but there is as much centralisation in the Localism Act as their is decentralisation – something like 140 new powers fot he Secretary of State (which is why there are going to be a huge number of new orders and regulations springing from it.

    Whether the new planning system will be much more localised in practice remains to tbe seen. (And the new National Planning Policy Framework does not derive from the Localism Act as such).

    The real problem is that central government will still control the money, council tax is still capped (though by a different means), and government support grants to Councils are being slashed.

    There are certainly some better things in this Act but in my judgement it is not something that Liberals will look back on with great pride in five or ten years time.

    Tony Greaves
    (At a Pendle Council meeting on Thursday it was suggested that I might have read all 400 odd pages of the whole Act. Not entirely true, there are sections about London I have ignored!)

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Nonconformistradical
    Peter Davies is right. Hugh - if you seat was genuinely winnable you'd have the money and been very hard at it knocking on doors long before now. What hap...
  • Peter Davies
    @Hugo. If your seat is broke, it's not winable. Outside elections, I'd agree that the party needs to give more help to seats which could be targets in future bu...
  • Jen
    It would be interesting if the LDs were kingmakers this time. Its often said they were in 2010, and it's wrong - with the maths and the attitudes in the par...
  • Hugh Young
    We, I am sure would love to deliver lots of leaflets during the campaign but I have been told by our agent for a possible winable seat that we are broke after t...
  • David Evans
    It is very disappointing the see that the usual messages being still trotted out to the same old easy questions and simplistic answers thereby avoiding facing u...