http://www.redp.org.uk/news/items/easy-read-guide-to-the-localism-act
This is a very readable summery of the main points , of course like any bill , it can only really be judged once it comes into use , the wonderful LAw of unintended consequences may come into play again . A lot of this does seem to reflect some of the view points expressed on the forum . Anyway I hope it helps ( you have to download the PDF via the link at the end of the description )
Just incase anyone cant open the link here is an overall description of the major points
The overall effect of the Act
Taken together, the measures in the Act mean:
New freedoms and flexibilities for local government
The Act:
•
gives local authorities everywhere the formal legal ability and greater confidence to get on with the job of responding to what local people want
•
cuts red tape to enable councillors everywhere to play a full and active part in local life without fear of legal challenge
•
encourages a new generation of powerful leaders with the potential to raise the profile of English cities, strengthen local democracy and boost economic growth
•
enables ministers to transfer functions to public authorities in cities in order to harness their potential to drive growth and prosperity
•
reforms the governance of London so that more power lies in the hands of elected representatives who are democratically accountable to London's citizens
New rights and powers for local communities
The Act:
•
makes it easier for local people to take over the amenities they love and keep them part of local life
•
ensures that local social enterprises, volunteers and community groups with a bright idea for improving local services get a chance to change how things are done
•
enables local residents to call local authorities to account for the careful management of taxpayers' money
Reform to make the planning system clearer, more democratic and more effective
The Act:
•
places significantly more influence in the hands of local people over issues that make a big difference to their lives
•
provides appropriate support and recognition to communities who welcome new development
•
reduces red tape, making it easier for authorities to get on with the job of working with local people to draw up a vision for their area's future
•
reinforces the democratic nature of the planning system - passing power from bodies not directly answerable to the public, to democratically accountable ministers
22
Reform to ensure that decisions about housing are taken locally
The Act:
•
enables local authorities to make their own decisions to adapt housing provision to local needs, and make the system fairer and more effective
•
gives local authorities more control over the funding of social housing, helping them to plan for the long term
•
gives people who live in social housing new ways of holding their landlords to account, and make it easier for them to move
This is, in sum, an Act with the potential to effect a significant change in national life, passing power to a local level, creating space for local authorities to lead and innovate, and giving people the opportunity to take control of decisions that matter to them.
Together with other, wider Government reforms, putting the Act into practice will represent a major milestone towards the transfer of power and control set out in the coalition agreement.
You can find updates about various consultations and guidance about the use of the powers in the Localism Act and about the Department for Communities and Local Government's wider work, at the address below:
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
It is very easy to understand as the above post said. Even that it is not law yet,some of the bill is being taken up on some councils and groups.
The actual act itself is not necessarily that easy to read , but the link removes the "legalise language " and also gives some context to the effect of each part of the bill
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i would like to say that i studied that in great detail sarah, but when i reached the first bullet point "factoring in gender equality can prevent costly errors" i was reduced to a quivering wreck.
i nearly turned on the one show in response.
LOL
Howard , just imagine the financial effect of introducing a policy / action which is inherently discriminatory that then resulted in a payout from public/local funds ( Good grief !!! I have worked in this feild way to long !)
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I have had it some weeks now ,so I think I know most of it now,just small parts that still need me to keep reading it over and over again.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
ok vic you are more up with this than me, just picked at random this one.
" makes it easier for local people to take over local amenities that they love"
being of cynical bent i am reading this as "we will no longer run that once a day bus service from your village/hamlet into town for your doctors/dentists appointement or shopping trip, it will be up to local people to find the funding".
You may well be right Howard in the easy read guide , it says ( and Im using my own language ) Each council has to make a list of it ammenities that are valued and if they become avaliable for sell off or privatisation them local group get a preferential timescale to put in a bid to run them on a not for profit basis , but how long before get the chance becomes will be closed if you dont ,
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
interesting sarah, of course most amenities would not be profitable so not up for privatisation.
i think the aim is to close loss making bits, refer to money loss.
some things are valuable beyond monetary terms.
My understanding is Libraries, swimming pools , nurseries that are up for closure or are "uneconomical" to run might well come under this heading ( obviously not them all
) but it willbe interesting to see
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Yes that last one is the one I was taking about only on Tuesday nights council meeting.Also the New rights and powers for local communities. one of them is avery good one Enable local residents to call local authorities to account for the careful management of taxpayers money.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
Public swimming pools are pretty much uneconomical. Try and find a pool that is independent of other facilities to subsidise it's running.
I remember working for a local leisure company (when I was younger) and being blown away by this concept. It is a worry!
Just to adopt the rationale based on current affairs: 'why should we be worried about this when so many do not live near the sea?' infact: 'we should be grateful we live beside the sea'
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the conclusion i am reaching after reading the posts here is that unless a profit figure is shown then people will lose facilities that they presently have.
is this what they mean by the "big society"?
i prefer to think about the people that do the graft unheralded, the big government does not think like that though.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
the concept is good
and if you can bring decisions to a local area thats great
but underlying all of this is;
1; should facilities that although not making a profit be scrapped?
some will be a lifeline to many, and save monies in other areas so is it a
short sighted look?
2; if parish/town councils are to be given more powers are many of them up to it?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Two very good points Keith.
Roger
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
More to the point, with Town/Parish councils now being expected to take over services from District and County councils as well as take on amenities such as libraries etc. where will the money come from?
At the latest KALC AGM (sorry Vic,, I was there and the proposals about limiting councillors were in there and are being taken to national level) we had presentations from Highways, Fire and Rescue and the Police. All three presentations could be boiled down to lists of things they wanted Town/Parish councils to take over paying for. Money can only be stretched so far and yet more is wanted. One example could be that DDC want DTC to take on more but do not want to hand over at least one carpark to provide some income towards the increased costs.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
chris(buddy) your not far wrong
realy cllr wise if you look around the councils
84 at county each one recieving between £10,000and £30,000
45 at District each one recieving between £5,000 and £20,000
then at town an unknown cllrs budget
it all adds up
then you look at our cllrs(if you can find them)
and question whether or not we realy should down size.
for to long we have hoped more people from all backgrounds would be active in the communities and good cllrs
in reality good cllrs are few in number from all parties
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
It wouldn't be Vic, the proposal has been passed and moved on now. Ask the local chairman, he was with me at the AGM (very kindly drove me there and back).
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
