The Democracy Commission was brought together by Kirklees Council to investigate what a strong and healthy local democracy should look like in Kirklees – for the next generation, and beyond. They were asked to gather evidence about local democracy and make recommendations based on what they learned. You can read the draft report here: Kirklees Draft report
There was an event on the 30th June to launch the report and to look at how to take the recommendations forward, it hosted by independent chair, Dr Andy Mycock from the University of Huddersfield and ADSO were pleased to also take part.
ADSO thought it appropriate to comment on the draft report. These are very much the views of the board Our comments do not change or suggest amendments but they will help continue the debate and possibly provide some ideas.
ADSO has followed the Commission’s work with interest and are very pleased to have been involved.
Young people
The report contains helpful comments. We need to guard against making assumptions that young people are only interested in youth provision. I am not suggesting the report does that but raising a cautionary note. Young people use the full range of council services and need to be seen in that context. This was evident by the increase in young voters at the recent general election.
Engagement
As the report indicates, what this means and how we go about it is a very difficult one to crack. I have always felt that we could look at involving citizens directly in scrutiny and, possibly, to get them to lead reviews. I appreciate the controversy of this suggestion and I am aware that a key issue would be one of legitimacy. I am familiar with citizen juries that were used by a number of authorities back in the late 80s early 90s. Such an approach could help provide a solution. I have been thinking about the ‘legitimacy’ argument and how citizens could be identified. We could look at a process not dissimilar to the one we use to identify jurors. Spain use a similar approach to select their election support staff. It is considered a civic duty. Such an approach could help increase awareness and encourage engagement and act as driver for civic responsibility.
Devolution
I have been following the devolution discussions with interest. I agree with the findings on the report. I also note the importance citizens place on defining their communities. There is often the argument levied that Local Government is not proactive enough in terms of devolution. I think that is harsh but understand how one might reach that conclusion. In terms of a potential solution one option might be to identify to a service area where we would like to take more control and to suggest directly to Government that we pilot it. I appreciate this could cause confusion as I agree that devolution can add additional layers of government, which adds to the confusion around Local Government decision making. As we know, Local Government reform has been developed in an incoherent fashion and the mystery surrounding it is compounded. However, taking control and asking the Government to grant additional powers based on a clear supporting strategy, might be an option worth exploring. I think this might be an approach for authorities to consider adopting when looking to devolve decisions to a more local level.
Supporting Councillors
My final comment relates to support for members. It is my experience that ward information is key. Test Valley BC where I am currently working on an interim basis, has recently changed the role definition for members. Interestingly, the support for members is considered a corporate role, not just a Democratic Services function. This is crucial in my opinion as it provides a corporate understanding of the role of members. It also helps reinforce close collaboration between officers and members. It also gives you more for your buck by sharing the load.
Dave Burn
ADSO Vice Chair