733
The Deputy Chief Executive submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.
Councillor Pearson attended and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the Cabinet. He noted it was International Women’s Day and welcomed the gender balance of Cabinet. He also expressed his thanks to councillors, officers and partners for the work behind the successful royal visit which had helped put Colchester on the map.
The wider body of Councillors had only recently been appraised of the details on the devolution proposals, There were some potential benefits to the Level 2/3 proposals, such as sustainable transport, more affordable housing and a more joined up approach on health and wellbeing. However, moving forward the approach needed to be cautious and inclusive. To ensure that Councillors were kept on board it was vital they were kept appraised of developments. It was also important that it was acknowledged there were some potential pitfalls as well as benefits. The financial benefits were not a panacea, given the length of the deal and the scale of proposed Greater Essex.
Councillor King, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, welcomed the comments which went to the heart of the matter. There were potential benefits and an opportunity to take control of services currently administered by central government. It was an opportunity to address how inefficient and fractured local government could be and deliver better services to residents through greater local control of areas such as transport or skills. Discussions so far had been positive and the approach would continue to be inclusive. The Leader of Essex County Council remained committed to listening to the views of all the districts. Some devolution deals had delivered a sum significantly greater than £30 million per annum, but the real benefit was through improvements to ways of working and governance, rather than the funding. Strong relationships were in place and that should give some confidence to members. No final decision was being taken at this stage. What was being sought was agreement to continue discussions.
Councillor Fox, Portfolio Holder for Local Economy and Transformation, emphasised the need to ensure Councillors were kept on board and the importance of keeping residents informed. It was the duty of Councillors to try and mould any deal to ensure it benefitted local residents. Whilst there might be some disquiet about some of the structures that were proposed, there were real opportunities. Other deals had led to improved public transport provision which would a real benefit for Essex. It would also be opportunity to address the issues of skills development. It was important to contribute to the debate in order to have any influence on the final outcome.
Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources, indicated that he shared some of the scepticism on the basis of his previous experience. The introduction of a Mayor, particularly of a wide area, was likely to concentrate power rather than dilute it. However he appreciated there were positives and that talks should continue. Councillor Cox, Portfolio Holder for Heritage and Culture, indicated she was broadly supportive of the principle and stressed the need for a simple communications initiative with residents setting out the potential benefits of devolution. However, it was important that local government was properly funded and given the resources to continue to provide services.
Pam Donnelly, Chief Executive, was invited to contribute and stressed that in discussions she and the Leader were committed to protecting Colchester’s best interests. The work across North Essex Councils demonstrated in Appendix B of the report should give some comfort to members about the degree of strength there was across North Essex to get the most out of the opportunity devolution presented by working together.
RESOLVED that:-
(a) Cabinet notes that it is not being requested to take a final position or decision on devolution.
(b) Cabinet notes the contents of the Deputy Chief Executive’s report.
(c) Cabinet agrees to progress the current work taking place to the next stage.
(d) To progress the work to the next stage, Cabinet agrees:
A. That the Chief Executives be commissioned to draft an ambitious devolution
pitch to Government – this should rule out a Level 1 devolution deal but explore the options and benefits around a Level 2 and Level 3 devolution deal, noting that the most extensive powers and new investment are only available at Level 3 as set out in appendix A, p17/25.
B. That leaders meet to review the pitch document and agree the level of deal to pursue.
C. That at that meeting, leaders confirm the timing for submitting the proposals to open dialogue with Government.
D. That the high level approach to engagement set out on pages 13/21-14/22 of the report is correct.
E. That a standard factual briefing should be issued to MPs following this discussion, following up the briefing issued earlier in the year.
F. That a letter to the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Secretary of State should be sent following this meeting from Councillor Neil Stock, leader of Tendring District Council, and upper tier leaders (on behalf of all leaders), setting out the basis of the Greater Essex leaders’ collaboration, the work done to date, and next steps.
REASONS
In England, devolution is the transfer of powers and funding from national to Local government.
It is important because it would ensure that decisions would be made closer to the local people, communities and businesses they affect.
A key purpose of devolution is economic growth, jobs growth and skills development.
It would also enable efficient use of increasingly scarce resources across local authorities in Essex.
Devolution investment would also enable Colchester and its partners to compete effectively with devolution arrangements elsewhere in the UK.
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
No alternative options were submitted to Cabinet.