Since the General Election, the Deputy Prime Minister has been appointed to be in charge of these arrangements. But both the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR) and the Cabinet Office have regional policy responsibilitie...
Countryside Agency Archive

Breadcrumbs

Regional governance (AP01/44)

Principal Manager Responsible: Claire Spink Lead Board Member: Cate Mack

FOR DECISION

  • A consistent framework for regional influencing (paragraph 3 and Annex 1), focusing on the regional rural forums, rural revival post foot and mouth, regional economic strategies and planning guidance, the regional assemblies, Government Offices and RDAs;
  • An enhanced role for Board Members, including an annual review of regionally distinctive practice (paragraph 4)
  • In relation to proposed changes in regional governance, agree that the Agency should focus its efforts on ensuring a rural dimension to policy development process, rather than on structural issues (paragraph 14).  

Relevance to Strategy and Corporate Plan:

  • This work supports our Strategy aims and our corporate plan task of ensuring the mechanisms and local government structures are used effectively to deliver our aims in rural areas.  

Staff and financial implications:

  • The proposals are affordable within the current level of financial and staff resources available.  

Main issues to concern the Board:

  • Are our proposed core influencing activities going to do enough to carry real weight? If not, what more do the Board want to see us doing?
  • Are Board Members content to devote time, as proposed, to support the work of the regions and to collaborate to provide a national overview of what is happening regionally? 
  • Does the Board agree that it is not regional or local government structural reform which is important but ensuring that the main relevant activities are rurally proofed?  

Background

1. Between 1997 and 2001, the Government established a new regional infrastructure, especially through regional development agencies and regional assemblies, but also including bodies such as regional cultural consortia and regional arrangements for dispensing lottery funds. Government Offices have developed with a number of central departments putting more functions into Government Offices for the first time (including DEFRA, where officers are now in action, having been diverted to fighting foot and mouth disease through most of this year). A new Regional Co-ordination Unit has been set up to monitor and manage the Government Offices. 

2. Since the General Election, the Deputy Prime Minister has been appointed to be in charge of these arrangements. But both the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR) and the Cabinet Office have regional policy responsibilities (and the Department of Trade and Industry leads on RDAs). DEFRA has a significant interest in the delivery of the England Rural Development Plans for each region. And a regional government White Paper is in preparation.

The Agency's regional priorities

3. The Agency needs to wield influence over the regional components of this new infrastructure, if we are to deliver our three national strategy aims. Annex 1 sets out a proposed framework for the approval of the Board. The main elements are:

  • to help to establish and steer the work of the Regional Rural Forum, acting as its joint Secretary with the agreement of the Government Office; 
  • help lead action planning for rural revival after foot and mouth disease;
  • ensure that regional strategic guidance will help deliver our three national strategy aims;
  • secure a formal position on the regional assembly ('associate member' or 'adviser') to influence its business;
  • close work with the GO Rural Director to embed rural proofing across GO activities;
  • close work with a Director in the RDA to embed rural proofing across RDA policies and programmes.  

4. Board Members themselves have an important regional leadership role, as part of this. With a nominated lead Board member for each region, the Agency has a vital resource to add to our effectiveness at a regional level. The regional offices already involve Board members in regional work. There may be scope to use Board members more in the regional influencing role as this activity grows, but this may vary from region to region depending on local circumstances and bearing in mind the constraints on Members' time. It is important to continue to take a national overview and one possibility might be to provide a more formal opportunity for Board members from time to time discuss strategic regional issues and to feed back to the rest of the Board their experiences/concerns. This might be done by having a regular regional issues paper to coincide with the annual rural proofing reports which we, central Government Departments and GOs have to produce each year.

5. In addition, the Chairman and Chief Executive should continue their annual visits to RDA chairmen and chief executives. And there are the six-monthly meetings between our Board Members and the RDA rural members.

The proposed regional government White Paper

6. The Government's Manifesto says "In 1997 we said that provision should be made for directly elected regional government to go ahead in regions where people decided in a referendum to support it and where predominately unitary local government is established. This remains our commitment." 

7. There has since been an undertaking to produce a White Paper this Autumn to explain how this commitment will be delivered. Ministers have also said that no decision will be made on removing any existing layers of local government. There is no sign of an early White Paper.

8. A more general  Local Government White Paper is also due to be published in late Autumn of this year. At present, it appears that it will be in two sections: one on local government as a whole; and a separate paper on the more technical aspects of Local Government Finance.  The focus of this White Paper will be on delivery of quality local services and on community leadership. 

9. Both of these White Papers are being produced in a very different financial climate to previous years. The emphasis, therefore, is likely to be on cost neutral changes at the very least. 

What do we want to influence and why?

10. The Agency has an interest in the new regional agenda because of the impact regional bodies will have on the countryside and rural residents and businesses and in particular their impact on spending priorities and planning decisions. We have two roles: to influence development of national government policy and to engage with the regional tier of government via our regional offices. This regional role serves both to influence our own thinking and to ensure regional structures take full account of the needs of rural areas. We do not need to have a view on individual proposals for different forms of regional government (unless there are clear and direct impacts on our responsibilities). But we do want to ensure that any central guidance and activities on the ground have a rural dimension and recognise the needs and opportunities of the whole region. 

11. It is unclear what the Government is seeking to achieve, or what the realistic timetable might be. We are receiving mixed messages on the importance being attached by the Government to this policy area. The current focus on those areas which already have predominantly unitary local government suggests that the Government is wary of starting yet another local government reorganisation. 

12. It is also unclear what the impact of any proposals might be on existing regional structures, particularly the RDAs and the Government Offices. In the meantime there is more of a focus on sub regional groups, particularly the Local Strategic Partnerships currently being created. These are being used by a variety of bodies to channel funds and potentially will have a major say in the allocation of funding for mainstream services. We are currently considering how the Agency can best influence the work of these partnerships. The plethora of strategies and new partnerships alongside local government makes this very difficult for us.

13. We believe we must concentrate on the preparation of regionally influential reports on data (such as the regional state of the countryside reports and regional rural service surveys). We must also develop new ways of rural proofing at a regional level. This will include publishing a bespoke rural proofing checklist to help members of LSPs, and those compiling community strategies, to build a rural dimension into their processes and policies. We cannot afford to try to influence or make an input to each strategy ourselves, except through our formal role in the preparation of local authority development plans.

14. In terms of future structures in the regions, we recommend that we refrain from taking a view on the merits of individual mechanisms, unless they would specifically disadvantage our interests or those or the countryside and rural people. 

Risks of failure and the main ways of guarding against 

15. In dealing with regional groups, we need to emphasise the national nature of our implementation programmes. We can only stimulate and spread best practice by having our feet on the ground; but we do not attempt to operate comprehensive service delivery programmes (other than access to open land). Setting priorities and being clear about what we are seeking to achieve should minimise this risk.

16. As proposals for new forms of regional government are developed, there may be pressure from our local authority partners to support one or other view. Being up front now about our level of interest will help others know where we stand and limit expectations. There could be a risk that any new structures could marginalise our role or even that some of our existing functions such as our successful implementation programmes might be absorbed. Being clear about our national role and demonstrating its benefits should ensure we retain our distinctive function of national champion, leading action for tomorrow's countryside. Finally, as public sector spending is squeezed regional fora could be more likely to focus on more urban areas. Our rural proofing role and national voice will be even more important to ensure the needs of the countryside are not overlooked.

Annex 1

STRATEGY FOR REGIONAL LEADERSHIP

Purpose

The purpose of this note is:

  • to help Regional Directors and their teams determine priorities
  • to provide a benchmark against which to judge success
  • to deliver an appropriate degree of consistency between regions
  • to provide a framework within which to share best practice  

Principles

1. we are a single national organisation with regional staff who help to shape the national programme, then deliver the national programme in the way which is most effective for their region. This makes us distinctively different from the RDA, the regional assembly, an RCC and other regionally focused organisations. Our objectives and strategies are developed at the national level to secure national outcomes. We look for partners in the region to help deliver them.

2. in deciding how to respond to opportunities for regional leadership, we must be  guided by our ability to add value. Our role as rural proofer (essentially asking the right questions) and suggesting links between social, economic and environmental issues, is one which can add value to any area. However we have to be very selective about the areas in which we acquire in depth expertise and funding of a sufficient scale to make a difference. We must not damage our credibility by implying that we can make this depth of contribution to every area. For example, we should jump at the opportunity to meet Chief Constables to discuss rural proofing of crime prevention but not imply that we have real expertise or targeted funding to offer.

Priorities

1. help to establish and steer the work of the Regional Rural Forum, acting as its joint Secretary with the agreement of the Government Office. Output - a highly respected Forum whose influence changes the policies and programmes of regional organisations.

2. lead action planning for rural revival. This is the medium term plan (2-5 years) between emergency measures to halt the FMD rot and longer term reform of CAP etc. Output - an agreed regional action plan which reflects our objectives and priorities.

3. ensure that regional strategic guidance serves the needs of the countryside and those who live and work in rural areas.

4. secure a formal position on the regional assembly ('associate member' or 'adviser') to influence its business. Output - rural issues considered routinely by the Assembly in its scrutiny role.

5. work closely with the GO Rural Director to embed rural proofing across GO activities. Output - annual GO report on rural proofing.

6. work closely with a Director in the RDA to embed rural proofing across the RDAs policies and programmes (manufacturing as important as tourism). Output - an appropriate share of the single pot (no less than available to RDPs in 2001/2) spent on rural areas.

Partnership - and its limits

The achievement of these priorities will require us to work closely in partnership with three key bodies: the Regional Assembly; the Government Office; the RDA. The partnership needs to be cultivated between members (Board), senior management and staff, through regular contact.

A feature of partnership is a certain pooling of identity and resources. The Agency should embrace this enthusiastically - within limits. We must retain our distinctive contribution as a national organisation with regional delivery. 

There is great scope to align our grant programmes so that they are complementary to the activities of others in a joint action plan. For example, a Rural Recovery Plan in which we had been closely involved could be a very influential factor in our grant decisions. However we cannot delegate authority to another organisation for assessing applications or making grants.

Mechanisms

After the regional business plan has been approved, each region should prepare a regional influencing strategy which should set out (inter alia) how the relationship with these key partners should be managed, and specify measurable outputs.