ConservativeHome's Local Government Blog

Councillors should be the final arbiters of complaints

Cllr Mark Bowen, the Deputy Leader of Conservative run Hounslow Council, on how they have made the complaints procedure in Hounslow quicker, cheaper and more effective.

Save money and improve Complaints Management at the same time?  This is what has been achieved in Hounslow.

In addition to being Deputy Leader of the London Borough of Hounslow since 2006, I also have Lead Member responsibility for Customer Services.  As soon as I took on my portfolio, Complaints Management was the area which I immediately identified as the one in need of most attention.  It had become an Achilles Heel and I wanted to see Hounslow turns things around in this area and build a record of resolving substantially more complaints quicker than before.

As with any other Council, Hounslow has a Complaints Procedure.  Most Councils have a three stage procedure, though some have one that is only two stages.  The general rule of thumb is that the later the stage, the higher the seniority of those responding.

One of the first decisions of the current administration was to reduce the timescales for dealing with complaints:

An even more important way forward was in reconfiguring the Complaints Procedure because I was hugely confident that the introduction of a Cross Party Members Panel at the final stage of the Complaints Procedure would make a significant difference. It would raise the profile of Complaints Management in an unprecedented way and it would also assist in making sure that those who complain get direct answers to their questions (even if, at times, those answers are not what they would like to hear).

A youth charity worker's experience of Labour councils

I've written a piece for The Guardian's Comment is Free website, about Tory proposals to tackle poverty, which Tim has been kind enough to Twitter in praise of. Not all the comments have been supportive but I was interested in the following response. 

RebeccaJT
13 Aug 09, 11:45am (about 4 hours ago)
Hi

I work for a youth charity which has dealings with local authorities of all stripes and has had some involvement with the centre for social justice. I have to say (not being a Tory) that I have been impressed with their progressive stance, and applaud their courage in actually pointing out that the Emperor is in fact not wearing any clothes - Britain is broken, and we are selling the most disenfranchised in our society down the river if we don't admit that.

I agree with Iain Duncan Smith that the voluntary sector is buckling under the weight of a bloated - if well intentioned - Labour administration. It is impossible to get anything done. They are obsessed with 'evidence' and use this as an excuse for not actually doing anything ...

I never thought I'd be a Tory sympathiser but after coming up against Labour Councils where youth teams circulate a memo calling a meeting on a particular issue, and then sit in a room where no one is allowed to speak for an hour (honestly, in silence!!) and then write up the minutes so that if anyone asks they can say 'they had a meeting about it' rather than ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING then I'm all for change. This is despite them having money chucked at them to tackle particular issues and to work in partnership with the third sector, which they seem to treat as a bunch of dangerous hippies, rather than the extremely experienced and solutions focused bunch that we are. They is some astonishing talent out there in charities and social enterprises really, really making a difference to people's lives.

I have read, researched and written extensively on youth crime, teenage pregnancy, social exclusion, poverty of aspiration, social cohesion etc etc etc and without fail poverty is the underlying cause.
The poverty gap has widened more in the last ten years than it has since the Second World War. Britain is failing its most vulnerable - its a disgrace. And disempowering people with this ridiculous nanny state is an assault on human dignity.

I agree that the Tories are right on this one, and whilst I thought I'd never say it I will never vote Labour again.

Cutting red tape in Cambridgeshire

As reported earlier this week Cambridgeshire is among the Councils to have been given an award for reducing bureaucracy. Here the Council leader Cllr Jill Tuck says they enforce rules on business in the least onerous way possible.

Cutting red tape is at the heart of what Conservative-led local government should be all about.

It helps people get the services they need quicker, and helps councils do things for less money.

So I was thrilled when Cambridgeshire County Council picked up an award for cutting red tape through our Trading Standards team.

The award was made for our 'can do' attitude in helping small businesses.

So, for example, rather than the shopkeeper falling foul of the law in not stopping underage alcohol sales, we are actively helping them through community based projects such as our Community Alcohol Partnerships. This helps traders from getting bogged down in red tape as well as improve the quality of life for communities.

Even better, particularly in these recession hit times, is that fact that what we do is helping local businesses. One of our aims through the work we do is help them increase sales, not hit them with red tape which makes it more difficult.

So, for example, we work with shopkeepers and staff from migrant communities to help them stay within the law on sales of international foods, but at the same time help promote their business and the fact that food from these stores is safe and meets the right standards.

Regulation doesn't have to be burdensome. In fact if you adopt our approach, it can help businesses survive and prosper.

Tory Councils cutting red tape

For a Labour Government Quango to be passing judgment on others having too much bureaucracy does remind me a bit of the United Nations deciding the Cuba would be a suitable country to sit pontificating on its Human Rights Council.

Nevertheless I am pleased to see that three Conservative Councils - Bexley, Westminster and Cambridgeshire - have won a "Beacon Award for Cutting Red Tape" sponsored by the Local Better Regulation Office.

Clive Grace, the LBRO chair, said:

"The Beacons awards are often called the Oscars of local government and the parallels are clear – they are very difficult to win and they recognise outstanding work.

"The officers and members of these three councils deserve plaudits for their inspirational and groundbreaking work. In the current economic climate, the support that local authority regulators can provide to business is more important than ever. Cutting red tape is an absolutely essential part of bringing Britain out of the recession."

Eric Pickles: End abuse of surveillance powers by Town Halls

Labour Ministers were attacked today for their plans to give councils new powers to spy on their residents, as Conservatives pledged to end the abuse and misuse of town hall spying powers. In a new policy document, plans are outlined to ban surveillance for all but the most serious criminal offences, to require all surveillance to be approved by a magistrate, and to make councillors directly responsible for any authorisation under the anti-terror laws of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA)

Labour plans to extend town hall snooping: Government Ministers have recently suggested that they are considering new "guidance" to town halls, yet behind the spin, the Labour Government is actually extending the use of RIPA powers. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Communications Data) Order 2003 extended local authority powers, to allow councils to access communications traffic data.

The Government's Interception of Communications Commissioner has now called for councils to "make much more use" of their powers to spy on phone bills and call records. Town hall powers to access communications data are to be increased further under the Government's controversial implementation of the EU Data Retention Directive, which will include access to the planned 'Big Brother' database of electronic communications.

Conservatives today revealed three case studies to illustrate the abuse of these anti-terror powers:

• Pot plants: Guildford Borough Council in Surrey used RIPA to spy on a garden centre and plant nursery to see if they were selling pot plants without 'change of use' planning permission.

• Unlicensed parrots: Mendip District Council sent in undercover operatives, using "covert surveillance methods", into a fair to see if birds were on sale without a licence under the Pet Animals Act 1951.

• Walking your dog: Hambleton District Council routinely uses covert video cameras to spy on dog walkers and their dogs on public land, this is simply justified because "the dog warden is unable to be in attendance 24 hours a day, 7 days a week".

Should councils employ political advisers?

Some of my best friends are, or have been, employed as "political advisers" to Conservative Councils. I hope they will not take offence by my suggestion that such posts should be abolished and their talents released for more productive uses.

When we swept to power in Hammersmith and Fulham among the earliest decisions made was to "delete" the ten  posts of  personal advisers to Cabinet Members saving £300,000 a year.  The Council leader  Stephen Greenhalgh  has made  plenty of other savings but this is one that he cites in his article for this week's First magazine.

We could have simply replaced the batch of Labour courtiers and cronies with our own. But we didn't. That helped to impress the Council staff that we were serious about cutting the Council Tax. It also meant the Council worked better. One senior officer told me it was a relief to be able to pick up the phone and speak directly to a councillor rather than have to go through an intermediary.

Why are Councils funding a nannying promoter of the Metric system?

Cllr Daniel Moylan, the Deputy Leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea on how Councils are giving £3 million to a body called LACORS which pushes for enforced Metrication and further regulation.

The Local Authorities Coordinators of Regulatory Services (nice touch, that: "regulatory services") is nominally responsible to a board of elected Councillors (with a Conservative Chairman) drawn from the whole of the United Kingdom. It spends about £3 million a year (much of it taken from English and Welsh authorities' Revenue Support Grant that would otherwise go into Town Hall coffers) and seems fully bought into an agenda of increasing regulation driven by professionals who make their living from telling us what to do. Its newest slogan is that "the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and local authorities need to continue to work together to deliver a new strategy for a safer and healthier Britain". Is that what most people - and most Conservatives - really believe and want?

LACORS has been at the forefront of the plan to abolish our traditional weights and measures. Even the occasionally useful work it does (for example its recent investigation of hospital weighing-scales, which found that a third of them did not give the right weight) is marred by insinuating another call to abolish dual Imperial/metric displays.

LACORS includes in its Mission Statement a commitment to "lobbying for positive changes in legislation, policy and funding that serves the best interest of local government". But are the "best interests of local government" the same as the best interests of a population increasingly harassed by professional regulators? Perhaps we could invite LACORS to undertake a full review of what "regulatory services" could be abolished, so preparing the way for a Conservative government that we can hope will be keen to make a Churchillian bonfire of regulations?