West and South Dorset Green Party have sent the following written response to the consultation on the proposed creation of a Dorset Unitary Authority.
The Green Party is fundamentally opposed to the huge, ideologically-driven cuts imposed by the Conservative government on local authorities, including Dorset. However, putting the cuts and their damaging impact aside, we firmly believe that there is a longstanding and strong case for local government reform. This view is based on the recognised need for greater local democracy, accountability, public engagement and participation and for greater efficiency and better services through removing anomalies in the way in which local councils are currently organised. For example, the current separation of housing (under the district councils) from social services (under the county council) is anomalous and that the bringing together of these services under a single authority would have considerable potential for improving the public’s experience of these services and would save money. Local government would benefit from being more joined up.
As was reflected in the large support for the Public First group’s successful campaign for a referendum which has led to an imminent change from a cabinet model to a committee system for West Dorset District Council, there is a strongly held feeling that local government in Dorset is currently too remote and unaccountable. The Green Party sees these current proposals for local government reorganisation as a golden opportunity to reform the culture of local government so that the public feel more engaged, empowered, better informed and disposed to participate in much greater numbers. It is a central plank of Green Party policy that all decisions should be taken at the lowest viable level, i.e. as close as possible to those who will be most affected by any decision.
We support, in principle, the proposal for two unitary authorities in Dorset. For reasons of democracy, we argue that the decision concerning which of the proposed options should be adopted should seriously take into account the majority view of people living in East Dorset and Christchurch, the two districts where the impact of the final outcome is most problematic. However, with regard to both minimising funding cuts and creating sustainable democratic structures, we put the weight of our support behind option 2b.
We are very concerned that the information that is being given to the local public for this consultation process is highly inadequate. To make a secure, informed choice, the public has the democratic right to far more detail about the possible structure and organisational culture of unitary authorities. For example, earlier in the year we understand that consideration was being given to the establishment of Local Area Boards. Is this this still the case? If it is, how will they be organised and why is there no reference to them in Reshaping your councils, your consultation document? In this document you state that the reforms will base “services around the way people live their lives and identify with a particular area, and how businesses operate”. What does this mean in practice? What will be the role of town and parish councils in this re-organisation? And how many divisions and councillors might there be in each authority? Even if questions of this nature cannot currently be answered in the formal consultation, they should at least have formed part of a preamble giving the public a much greater sense of what might be possible.
Finally, irrespective of whatever option is put in place, we believe that genuine democracy in local government in Dorset will never be realised until there is reform of the voting system in council elections. Several existing county councillors, for example, were elected with less than 50% of the votes cast. Only when we have a voting system based on proportional representation will the people of Dorset be able to feel that their vote can have a genuine impact on the outcome of elections and that those elected genuinely represent the wishes of the majority of voters.
Kelvin Clayton
