I am speaking, of course, about Conservative Leader David Cameron’s “War on Quangos” announced today. As someone who has generally advocated being “Tough on Quangos, tough on the causes of Quangos”, I am generally supportive of Mr Cameron’s initiative, and one previously announced by Liam Byrne, Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Mr Byrne was formerly Minister for the West Midlands and it is on this region that I want to focus.
However, whilst I agree that we have too much “regional paraphernalia”, here as elsewhere, I do not support wholesale dismantling of this. Indeed, I would have preferred that the Regional Assembly, currently in the process of being abolished by the present Government, had been retained as one of the main instruments of regional policy, but not, I would stress, the only one.
The reason for this is straightforward. Area-based Quangos, as Mr Cameron should be well aware, came to prominence during the reign of Mrs Thatcher in the 1980s, because major urban local authorities, mainly, but not exclusively, Labour-controlled, were regarded as incapable of delivering the scale of regeneration required following the economic re-structuring that occurred during the 1970s. This question of regeneration “capacity” still applies, I would argue, and not just in the major urban areas. Those of us who have dealings with the Shire Counties and District Councils also question whether local government is up to the task of adequately tackling regeneration challenges. Some will respond that this primarily an issue of funding settlements from central government, in which case they should consult Mr Tony Travers of the London School of Economics, who is an expert in this area. However, I’m not so sure.
It seems to me that local government in the West Midlands Shires operates as part of a wider established oligarchy, which includes senior officials from a range of public organisations and key executives from the private sector. In some respects, this arrangement has itself some of the qualities of a Quango, with accompanying lack of transparency and deals done behind closed doors.
The challenges of the present suggest that a more pluralistic approach to regional development is required.This would retain some of the “centres of excellence” associated with Advantage West Midlands (AWM), for instance with regard to the re-development of regionally important investment sites, such as Longbridge. Given AWM’s development role it is not, therefore, appropriate that it should have main responsibility for spatial planning in the region. This should probably fall to a consortium of government agencies, including local authorities, with the Government Office for the West Midlands as lead, notwithstanding currently unsatisfactory policies for housing-based growth.
There is also an important role for more community-based planning – something almost entirely “lost” under New Labour, notwithstanding all the rhetoric around communities, including a supposed government department for these – and for more “bottom-up” (as distinct from top down) approaches to local regeneration. These are usually better value for money and can deliver action on the ground where excessive corporatism (strategic partnerships and like) have patently failed. In short, bring back pump priming !
