Ideally it would be the function of local councillors but given the huge variance in calibre and levels of specialist knowledge now needed, should the new model of unitary councils bring in such new roles?
Image – from Menagerie Theatre’s Trials of Democracy project – spot them outside Cambridge Guildhall this Sat 25 Jan
I’m thinking aloud here due to the fun and games of the latest ugly planning application in Cambridge. Essentially the issue is this: The amount of time, knowledge, effort, and motivation it takes to engage meaningfully in local decision-making on significant issues is out of all proportion to what anyone can get out of it altruistically.
We’re actually very lucky in and around Cambridge in that the calibre of candidates that stand for election and who get elected is generally very high. It’s not unusual to have councillors who are Cambridge University graduates, and/or current academic staff or researchers. One of them – Cllr Sam Carling, was so successful that the electors of North West Cambridgeshire Constituency decided to elect him as their local MP. (Hence his council seat in West Chesterton will be up for election in…just over 3 months time).
But not everywhere is Cambridge, and it’s not unusual for council seats to be uncontested because of a lack of interest from local residents, and a lack of resources and organisation within political parties.
The role of a local councillor, and the knowledge now required, means its hard for anyone to get up to speed with the role without investing a significant amount of time (in what is officially a part-time role) into it. A decade ago at a workshop for potential candidates, council officers told us assembled interested persons to expect to commit 20 hours a week if we wanted to carry out the function well.
We don’t provide for the routes into local democracy that we should be providing
This is where Andy Haldane’s lecture on declining social capital becomes really important. If we want to have a critical mass of high calibre councillors then it figures that there need to be a sufficient pool of high calibre candidates to select from – in which case there need to be enough people willing, able, and knowledgeable within local communities for such persons to emerge. Hence if anyone wants to put those issues to Mr Haldane when he visits Cambridge next month, get your tickets from the Cambs Chambers of Commerce here.
“What’s a public advocate?”
Someone whose role it is to make the case for, and stand up for the interests of the local community and general public in response to a specific policy or development. (My working definition – happy to have it improved).
That should not mean there is only one person per area/locality who can function as such. The model I’m sort of thinking of was similar to when the Tories tried to get out of having a full public inquiry into the Banking Crisis because they did not want their ministers or donors in the city hauled before eminent counsel and grilled as we saw at inquiries with Leveson, on CV19, and on Grenfell Tower where the barristers did a superb job in cross-examining witnesses – especially the hostile ones.
Put simply, each local authority area could establish a pool of specialists who on a freelance/call-off basis could be commissioned by the local authority to act as a public advocate for a community on a case-by-case basis. So for example on a very large and/or complex planning application, someone who specialises in that sort of work could be commissioned to be that advocate, whose functions and responsibilities could include:
- Meeting and listening to local residents about their concerns and issues on the specific application in hand – it would not replace what should be routine councillor casework
- Educate and inform the public so that they are familiar not only with the processes that the application is going through, but ensuring they know who has the legal powers to do what, and where that legal authority comes from
- To stand up in public forums such as a planning committee meeting to make the case on behalf of the community especially where no one from the community feels willing or able to do so themselves
- Help the community access whatever training, education, and support that they might need so that should future similar applications come along, they will be more willing to take on things themselves – so as to avoid creating a dependency culture
Again, it would not simply be a case of one specialist doing everything. One of the outcomes is to increase the knowledge and capacity of the communities so that in the longer term more people feel willing and able to put themselves forward into future civic society roles – such as school or hospital governors, or trustees of local charities. It’s not all about party politics.
“Isn’t there the risk that some residents will order the public advocate to do as they tell them?”
Hence the point about educating the public. This isn’t about those with the loudest voices having a free lawyer or spokesperson to intervene in every other meeting that is going. Furthermore, in reality any rules created for them would prevent such points from being heard or accounted for anyway. The sorts of scenarios things like this could come up in include but are not limited to:
- A large planning application
- A new transport application (cycleway, road, railway line, busway)
- The proposed closure of a community facility
- The withdrawal of a community service
- The creation of new community facilities – helping the public find out what’s available to them and how to come to an agreed decision
It’s not simply about getting a specialist to come in and block every other planning application – and nor is it about making things easier for developers to get their way either.
It might be that there is a very sound case for a planning application to be granted approval, but that the developer has taken liberties and has under-provided for the needs of the community. The role of the public advocate would be to ensure that the developer properly provides for those needs rather than going for an adversarial ‘take it or leave it’. This is also where a public advocate can work closely with those in the community who are most adversely affected by the proposals to see what the best solutions are for them. That sort of working should, in principle provide a strong enough incentive for promoters of developments (whether state or private sector) to come up with much better proposals in the first place rather than having a ‘design and defend’ mindset based on the bare minimum that they can get away with.
Follow me on BSky <- A critical mass of public policy people seem to have moved here
Consider a small donation to help fund my continued research and reporting on local democracy in and around Cambridge.
On tackling loneliness? Opening a new city orchestra and community music school for adults like the Mary Ward Centre in London could go a long way – especially if it was located close to a major public transport interchange. Something that I’d like to see established in Cambridge as a new institution and service
The Cambridge Town Owl 