Ronnie Hinds has a proposal for managing local authorities, John Clark says large city-based unitaries do not work for rural areas, and John Bullock believes that anyone standing for parliament should have a decade of local experience
Your editorial on local government (Editorial, 14 April) concludes by pointing up the tension between the economic benefits of scale claimed by proponents of large councils and the community benefits of small councils closer to those they represent and serve. After a lifetime career as an officer in local government, and having chaired two commissions overseeing council finances and electoral boundaries, I have come to wonder if the answer is to separate the council (ie those elected to represent their constituents) from the organisation that is responsible for delivering local services to people and communities (ie the council employees).
The present system treats these as one and the same, but their functions are different. I believe it would be possible to create a different relationship, whereby the elected, political body effectively commissioned services from the delivery organisation, run entirely on managerial lines. This would sever the current one-to-one relationship between them and allow a number of elected councils to be served by one delivery agency, holding out the prospect of achieving the economic benefits of larger operational scale and the political benefits of closeness between electors and elected.
