Tag Archives: Accountability

How councils can strengthen civic engagement

Robin Hambleton

Robin originally published this article in Local Government Chronicle on 10/1/24

Given the widespread rise in societal tensions local councils can do more to promote effective participation in civic affairs, writes the emeritus professor of city leadership, University of the West of England, Bristol.

Just before Christmas, I attended a rather startling Bristol City Council meeting.  On 12 December 2023, the lord mayor had to suspend proceedings not once, but twice.

Social tensions in the chamber were so high that he had to ask city council security staff to move into the public gallery to help calm the febrile atmosphere.  Why were tensions so high in Bristol?

The two issues that caused such strife related to, firstly, a call from a group of Bristol citizens, many of whom clearly knew people living in Gaza City, who asked the city council to advocate a ceasefire in the Israeli/Palestine conflict, and, secondly, statements from citizens living in the Barton Hill high-rise flats, who were forced to evacuate in November because of alarming concerns about the structural safety of their homes, who asked if they would be able to return home for Christmas.

These two enormously important public issues clearly transcended party politics.  I was able to see from my vantage point in the public gallery above the council chamber that councillors from all parties sympathised to a very great extent with the views expressed by the many animated citizens sitting, and at times standing and shouting, next to me.

Participatory and representative democracy

Local authorities across the country should be praised for developing, over the years, many new ways of blending participatory democracy with representative democracy. 

Innovations with, for example, citizens’ assemblies, participatory budgeting, and co-production of public services have expanded.  Organisations like the Local Government Association and the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny have played a helpful role in facilitating the sharing of practical advice about these experiences.   

In some cases, local authorities have attempted to revitalise their full council meetings by creating space for citizen voices to contribute.  Thus, in 2000 Bristol City Council introduced a public forum space at the beginning of each council meeting during which individual citizens can submit public statements and/or ask public questions.

This approach – and similar practices have been developed by other local authorities – has the benefit of enabling citizens to contribute directly to local civic discourse.   Innovations of this kind can certainly enliven local democracy, but they also create challenges.

The rituals and ceremonies of council meetings have their basis in history.  The mayor, or lord mayor, usually enters with the mace, a symbol of the mayor’s authority as the ‘first citizen’ of the locality.  Council meetings express, then, a reassuring continuity. 

Enhancing citizen participation

Given the rising societal tensions now facing British society, I offer here three suggestions on how councillors could enhance citizen participation in civic affairs.

New settings for civic dialogue.

First, local authorities can become much more active in co-creating new civic spaces in which citizens and, indeed, young people who may not yet be recognised as formal citizens, can express their views on policy priorities.  Looking ahead, the ‘democratic offer’ that an elected local authority presents to citizens needs to break new ground.

In Bristol, under the leadership of Mayor Marvin Rees, the city council has, in the period since 2016, developed a prize-winning approach to inclusive city governance, known as the Bristol One City approach.

This strategy has been successful in bringing a very wide range of civic voices (public, private, trade union, non-profit and community) into the problem-solving capacity of our city. 

The city gatherings, which are held twice a year and attract over 300 participants, enable diverse voices, including the voices of young people, to participate directly in the governance of Bristol.  They not only revise and update the 30-year One City Plan and decide on top priorities for civic action in the forthcoming year, but they also initiate numerous citizen-led initiatives to tackle specific policy concerns.

Experiment with existing council meetings.

Second, local authorities should revisit the way they construct and conduct meetings, including their full council meetings.  Is it worth asking if the council meetings in your authority are readily perceived by citizens as truly welcoming spaces? 

For example, who decides on the agendas for council meetings?  Do citizens have a voice in this process?  Do agendas focus on the needs of the locality across the board, or the narrow business of the council?  Does your council have a public forum space within each council meeting enabling citizens to stand up and ask a question that the council is committed to answering in writing?

Strengthen the power of elected local authorities.

The civic vibrancy of a locality, as well as the potential for successful local economic development, is shaped to a very significant degree by the amount of political and fiscal power exercised by the elected council.

Countries where local government has solid constitutional protection and significant fiscal power are far more successful than the UK, not just in achieving public policy objectives, but also in fostering active participation in local affairs. 

In Sweden, for example, the voter turnout in local elections has been running at around 80% for many years, which compares with an average figure for the UK of around 32%. The evidence from international research shows that countries that value local democracy and encourage citizen participation in civic affairs, also deliver far better economic, social, and environmental outcomes. 

In 2024, given a General Election is looming, UK citizens should be encouraged to ask candidates for political office in Westminster: ‘What are your specific proposals for boosting the power of local councils and enlivening civic democracy in our country?’

 Robin Hambleton, emeritus professor of city leadership, the University of the West of England, Bristol.  His latest book, Cities and Communities Beyond Covid-19. How Local Leadership Can Change Our Future for the Better, was published in 2020:

https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/cities-and-communities-beyond-covid-19

The original article can be found here: https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/governance-and-structure/robin-hambleton-how-councils-can-strengthen-civic-engagement-10-01-2024/

Greg Clark should return to his old devolution diagnosis

Robin Hambleton published this piece in Local Government Chronicle on 26/7/22


The new levelling up secretary’s 2003 analysis of over-centralisation in the UK could be used to make a lasting mark on the future governance of our country, writes Robin Hambleton, emeritus professor of city leadership at the University of the West of England, Bristol.

I send congratulations to Greg Clark on his appointment as secretary of state for levelling up, housing and communities earlier this month. For those of us who care about local democracy in our country the good news is that, early in his career, Mr Clark demonstrated a well-honed and sophisticated understanding of the dangers of centralising too much power in Whitehall.

In 2003, when he was Director of Policy for the Conservative party, he co-wrote, with James Mather, a blistering attack on Labour’s centralised approach to government. Their report, Total Politics. Labour’s Command State, provides a lucid analysis of the four main drivers of centralisation: targets imposed from Whitehall, centrally controlled funding, bureaucratic audit and inspection, and rigid terms and conditions.

Lost wisdom

Clark and Mather concluded that it was essential to create local communities where: ‘Local government is directly accountable to ordinary people, not lost in the complexities of Whitehall’ (p. 100). Sounds good.
The bad news is that, when he was communities’ secretary in 2015-16, Mr Clark seemed to lose sight of the wisdom articulated by his younger self.

In practice, and this was startling to witness, he presided over, what can only be described as, an extraordinary super-centralisation of power in Whitehall – one that has not only ripped power away from ‘ordinary people’, but also landed local leaders in a bewilderingly complex process of ongoing, and entirely wasteful, negotiations of ‘complexities’ with civil servants in Whitehall.

Take the misnamed Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016. Those involved in setting up the new ‘combined authorities’ in 2017, and ever since, were required to engage in the preparation of Parliamentary Orders documenting, in mind-boggling detail, how each combined authority would operate.

Devolution in name only

These new arrangements, and the whole ‘devolution deal’ approach that Mr Clark promoted, extended ministerial control over the minute details of how individual places in particular parts of England would be governed. It made the Blair Labour Government’s approach to local government of the 2000s appear almost entirely hands off.

The central problem with the Conservative government’s approach to devolution in England during this last ten years or so is that it is not, in fact, devolution at all. On the basis of their own unpublished preferences, ministers have been picking and choosing which localities are to benefit from these various deals. Ministers decide the criteria, ministers decide the content of each deal, and ministers decide what funding will flow to the selected areas. To suggest that this model of decision-making has anything to do
with devolution represents a misuse of the English language.

Various academic studies have shown that this super-centralisation of decision-making in Whitehall, which is entirely out of step with other western democracies, has not only done great damage to local government, but also paved the way for central government practices that border on the corrupt.

For example, it was claimed by ministers that the Towns Fund, announced in 2019, and the Levelling Up Fund, launched in 2021, were designed to allocate billions of pounds to localities selected on the basis of local need. However, independent academic analysis by, for example, Chris Hanretty at the University of London, demonstrates, in detail, how ministers took decisions that were, in practice, biased to favour Conservative marginal seats.

Rebalancing power

His important paper, ‘The pork barrel politics of the Towns Fund’, published in the respected academic journal, Political Quarterly, last year concluded that:

‘The findings call into question ministers’ commitment, under the Nolan principle, to take decisions “impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias.”’(1)

This finding is explosive. Go past the diplomatic academic language and recognise that rigorous academic research demonstrates that Conservative ministers clearly did not act impartially and that, moreover, they paid scant regard to scientific evidence relating to social needs.

Whilst the title of his department now no longer includes the words ‘local government’, a stain that will remain on the Conservative Party until the department is renamed, the most important challenge now facing Mr Clark is to consider how to level up, or rebalance, power between local and central government.

The international evidence shows that countries with very strong systems of local governance have coped far better with current challenges, including the COVID-19 pandemic, than centralised states. I explore this theme in my recent book, Cities and Communities Beyond Covid-19. How Local Leadership Can Change Our Future for the Better, and I also explain how to rebalance power in the UK.

The uncertainties posed by the current Conservative Party leadership contest certainly provide troubling challenges for Mr Clark. But he has an opportunity. I encourage him to revisit his 2003 clear-sighted analysis of local/central relations and take steps to bolster the political and fiscal power of all elected local authorities in the UK.


1) Hanretty C. (2021) ‘The pork barrel politics of the Towns Fund’, Political Quarterly, Vol. 92 (1), 7-13.

Robin Hambleton is Emeritus Professor of City Leadership at the University of the West of England, Bristol. His latest book, Cities and Communities Beyond Covid-19. How Local Leadership Can Change Our Future for the Better, was published in 2020. https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/cities-and-communities-beyond-covid-1

Leading the Inclusive City

In a new, international book Robin Hambleton examines the role of civic leadership in fostering the creation of inclusive cities.  The analysis presented in Leading the Inclusive City suggests that place-based leadership can make an important difference to the quality of life in a city, notwithstanding the pressures of global forces.  Innovation Story 2 in the book, which draws on the Bristol Civic Leadership Project research, provides insights on the impact of the mayoral model of governance in Bristol.  More information:

http://www.policypress.co.uk/display.asp?K=9781447304968

Devo Manc and the Osbornification of public policy

Far from being a positive example of decentralisation, Robin Hambleton argues that George Osborne’s proposals for ‘devo Manc’ are the latest example of ‘centralisation on steroids’.
You can read the argument in full on the LSE British Politics and Policy blog.