TAKING STOCK OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY ASSOCIATIONS
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1984.tb00552.x |
| Date | 01 June 1984 |
| Published date | 01 June 1984 |
TAKING STOCK
OF
THE
LOCAL
AUTHORITY
ASSOCIATIONS
~~
K.
ISAAC-HENRY
This article examines the achievements
of
the local authority associations in the period
from
1974
to
the present.
In
particular, it considers whether the associations have met
the major objectives set by their predecessors. The conclusion indicates that there are a
number
of
factors which have inhibited the achievement
of
these objectives.
Two
of
the main inhibiting factors are the close connection between the associations
and central government, and their readiness to respond to every move the centre makes.
The associations might now consider adopting
a
weaker connection and a more
discriminating response in relation
to
central government.
INTRODUCTION
It is a widely held view in local government circles that over the last few years
local government has been subjected to an unprecedented attack in an attempt
to shift any vestige of power the locality may have to the centre. Indeed there
are those who believe that in the last
four
years, successive Secretaries
of
State
in the
DOE
have conducted a crusade against local government and the people
who serve in it
(Municipal
Review
1982). Under such attack local authorities look
to their associations
for
protection. The primary aim
of
the Association of County
Councils
(AcC),
Association
of
District Councils
(ADC)
and Association
of
Metropolitan Authorities
(M)
is to promote and protect the interests of member
authorities. However, some critics believe that they have failed to achieve this aim
and have not been as effective as they could be in resisting the onward rush
of
centralism. They argue that the Local Government, Planning and Land Bill
(1979-80), the Housing Act of 1980 and the Local Government Finance Act
of
1982,
all
of which were said to
pose
grave threats to the local government system, passed
into the statute book without the associations making major amendments to them.
Regardless
of
whether these criticisms are valid, the associations have been placed
under great strains by the stream of very sensitive legislation which has issued
forth since 1980. These strains have been visible
in
the withdrawals, and threats of
Dr
K.
Isaac-Henry is a Lecturer in the Department
of
Government
and
Economics, City
of
Birmingham
Polytechnic.
Public Administration
Vol.
62
Summer
1984 (129-146)
0
1984
Royal Institute
of
Public Administration
130
K.
ISAAC-HENRY
withdrawals, from the
ACC’
and in the less than cordial relationship between the
ACC
and
AMA.
In
the light of these criticisms, and given the fact that the associations are now
ten years old and that reform of some magnitude is’about
to
take place
(DOE
1983),
it would appear an appropriate moment to take stock of the local authority associa-
tions. The
AMA
and
ACC
have themselves recently undertaken internal reviews
in an attempt to pacdy disenchanted groups as well as to improve their effectiveness
(ACC
1983a;
AMA
1983b). They both appear
to
be satisfied with their organiza-
tions, although they feel that member authorities could become more involved
and that communications between members and associations could be improved.
At the outset it could be argued that these reviews, as they appeared
in
the
associations’ own journals, did not address themselves to some of the more
important issues which have given rise to these criticisms.
For
example, little was
said concerning their relationships with each other, with central government and
with the different political groupings within and between associations.
Any
realistic
evaluation of their role and activities must first look at the objectives as set out
for them in 1974, with a view to seeing whether these have been or are being
achieved. As would
be
expected, the objectives of the associations
are
wider than
the statements contained in their constitutions. In creating the
ACC, ADC
and
AMA
in 197314, the Association
of
Municipal Corporations
(AMC),
County Councils
Association
(CCA),
Rural District Councils Association
(RDCA)
and Urban District
Councils Association
(UDCA),
both explicitly and implicitly set out certain aims
which
it
was hoped would result in an improvement in the effectiveness and
influence of new associations when compared with themselves.
THE
1974
OBJECTIVES
Up to 1972 there was a tendency for both government ministers and academics
to attribute great power and influence to the existing local authority associations.
Those (few) writers who commented on their work tended to judge their effec-
tiveness by their activities in relation to local government reform: they seem to
have agreed that the lack of reform between 1940 and 1972 was the result of the
associations successfully bringing pressure to bear on governments. However, a
detailed study of the issue of reform
up
to
1972 has shown that this readiness to
portray the associations as very powerful pressure groups was misconceived. The
failure to reform local government was due not to the influence and power
of
the
associations
-
which were continuously divided over the issue
-
but to successive
government’s interest (Isaac-Henry 1980; 1975). The associations themselves had
no illusions about the limitations of their influence, nor about the weaknesses they
had to overcome
if
they were to be effective. In 1966, for example, sections of
the
AMC
were suggesting that
if
the main function of that body was to influence
governments on behalf of member authorities and to develop and initiate policies,
then
it
had failed to play its role
(AMC
1967). The associations, it was said, suffered
1
Derbyshire
and
Avon
withdrew
from
the
ACC
in
1981
and
1982
respectively.
To continue reading
Request your trial