Otherwise engaged

The “duty to involve” is linked to proposals to remove the current requirement for independent examination of statements of community involvement (SCIs). It is proposed that local authorities will work together with local strategic partnerships to produce one SCI with a wider remit, including local development frameworks (LDFs), local area agreements and sustainable community strategies.

As a result, greater integration would be achieved between these strategy documents and there would be less duplication of effort. Planning would move from being a peripheral, reactive and regulatory function to being central to the local authority’s long-term decision making process. The duty to involve would, in effect, replace the independent examination of SCIs in obliging local authorities to consider how they consult their communities.

The duty to involve is proposed to apply to all “best value” authorities – for example, local authorities and health authorities; and it would become a statutory duty with the enactment of the draft Local Government and Public Involvement in Health bill, which is now making its way through parliament. The duty would require best value authorities to consider whether it is appropriate to inform the public of, consult the public on, or involve the public in, the exercise of its functions. The authority must “take such steps as it considers appropriate” to secure that involvement.

Wording gives flexibility to local authorities

The wording of the duty – ie, “where a best value authority considers it appropriate” – gives a welcome degree of flexibility in terms of how it is applied to different functions by different authorities. However, many authorities are likely to seek some form of guidance on how to implement their duty. The DCLG is currently working with the Community Development Foundation, the Youth Foundation and local authorities in developing guidance on implementing the duty. This guidance will have significant weight as the duty to involve includes a statutory requirement to have regard to such guidance. However, the guidance is likely to emphasise that decisions on when, how and who to consult will lie with people at the local level.

Poor transition management could mean missed opportunities

Procedurally, these changes could streamline processes. The Planning Inspectorate has now examined over 50% of SCIs and most have been found sound. This could save the inspectorate’s time on the remaining SCIs. However, if the transition is not well managed, it could place local authorities in an awkward position in terms of coordinating consultation on their local development frameworks with other strategies. By the time the requirement for independent examination of SCIs is removed, many local authorities may have missed the opportunity to create a wider scope of SCI encompassing their other strategies.

Broader focus could enable greater community influence

This broader focus of SCI has various implications. It could mean that is it less focused on planning issues. For example, will a consultation on urban extensions to settlements be diluted among other community issues such as environmental improvement and affordable housing? Will the community be able to understand the shape and importance of the LDF if it is merged with other strategies? Do they need to? On the other hand, the broader focus could enable the community to understand and influence their environment in a more comprehensive manner than they might do at present. Community aspirations that might be found in a sustainable community strategy could be given a practical grounding and method for delivery through the LDF.

A ‘living’ method of redress for the community

With more autonomy at the local level, it will be important that community involvement strategies and procedures are transparent and accountable. The best value regime is likely to include new “citizen perspective indicators” which will focus on the outcomes of consultation rather than the methods. This will mean that best value authorities will have to annually audit the outcomes of community involvement and consultation. The proposed “community call for action”, which empowers communities and councillors to tackle local issues, will also give the community a clear course of redress, should anyone be dissatisfied with how an authority is implementing its duty to involve. While the broader focused SCI will not be subject to an independent examination, the proposed methods of audit and redress are more active throughout the life of the document.

Overall, the success of the duty to involve will be determined by the strength of the guidance to be issued by the DCLG and by the innovation of those who use it. Hopefully, the guidance will encourage authorities to provide feedback to the community about how their involvement has influenced projects and wider decision-making.