Yorkshire and Humber
Green Party Response to the West Yorkshire Devolution Deal
Question 1
Do you agree or
disagree with our proposals for the revised arrangements for the Combined
Authority, as set out above and in the Scheme, in particular the proposed
arrangements for a Mayor, Mayoral Combined
Authority, and the councils, working together?
Strongly Disagree
This is not real
devolution.
The Elected Mayor does not represent real devolution. It is
simply replacing a remote Westminster politican with a remote individual who is
supposed to represent 2.3 million people which they cannot. When mayoral models
have been put before local people in referenda before they have rejected. Now
it is proposed to impose a Mayor on West Yorkshire without a referendum.
The Mayoral Combined
Authority – Some members are more equal than others
The proposed West Yorkshire Combined Authority will have 11
members. 5 of these members will most likely be the Leaders of the constituent
Councils. These will be Councillors who have been elected by the unfair first
past the post electoral system unlike the WYCA mayor. Having members of the
same body elected by different electoral systems is bizarre and perverse. The
proposed 3 additional members will also be Councillors elected under the first
past the post system but these places will be allocated on the basis of the
number of Councillors in political groups on the constituent councils not on
the basis of popular share of the vote. We believe that West Yorkshire should
have an Assembly like the GLA in London elected by Proportional Representation.
If it is good enough for London why not West Yorkshire?
The 3 additional constituent council members on the Mayoral
Combined Authority appointed for political balance should be referred to as
“Second Class Members” as their support is not required to pass the Mayor’s
Spatial Development Strategy, the designation of land for a Mayoral Combined
Authority Area, the compulsory purchase of land, decisions that could incur a
financial liability on a constituent council or any matter pertaining to the
Mayoral Combined Authority’s Constitution. Using the same logic the 5 members
appointed by each constituent Council should be referred to as “Premier Class
Members” as their support is required to approve the above matters.
All Councillors need
to be represented on the Mayoral Combined Authority
Over 8% of elected Councillors in West Yorkshire are from
parties other than Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats. All these
Councillors are members of the LGA Independent Group. Current proposals would
mean that these Councillors and the communities they represent would have no
representation at all on the Mayoral Combined Authority. Provision should be
made on the board to represent all groupings represented by LGA Political
Groups including the LGA Independent Group which consists of Independent and
Green Party Councillors. We propose an additional member for political balance
to ensure Councillors who are members of the LGA Independent Group, and
therefore the people who vote for them, are represented.
The proposals for 2
Deputy Mayors are undemocratic
The proposal for the Mayor to be able to simply appoint 2 paid
Deputies is undemocratic and will most likely be given to ‘Party worthies’ as a
form of patronage. If it follows the model of the West Yorkshire Police and
Crime Commissioner the Deputy Mayors positions will attract an allowance of at
least £50k/year with no democratic mandate. The Leader of Kirklees Council has
stated at a Kirklees Scrutiny meeting that a Deputy Mayor position will be
taken by a Leader of one of the Constituent Councils. There is no reference to
this in the Governance Review document.
Mayoral Compulsory
Purchase and Development Area powers should need approval of a meeting of the
constituent Full Council
The Mayor will have the power to compulsory purchase land
within each Combined Authority area and set up Mayoral Development areas.
Before any of these powers are put into effect they should require the approval
of a vote in Full Council in the constituent Council affected.
As with the Compulsory Purchase powers we strongly believe
that proposals to establish a Mayoral Development area should also require Full
Council approval.
If London can have
the GLA why can’t West Yorkshire have an elected assembly?
It is not at all clear that powers will not be taken away
from Councils and given to the Mayoral Combined Authority - the exact opposite
of devolution.
It is our view, for Devolution to work in this area it needs
to have a representational assembly elected by proportional representation to
cover the whole Yorkshire region with similar powers to those of the Scottish
Parliament or the Welsh Assembly. Yorkshire has a population somewhat greater
than Scotland, and significantly larger that Wales. What’s good enough for
Scotland & Wales is good enough for Yorkshire.
Specific Governance
proposals
·
Allocation of places to be based on LGA Groups -
Greens and Independent councillors would all fall under the LGA Independent
Grouping rather than being treated as small parties or individuals.
·
There should be 4 balancing members on the
Mayoral Combined Authority. This would create a more balanced authority giving
10 voting members. 4 balancing members would currently result in 2
Conservative, 1 Lib-Dem and 1 LGA Independent Group members.
·
Equal voting rights for all Mayoral Combined
Authority members on all matters not reserved to the Mayor. The proposed
structure creates 3 classes of voting member.
There is no justification for the Mayor and the balancing members to be
excluded from key decisions, and there should be only 1 class of voting member
on Combined Authority decisions.
·
In the absence of an Elected Assembly there
should be all member assembly from the constituent councils for key decisions -
As far as possible all elected members should be involved in the decisions that
will shape and determine our shared future.
Question 2
Do you support or
oppose this proposal to confer transport functions and new transport related
functions to a West Yorkshire Mayor and mayoral combined authority?
Disagree
Additional Transport
funding should simply be passed down to each constituent Council
While we would welcome some of the potential powers that
would be granted to the Elected Mayor in relation to Public Transport and
access to funding, we believe that Government should simply devolve this
funding and powers to the Local Authorities without requiring the establishment
of a new undemocratic Mayoral Authority.
Transport funding
should not be used to support higher carbon emissions
The Key Route Network proposed could involve the
establishment of new roads encouraging car use and destroying valued green
corridors. This would also be inconsistent with WYCA’s commitment to have a
zero carbon economy by 2038. It might be noted that while WYCA have stated a
target of 2038, Leeds City Council, via a motion of Council, set a target date
of 2030 – We believe that within the boundary of Leeds the Elected Mayor, if
brought in, should implement the Zero-Carbon economy by the 2030 date.
We would oppose the use of funding on any projects that
would enable expansion at Leeds Bradford Airport by the Mayor and the Mayoral
Combined Authority. Any such funding would be contrary to reaching Zero-Carbon.
We acknowledge that delivering a mass transit system has
long been the plan for Leeds City Region, and aligns with the move towards
becoming Zero Carbon. However, the need to progress at pace to achieve modal transport
shifts in order for Leeds to reach its Zero Carbon target of 2030 may require
the mass transit system ambition to be revisited. Funding is needed now to
develop an effective and responsive bus system, the means for all transport to
be Zero Carbon and to greatly increase active travel. Planning for low carbon
transport is no longer good enough; travel needs to be Zero Carbon, and this
must include ensuring that the electricity for electric vehicles is generated
from renewable sources. We welcome the plans for improvements at Leeds city
station as long as the modal shift is to Zero Carbon transport.
Question 3
Do you support or
oppose this proposal to confer skills and employment functions to a West
Yorkshire mayoral combined authority?
Agree with some reservations
While we would argue that Adult Education – lifelong
learning – is about more than those outcomes linked to employability and the
minor extensions into Community Learning covered by the current AEB, the
question asks only about the current system.
We are conscious that levels of participation in the
Yorkshire & the Humber region in the forms of Adult Education covered by
the AEB at 30%, are only just above the lowest level nationally (29% in the
South West)
There is a concern about the unpredictability of funding
levels, which have seen a 45% fall over the last ten years. Clearly if the
mayoral region is to plan for provision in the long term it needs assurance
that funding will reflect levels of commitment made and increase at the very least
to cover the inflationary costs.
We are conscious that the administrative and procurement
processes that have operated at a national level have shown great weaknesses
that have undermined provider confidence. We would want to see devolution of
the budget linked to the power to simplify rules, make required outcomes
clearer and support provider confidence. The devolution of the budget has
promise, but only if the administration can be simplified and made more
transparent. If devolution is to mean anything it must include devolution of
decision making about the outcomes wanted in the region.
The region as a whole, and the West Yorkshire region in
particular have great potential in building the new green economic order that
is needed. There is a strong skills base that can be built on in the provision
of training, and this development should take place not just in the context of
the 2038 Zero carbon Agenda target of the WYCA, but also reflect local
commitments, such as those in Leeds to a 2030 target.
As such we would favour further devolution of the budget to
the five constituent authorities of the sub-region and not just to the WY
mayor, and for the opportunity for lifelong learning to become an offer that is
available very locally, for example from community centres or schools.
Question 4
Do you support or
oppose this proposal to confer housing and planning functions to a West
Yorkshire Mayor and mayoral combined authority?
Disagree
Planning decisions
should be taken at a local level
We do not support the granting of any land assembly or
planning powers to the Elected Mayor, these should be held by the appropriate
Local Authority, as those councillors have the local knowledge to be able to
make these decisions. Clearly, it is our view if this function were to be
granted to the Elected Mayor and, we note that the local authority will have a
veto, we would like to put in the safeguard that any decision taken by the
Elected Mayor in this area should have to be endorsed by both the Executive
Board and a meeting of the full Council of that particular metropolitan
authority.
The Mayoral Combined
Authority should be able to suspend the ‘Right to Buy’
One function we would like devolved to a local level is the
power to suspend the Right to Buy scheme. We have seen a massive reduction in
Council Housing at a time of high demand for income particularly for the
millions left behind in the policy push over the last 40 years towards home
ownership. Not everybody can own a home and we need a secure affordable option
for the millions who cannot. Suspending
or preferably abolishing the Right to Buy would boost the business case for
Councils wanting to build new affordable homes.
The power we need is
to insist on higher energy efficiency standards for buildings
The Mayor will not have powers to insist on higher building
standards in the region such as Passivhaus for all new build. This would be
compatible with WYCA’s stated commitment to a Zero Carbon Economy by 2038 but
is a power that we won’t have.
We need a 2030 Target
for the West Yorkshire Zero Carbon Economy
We strongly believe that the Mayoral Combined Authority
should set a new, more ambitious target for a Zero Carbon Economy by 2030 in
line with the conclusions of the report of the United Nations Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change. This would help support our argument for stronger
housing and planning policies either at the local or regional level.
Question 5
Do you support or
oppose this proposal to confer Police and Crime Commissioner functions to a
West Yorkshire Mayor?
Strongly oppose
Police and Crime
functions are even more unaccountable under the Mayoral Combined Authority.
The appointment of a highly paid, unelected Deputy Mayor to
lead on the Policing function, however, just makes matters worse. It will undoubtedly put an unelected
politician in a role where the people scrutinising them will have a democratic
mandate (albeit through FPTP), but they will not.
Question 6
Do you support or
oppose this proposal to confer additional finance functions on a West Yorkshire
Mayor and mayoral combined authority?
Strongly oppose
No taxation without
adequate representation and scrutiny.
Our opposition to these additional powers is due to the lack
of a suitable democratic mandate as we have detailed in our answer to question
1 and/or the lack of suitable scrutiny and powers to limit the powers of the
Mayor by a democratically elected Assembly.
The power to charge a precept for policing would mean that
the funding gained could be the responsibility of an unelected functionary and
or ‘Party Worthy’.
Question 7
Are there any
comments you would like to make that you do not feel you have addressed in your
response?
What about the
challenge of Climate Change?
The West Yorkshire Authorities Governance Review document
highlights the major challenges to the sub region. It includes growth,
productivity, diversity, innovation and trade but Climate Change is not
identified as a challenge bizarrely. The self-declared target of having a Zero
Carbon Economy in just 18 years’ time is a significant challenge but it is
concerning that it has not been included here. For the record the Green Party
believes that our target should be 2030 not 2038 in line with the evidence from
climate scientists.
What about a
resilient economy?
Another significant challenge highlighted by the COVID19
crisis is the need for a resilient economy that is less affected by global
factors such as international trade, the money markets and financial speculation.
A more resilient economy would have an emphasis on local
production for local need, more locally owned and managed businesses trading
with each other ensuring money remains within the regional economy. This is not
identified as a significant challenge and therefore cannot be regarded as a
priority by the Mayoral Combined Authority. This is a major weakness in the
Governance Review Document
A Devolution Deal for
a Post-COVID/Post-Growth World
The proposed devolution deal was prepared in the pre-COVID
world, and therefore it will need significant rethinking in order to align with
the new normal that individuals, businesses, communities, councils, regions and
nations are now preparing for. Recently 200 leading UK businesses, investors
and business networks, called on the Government to deliver a Covid-19 recovery
plan that builds back a more inclusive, stronger and more resilient UK economy that
aligns with the UK's wider social, environmental and climate goals. There is no
mention here of economic growth. More and more people with vision are realising
that growing an economy is at odds with tackling climate change. What we can
have instead is a strong, vibrant, inclusive and sustainable economy and that
should be the vision that underpins the devolution deal. We have an opportunity
here in West Yorkshire to be leaders in this new green recovery world.
In view of this, the metrics used for making the 5 year
Gateway Assessments on which ongoing funding may depend cannot be based on
economic growth, but on other measurements of a vibrant economy. In the new
COVID 19 world economic growth may be a thing of the past anyway. In particular
decisions must not be made in order to meet the Gateway Assessments that will
reduce the capacity of Leeds to meet the Climate Emergency commitments.
Let’s have Real
Devolution not Faux Devolution
In our view this is only partial devolution to, effectively,
an elected dictatorship, and not a proper democratic body. The area covered,
the County of West Yorkshire, is a failed concept of the early 1970’s and does
not cover the economic footprint of the Leeds City Region. To have real devolution
we need an Assembly and First Minister with powers similar to those granted to
Wales, and Scotland, but based upon the region of Yorkshire. The proposal
states that this agreement is the first step in the process to further
devolution, therefore a Yorkshire Assembly should be seen as the assumed next
step, which should be included in this devolution agreement. Devolution for
Yorkshire has wide support, including in the Sheffield City Region where
referendums held in Barnsley and Doncaster, indicated an overwhelming
preference for a One Yorkshire deal over the South Yorkshire deal.
Devolution that
acknowledges the Climate Crisis
On October 8 2018 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change issued a report, in which they stated that ‘Limiting global warming to
1.5°C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all
aspects of society.’ Other parts of the report state that ‘With clear benefits
to people and natural ecosystems, limiting global warming to 1.5°C compared to
2°C could go hand in hand with ensuring a more sustainable and equitable
society’. We are already seeing the consequences of 1°C of global warming
through more extreme weather, rising sea levels and diminishing Arctic sea ice,
among other changes. The report finds that limiting global warming to 1.5°C
would require “rapid and far-reaching” transitions in land, energy, industry,
buildings, transport, and cities.’ It is already widely acknowledged that the
UK’s zero carbon target of 2050 will not achieve the limiting of global warming
required, which is why councils around the UK have committed to achieve zero
carbon much sooner.
So it is within the context of the Climate Emergency that
West Yorkshire now has the opportunity, through devolution, to set truly
ambitious plans to lead this country in a green economic recovery from the
COVID pandemic, a recovery that will achieve the challenging but necessary zero
carbon targets that have been set. This will require public support, and that
can only be achieved through the democratic processes and structures that are
outlined in our response.
