Ben,

I wasn't talking about the experience of working for a commercial organisation in a complicated LGR situation, I was speaking as as Berkshire council tax payer who sees his taxes being extremely wastefully used by authorities who can barely afford to provide their core services.  I was not talking about the heritage service per se.  In actual fact, the existence of our contract has enabled the continuation of strategic, cost-effective, archaeological, environmental, planning & waste management services for two years after the abolition of the County Council during which time all parties (ie. us and most of the UAs) have worked hard to try to set up a system that works to the best advantage of the local authorities.  In the face of parochial, petty political decision making by at least one authority, collectively we have been able to secure the provision of a joint service between 5 of the 6 authorities, which, again speaking as a local council tax payer, I know is far more efficient (after all I know exactly how much it costs as I wrote  tenders for both the joint and separate service options) than the original rather blinkered plans of the UAs.  So yes, there can be some good out off UAs but it has taken a lot of extremely hard work and perseverence by myself and a small number of key officers in a couple of the UAs.  

However, I still stand by what I said yesterday, council tax bills have gone up by c15-20% across Berkshire this year, and there has been at the same time, definate reductions in quality and breadth of local authority services across the board.  Decision making has become increasingly parochial in its outlook.  Finally, as Chris Wardle was saying yesterday) the vast majority of local people ,in Reading at least (which is where I live), haven't suddenly  started rejoicing that decision making is now in the Civc Centre as most of things that really concerned them (dustbins, clearing dog shit, potholes in roads with a speed limit under 30 (ie. residential streets - never a CC responsibility), etc.) was done by the Borough Council anyway.  In Berkshire there is absolutley no question that LGR has been anything but successful but I am quite prepared to accept that it is different elsewhere. 

Finally most curators, try to know their 'patch' intimately regardless of being UA, County Council, or in an equivalent set up to Berks (ie. West Yorks, Humberside, London, etc.).  Not being in a UA does not preclude close working with the museums, libraries, planners, etc.  When the County Council still existed, we had extremely close contact with the planners of all of the authorities.  Being UAs has not changed any of that apart from as the morale in the planning dept in at least a couple of the UAs has gone down, staff turnover has increased to the point that it can be hard to keep track about who's in and who's out.

I'm sorry if this sounds like a bit of a tirade against UAs but LGR was clearly an outcome of Conservative political ideology rather than a clearly thought out strategy.  It was aimed at undermining political opposition in the regions whilst strengthening the centralisation of political power at the centre.  Two-tier government does not necessarily make sense but the current hodge-podge across the county does not exactly make sense either.

Rob Bourn

>>> <[log in to unmask]> 03/23/00 07:19pm >>>

Dear interested parties,

I think its difficult to generalise about the Unitary versus multiple tier
issue. Discussion should be based on objective reviews of local services
delivery before and after LGR, but I'm not sure this has been carried out in
a very meaningful way. 

My own opinion is that the picture is extremely complicated. I am certain
that some services (here I mean all LA services not just heritage functions)
in some places are now much more efficient and responsive to local need than
they were, but others may suffer from insufficient support and funding. 

I am sorry that the Berkshire experience appears to have been negative, but
as Rob says his is an opinion based on the experiences of one commercial
heritage services provider operating in one area. Maybe someone else can see
some positive aspects in the Berkshire situation ? 

Gareth may find the Peterborough experience interesting. Peterborough
Unitary Authority was created largely from Peterborough District Council
within the 1974 county of Cambridgeshire. The Soke of Peterborough (c. 70%
of the present UA) was (separate-ish) part of the historic county of
Northamptonshire, then became a county in its own right (19th century), then
was merged with Huntingdonshire (1960s) to create Peterborough and Hunts,
then got absorbed into Cambridgeshire with Huntingdonshire to create modern
Cambridgeshire in 1974. Along the way Peterborough picked up bits of
historic Huntingdonshire and the Isle of Ely (another historic sub-county
unit). The creation of Peterborough UA might be seen largely as the
restoration of an historic administrative unit, rather than the division of
one. 

I know that locally there was some feeling that the area was
unsatisfactorily catered for within the modern county of Cambridgeshire.
Peterborough was at the opposite end of the county from Cambridge (the
administrative centre), and the two places never seemed to be operating in
step. 

In terms of the impact on Heritage Services, its probably best to let others
judge (systematically and objectively). However, I know that the UA
planners, local students, and local interest groups, etc. appreciate the
presence of SMR information and archaeological advice on their doorstep,
rather than at the opposite end of the county. I very much appreciate close
contact with the planners. Also, I appreciate being able to get to any site
in my curatorial area in under 25 minutes (some contractors and constructors
don't appreciate this quite as much !) and the ability to really get to know
my 'patch'. SMR data gathering for this area has accelerated considerably
and there is no longer a data entry back-log. Real mutual benefits have
resulted from the integration of the new Archaeological Services within the
UA's Museum (finds reporting to SMR, 'outreach', exhibition planning,
accessibility of museum documentation, archives, and library, staff support,
etc.) and I am confident that the service can further develop as one which
is authoritative, properly part of the national heritage service mosaic, and
locally relevant. 

My chief complaint is the title of the Unitary Authority - Peterborough City
Council. This unhelpfully ignores the rural areas and many villages which
make up the remaining 80% of the UA area. 

Ben Robinson
Archaeology Officer, Peterborough City Council


***Private and Confidential Notice***

The information contained in this E-Mail is intended for the named recipients only.
It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended
recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action or reliance on it. 
If you have received this E-Mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by
using the E-Mail address or on +44 (0) 1733 452411.


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%