Introduction: three phases of modernisation

The 1997 Labour manifesto confirmed what had long been anticipated by those who had observed the amount of networking taking place in the previous two to three years, orchestrated by Hilary Armstrong (the Local Government Minister in waiting) – namely that the Labour Party had a serious and wide-ranging agenda for local government. Once it had gained power, the Labour government first expressed what had come to be known as its ‘modernisation’ programme for local government (‘modernisation’ was a key theme throughout its manifesto) in the 1998 White Paper Modern local government: In touch with the people (DETR, 1998a).

There have been three distinctive elements to this modernisation programme – service performance, community leadership and democratic renewal. Service performance has less direct political repercussions than the other two, although the transformation of ‘best value’ into Comprehensive Performance Assessments (CPAs) has certainly attracted the energies of political leaders in particular (especially where an authority has received a ‘poor’ or ‘weak’ assessment – see below). Community leadership has not been subject to the same legislative impetus that the other two elements have, and has as a result developed in different ways and at different speeds in different authorities. Democratic renewal has had the most profound and direct consequences for the operation of local politics, and as a result is given most attention both in this chapter and the next. However, service performance and community leadership have also had political repercussions and are discussed more briefly below.

The Local Government Acts of 1999 and 2000 took forward into legislative form many of the key themes of In touch with the people. By the time the party sought re-election in 2001, the first phase of its modernisation programme for local government was in the process of implementation.

The second phase of the programme – heralded by the 2001 White Paper Strong local leadership – quality public services – was less coherent than the first phase. That the government was having difficulty in developing a second-term programme (and in filling the proposed White Paper) was apparent at a ‘round table’ meeting of government ministers, civil servants and selected local authority leaders, chief executives and academics, at which the author was present. (The meeting was abruptly concluded during the afternoon – of 11 September 2001.)