Introduction

Tracing the fortunes of English local government, from the establishment of the principle of elected local self-government in the mid-19th century through to the programme of ‘modernisation’ that the system is undergoing in the 21st century at the behest of ‘New Labour’, reveals the extent to which change has been the dominant feature of its history (Wilson and Game, 1998). Post-1945 much of that change has been driven by central government reform and, while local government has been able to draw on its own institutional resources to help it adapt and absorb some of the more radical reform proposals (Sullivan, 2003; Lowndes, 2004), nonetheless, central government interventions have had important consequences for local government's structures and processes, role and purpose, and relationships with citizens. They have also played an important role (directly and indirectly) in influencing local government's perspective on and its interactions with the neighbourhood. Two vignettes serve to illustrate the point.

The attempt by the post-war Labour administration to rid society of all major ills was manifest in the development of new institutions, centrally organised and administered. While some of the local discretion and variation enjoyed by local government in the period of expansion up to the 1930s began to diminish, local government assumed significant delivery responsibilities for welfare state services. This led to the creation of local government units far larger than many European counterparts. At this time it seemed that local government did not have to pay much attention to the neighbourhood. Autonomous, self-confident, delivering the valued services of the post-war welfare state, its connection with locality was at the authority-wide level at which it embodied civic pride. Internal divisions were based on service departments, not sub-localities. Neighbourhood seemed in any case to be declining in significance in the face of prosperity and social mobility.

Contemporary narratives provide a sharp contrast. Following decades of reform under the Conservatives, coupled with the emergence of a new, more challenging governance environment, local government is depicted as a shadow of its former self. Reduced in powers, no longer confident, struggling to assert civic leadership, its capacity to engage with others is as important as its internal organisation. Its partners are important both as means of achieving improved service delivery (local government is now oriented towards commissioning and purchasing services, rather than providing them) and as collaborators in a form of ‘network governance’ (Stoker, 2004).