Markus Petz: Local Councils

[Andrius Kulikauskas]

The place of local councils and how they interact with associations and
informal groups in the non-commercial third sector. Or civil society.

Councils occur at different levels. At the highest level is perhaps the
big metropolitan city coucnil with a Mayor that can make unilateral
decisions and have tax rasining powers. This model is seen in the USA
where there has been a high level of corruption and many such mayors are
in prison.

However, councils can also occur at much lower levels. District councils
or even village councils. Such village councils are often the butt of
jokes. A case in point is the British TV sit com The Vicar of Dibley
(which confuses the Church Parish Council, with the Town and Parish
Council, which in the UK is the lowest level of local government.

Although of course crooks can exist here its more the connections with
local peoepl and the opportunities to support initiatives that makes
these councils better known. Here the praxis of politcs is different and
Party political lines are not so important.

The councils can usefully provide a rôle as an advocate of smaller
groups, for example in Rippingale, where I was a Parish Councillor they
were able to argue for the Village Design group that effectively was
interacting with the planning departments higher up in governement.

Such local groups can develop the expertise and special interests that
the council sees are valuable but just cannot find time for amongst
other council business. They also allow a broader range of opinions to
be debated. Funding can come from the council or through its support for
ideas and help develop them to fruition and success.

The council can also stimulate smaller groups to form, based on needs
identified with other local areas. Village audits are a good way of
doing this. Small regions and districts can act in a more autonome
method less constrained by public spending restrictions, yet still
supported by coucnil advice or lassitude. Such a system exists in
Tampere with Kirpitsa Talo and Hirvi Talo, whcih are ostensibly council
owned, but run by independent associations. These associations are very
free to persue directions not set centrally.

Good governance relies on this civil sector interacting with the higher
up bodies that can then spend money, other resources and guide without
controllling. If the council is too controlling failure results. This
has been seen in the analyses of Agenda 21, whcih was shown to work well
in Norway, where the hands off approach and local empowerment meant
ownership and successful initiatives, compared with much of the UK where
the middle sized executives actually stymied progess, largely as the
officers (paid workers for the council) had vested career interests that
were threatened by the smaller bodies taking credit for successful
projects. And little to gain by someone else doing a good job. Also at
the intermediate level party-ocracy starts to play a part and thus
horsetrading and there is less of ”will it benefit someone” and more of
”will it give another party adavantage over mine or my vested interests”.

So for success both must feel they are winning and subsidiarity needs to
manifest without all the work being dumped on one party and no reward
for successful projects. How to achieve this balancing act is hard. But
this is the question I leave you with. Balance and benefit to all with
independent opportunities? How do you have co-operation without
co-ercion? How do you let the power go?