Reform Took Over Lancs County Council.....

One of the very biggest concerns has to be what will happen with Luke Campbell who was elected Regional mayor for Hull and Humberside.

He is a former Olympic boxer who has no experience whatsoever in not only politics, but no kind of management or financial role whatsoever. Just a nice popular local guy.

I think some of the voters confused local mayor with Regional mayor, given what responsibilities a Regional mayor has.

these are the tasks this Campbell is charged with

"HEYCA controls an investment fund of £13.3m per year for 30 years.21 The mayor has the powers to charge a business rates supplement for projects promoting economic development and set a council tax precept for mayoral functions.

The combined authority is responsible for the adult skills fund from the academic year 2026/27, subject to meeting the government’s readiness conditions.

HEYCA will also provide input into the area’s local skills improvement plan.

The combined is the local transport authority for the area and holds responsibilities concurrently with the constituent councils until 31 March 2026.

The mayor is responsible for drawing up a local transport plan and for a multi-year consolidated local transport settlement. They also have the power to franchise bus services.

HEYCA coordinates a key route network of roads on the mayor’s behalf.

The mayor is able to establish mayoral development corporations (MDCs), subject to consent from the lead member from the council(s) where they would operate.

The combined authority and mayor have land assembly and compulsory purchase powers, also subject to the agreement of the relevant constituent council(s).

The combined authority is also able to become the area’s heat network zoning coordinator and to take on a local authority health improvement duty concurrent with the local authorities.
The mayor and combined authority’s powers are likely to increase over time. I

n December 2024, the government published its English devolution white paper, which set out plans for the devolution of further powers across a range of areas, including transport, skills and employment support, strategic planning, and local growth.22
The white paper also set out the criteria to become an ‘Established Mayoral Strategic Authority’, which would enable HEYCA to access additional powers and a single-pot ‘integrated’ funding settlement.23

I dont want to knock the bloke as a person, but really

Not a lot but every little helps, pennies and pounds etc

That was to Cossy. Though it’s concerning about the lack of experience of those now holding power.

silverlining48

That was to Cossy. Though it’s concerning about the lack of experience of those now holding power.

It is concerning, even more so because of the poor performance of many ‘experienced’ councils or councillors which led to the change.

Mmm. Poor performance, or impossible situations and the rapid rise of people needing care especially in big metropolitan areas? Well....time will tell if new councillors with no experience can tackle it better via improved "ideology" without those most in need suffering more?

Well, poor performance or impossible situations will undoubtedly apply to the new councils too.
Both excuses for not getting things done that need doing.

Well labour have done nothing to sort out the sickening railways between Blackpool and Liverpool still as awful as ever Someone is going to die in the crush There is no limit apparently to how many people can be squashed on a train What a nightmare journey today Just hope Reform listens to the general public p

MayBee70

Currently, in my street alone I have one rental property lived in by an autistic man that has 2 carers with him 24/7 and another neighbour who sadly is on end of like care and has at least four people coming each day for an hour or so to look after him. Do Reform actually understand just how much social care costs and how many people need it?

I wonder if the cost of some of these essential services should come out of general taxation and not be funded by Local Authorities?

TakeThat7

Well labour have done nothing to sort out the sickening railways between Blackpool and Liverpool still as awful as ever Someone is going to die in the crush There is no limit apparently to how many people can be squashed on a train What a nightmare journey today Just hope Reform listens to the general public p

They've had less than a year. The decline of the railways has taken many years, much of which have been Tory-led, if that's how you want to apportion blame.

Allira

MayBee70

Currently, in my street alone I have one rental property lived in by an autistic man that has 2 carers with him 24/7 and another neighbour who sadly is on end of like care and has at least four people coming each day for an hour or so to look after him. Do Reform actually understand just how much social care costs and how many people need it?

I wonder if the cost of some of these essential services should come out of general taxation and not be funded by Local Authorities?

Central government is a significant funder of local government. It has been for decades.

LA funding is a mix of government grants, local taxation (council tax and business rates) and some local charges.

Doodledog

TakeThat7

Well labour have done nothing to sort out the sickening railways between Blackpool and Liverpool still as awful as ever Someone is going to die in the crush There is no limit apparently to how many people can be squashed on a train What a nightmare journey today Just hope Reform listens to the general public p

They've had less than a year. The decline of the railways has taken many years, much of which have been Tory-led, if that's how you want to apportion blame.

Besides which, government has very little influence on the operations of privatised rail companies. It can’t dictate the size of each train. That’s a commercial decision.

Central government has a formula for giving more funding to councils with higher social needs.

I cannot find any Reform Party rail policies

The now withdrawn election "contract" said:

CRITICAL REFORMS NEEDED IN THE FIRST 100 DAYS

Accelerate Transport Infrastructure

Focus on our coastal regions, Wales, the North, and
the Midlands. Improve existing rail and road links.
Integrated services are critical.

In 100 days?

Thereafter:

Tighter Regulation and New Ownership Model for Critical National Infrastructure. The British taxpayer needs to be in control of Britain’s utilities. Launch a new model that brings 50% of each utility into public ownership. The other 50% would be owned by UK pension funds, benefiting from new expertise and better management. We will ensure standing charges are
capped to help low users and pensioners.

While I am all for renationalisation of all public utiities I fail to see how rail being 50% owned by pension funds brings new expertise and better management in running a nationwide transport network.

The usual word salad and nothing to do with local government anyway.

MaizieD

Allira

MayBee70

Currently, in my street alone I have one rental property lived in by an autistic man that has 2 carers with him 24/7 and another neighbour who sadly is on end of like care and has at least four people coming each day for an hour or so to look after him. Do Reform actually understand just how much social care costs and how many people need it?

I wonder if the cost of some of these essential services should come out of general taxation and not be funded by Local Authorities?

Central government is a significant funder of local government. It has been for decades.

LA funding is a mix of government grants, local taxation (council tax and business rates) and some local charges.

I know but first they take money from Local Authorities before redistributing it in the way they ses fit.

What I meant was, if care is needed should that be funded directly by Central Government?

growstuff

Central government has a formula for giving more funding to councils with higher social needs.

Having taken it from LAs in the first place.

Perhaps better to let LAs keep all the money they raise and pay top-ups to those areas of deprivation from general taxation.

I think it's a moot point just now as we are heading towards more regionalisation of funding.

No news available on that and care. I agree with the government fixing a cap on % rises in council tax.

Cossy

silverlining48

Kent county council was won by reform , the leader is a woman and apparently all councillors will have a 5% deduction in their pay in order to fund social needs.
A good start, not that I voted for them.

But, big but, this will amount to very small amounts, as far as I know, councillors receive “allowances” not salaries, they are not council employees.

I understand their allowances start somewhere between £12,000-£16,000 and then are topped up for any additional duties, portfolios etc.

Hardly going to make any difference to overall budgets, but of course, it sounds good to the public.

Kent allowance is £17k and there are a
80+ councillors so that's approximately £68,000+ extra for community projects. So yes, that's pretty good for the public.

Allira

growstuff

Central government has a formula for giving more funding to councils with higher social needs.

Having taken it from LAs in the first place.

Perhaps better to let LAs keep all the money they raise and pay top-ups to those areas of deprivation from general taxation.

Yes, they take it from councils with fewer needs and give it to those with higher needs. General taxation is supposed to work like that anyway.

While Induction courses for a grounding in council functions are a useful feature in that area. Very often the nice guy without any real knowledge or education can be very astute and straightforward when it comes to dealing with things because they cut through all the nonsense and get to the point.
How many times have we thought why complicate things with x, y and z when a, b and c sort the issue in half the time and with a lot less input.
We all know plenty of nice guys -it doesn't mean they are not capable of doing the job.