I’m glad the Conservatives have finally recognised the importance of local government. For those who’ve been here for the last five years, we’ve heard them attempt to take money out of local government and give it to health, the equivalent of buying a car, not maintaining it, but spending money on repairs. Spending on sports facilities, environmental health and elderly care helps keep people from needing hospital care.

Local government provides a huge variety and a wide range of services. There’s a booklet called the A to Z of environmental services—for those who haven’t seen it, it’s not a thin booklet, and that’s just one area of local government. Local authority services affect everybody and everyone every day: roads, pavements, refuse collection, litter removal, education and social services daily affect the lives of the people living in an area. Social services departments in Wales are under more financial pressure than any other service area in the public sector, and I include the health service in that. We know that the population is ageing and that people are living longer, often with substantial care needs that have to be provided outside of hospitals. The reason why local government is cutting back on other services is because social services’ need is so great and has to be met.

Can I just quote the Cardiff University Centre for Local and Regional Government Research? It undertook the first comprehensive analysis of the impact of size on the performance of local authorities. The team developed a groundbreaking model that used inspection scores, national performance indicators, public confidence and a value for money index. The results showed local authorities have no ideal size. Larger councils have lower central administrative overheads, but size effects varied between services. Subsequent research found reorganisation-produced larger councils can disrupt performances. We also know that the largest local authority in Europe—Birmingham—has had serious problems with its social services department. So, big is not always better.

They tested the impact of population size and controlled for difference in socio-economic context, including deprivation and diversity of service needs. The result of this analysis showed that population size had little impact on CPA scores, but it did affect about half of the measures of service inspection and a majority of the measures of consumer satisfaction. It also impacted on measures of value for money. But the relationship between size and performance is complex. In some cases, larger authorities performed better, in others, smaller councils performed better, and, in others, medium-sized authorities achieved the best results. In fact, if you look at the Welsh performance indicators across local authorities, it’s actually the medium-sized authorities that do best in terms of getting the most greens.

We know that size is not proportional to performance. Everybody doesn’t look and say, ‘If every council could be like Cardiff and Rhondda Cynon Taf, then we’d have a wonderful set of local authorities in Wales’. Local authorities have lost control of a large number of service areas that they had when I was first elected a councillor in 1989. They’ve lost institutes of higher education and the polytechnics, further education colleges, direct control of schools, a majority on police committees, Cardiff Airport, and, in many council areas, housing. Does anyone actually think these changes have been for the better regarding service delivery?

On turnout, this is a problem across all elections in Wales, including, unfortunately, the Assembly election. Comparisons between council and Assembly elections are difficult, because in areas that traditionally have the highest Assembly turnout, many seats at council level go uncontested. We do know that council election turnout is substantially above the European election turnout, and, when held separately, the police commission elections. An obvious solution to getting higher turnout for local elections would be to give local authorities more control and have less Welsh Government direction. The single transferrable vote, also known as ‘Guess how many seats you’re going to win?’, creating large wards in rural areas, moving local government away from voters—I can think of no better way of reducing turnout in local government elections than introducing STV. I note you don’t ask to have a referendum on it, because I think that people know what the result would be. We had a referendum on changing the voting system, and that was overwhelmingly against making a change. So, obviously we don’t want to have another one—let’s impose it from above.

I urge the Welsh Government to consider the following: give local authorities the power of general competence, something local governments have asked for for as long as I can remember, provide less central control over services—let local decisions be made—promote joint working for education and social services, but on the same footprint. Every Minister who takes over a different portfolio creates their own little footprint for each service; we need to have services covering the same area. Look to local authorities to work together on regional planning for housing and economic development. We have a development plan for each local authority, and we all know, don’t we, that changes that are made in Swansea will have an effect in Neath Port Talbot and Carmarthenshire and the same the other way. So we need to have some sort of regional policy so we all know where we are. We should look to maximise the number of services under direct local government control. I actually believe in local government and I think it really is important that we let local authorities make decisions on behalf of their local people and then, if the people don’t like it, they can kick them out.