The Leader requested comments from Non-Executive Members first.

Councillor G Coxshall stated that both parties agreed that devolution is a good thing and will present lots of opportunities. He commented that he is very mindful of the opportunities Thurrock can get out of skills, strategic transport links and spatial planning and his biggest concern is ensuring Thurrock gets the best deal. Thurrock needs to be ambitious, it has fantastic ports in Essex and he would not want Thurrock to lose the great opportunities it has with the freeport and skills academy.

Councillor N Speight read out a pre-prepared speech on behalf of the NPAIC members.

Thank-you for the opportunity to comment during this evening’s debate.

I am speaking on behalf of my group colleagues who have approved this statement, though they reserve the right to speak individually.

Together with fellow members of the council’s member devolution & LGR working group, I recently sat in a useful briefing on this evening’s agenda.

However, though it was a helpful and informative session, I left it with a sense of fait accompli and with a sense that Thurrock’s forthcoming participation in wider debate was, at best, pallid and unimaginative.

I was also disappointed to be briefed on Thurrock’s official contribution to a consultation over the development of a county-wide Mayor’s office. That document is available to read as an appendix to this evening’s documentation and the overwhelming gist is ‘strongly agrees’. I will concur that I think most elected members recognise the inevitability of the creation of this office, but I do not feel that over the seven specified answers, concerns from Thurrock are truly represented.

The council ‘strongly’ agrees with the delivery of benefits, governance arrangements, economic geographical support and social outcomes.

To be fair, the council does say in its response that it strongly backs: “proposed governance arrangements for the Mayoral Combined County Authority and that no one existing upper tier authority area can, on its own, direct policy and allocation of resource across the whole of Greater Essex”

It’s one of the few specifics that is singled out. While I have no issue about that statement, the paucity of detail – and what happens in the interim to Thurrock’s best interest concerns myself and colleagues.

The council also agrees a mayor will support the interests and needs of local communities and reflect local identities? Well, the nearest thing we have had to a county mayor is a police and crime commissioner over recent years and very few people I know think that Thurrock is a better place for his influence.

The council also thinks a mayor will improve the local natural environment. I suspect north and mid Essex will emerge a lot better off than Thames riverside boroughs.

Cllr Kent, has said: “This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for Thurrock to become part of something bigger, and to help shape a future that is right for local people. They deserve better than the failures of the past, and I can’t wait to start work.”

I concur wholeheartedly with that statement. The problem is I don’t get any perception of Cllr Kent and the senior leadership team loading up their guns and getting ready for a confrontation. I see civic leaders in other parts of East of England challenging the government’s brief and standing up for the rights of their residents.

Now Cllr Kent and Co may have a strategy of keeping their powder dry and keeping their defence of Thurrock under wraps and, if so, I wish them well. But I fear that when anyone goes into negotiation looking weak and talking compromise, it fares less well. That’s how I see Thurrock at the moment.

We are in our third year of intervention and both major groups have had seats at the top table in that time. But collectively, what have they achieved?

In their last report to government, commissioners said: “A combined county authority will improve local government services.”

A lot of people in Thurrock may choose to differ with that given recent performance levels under a commissioner-led system whereby services in Thurrock have been slashed.

'Improved local government services' can have a number of different meanings - one of which is quite simply cutting services to improve the bottom line. But at what expense to the rights and requirements of people in Thurrock?'

We have a cohort of commissioners who publicly criticise those who challenge.

They have cut down on scrutiny by elected members, time-limiting the possibility to challenge decision-making. And have the temerity to call that ‘good progress’ even though the chairs of scrutiny, including myself, have been very critical of that action.

The commissioners say the Council is also delivering a number of major projects. I'm not sure what they are as most projects in this borough are either stagnant or stopped.

The commissioners also say: "A limited number of members have not treated officers and their decisions, or their fellow members, with the respect and courtesy that we would expect to see within a professional organisation."

Make no mistake, that is very much a jibe at myself and some of my colleagues who have not been prepared to stand idly by and remain muted. We have challenged and where we believe wrong decisions have been made and where incompetence has been identified, we have spoken up.

But that’s ended up with us on the naughty step because we used strongly worded- direct criticism. I stress it’s been pointed out that we haven’t uses foul or abusive language but that our comments are deemed ‘offensive’ because they question the capability of decision-makers and the outcomes of those decisions. In the public sector, apparently that’s not de rigueur.

That independent voice that puts people before politics is going to be even more dissipated in a bigger unitary council and unheard in a mayor's office!

Yes, we need change. Thurock Council is a busted flush, and it has let Thurrock residents down. That is indisputable.

But this latest change is one in a series.

Thurrock Urban District Council formed in 1936, was created from the former urban districts of Grays, Thurrock, Purfleet, and Tilbury, and the Orsett Rural District, and was created on government advice because 'bigger is better'.

The district was abolished in 1974, with the formation of Thurrock Borough Council which was supposed to bring a more professional approach and shiny. modern look. And we got some civic chains and a mayoral office with the chair of the council assuming the title of mayor. Bigger was going to be better with a shiny badge.

Well apparently, not, because in 1998 under another piece of intervention under the Local Government Act, Thurrock became a unitary authority with responsibility for all its own services.

Bigger, it was said again, is better.

But perhaps central government got it wrong again. In 2003 we had the formation of the Thurrock Thames Gateway Development Association, with planning and strategy removed from the council's portfolio of responsibility because it was failing in both.

TTGDC proved to be a very expensive - and achieved little. It did deliver High House Production Park and was instrumental in the creation of DP World London Gateway, but despite employing dozens of highly paid experts, a lucratively rewarded governing body and a CEO and Chairman whose efforts ended in infamy rather than success, it crashed and was burned in Eric Pickles' bonfire of the quangos.

Ironically this week the government has been calling in its boffins to work out how to cut quangos again as out of the embers of Mr Pickles’ torch-burning dozens more grew. Reinventing the wheel is a government speciality.

Bigger, in the case of the TBC and planning, certainly was not better.

But that ever-turning wheel has been spun again, and we have devolution and local government reorganisation ahead of us again.

Will it make much difference to the lives of the people of Thurrock? That's a moot point, but I think it could fail unless Thurrock Council stands its ground.

Whoever we are linked with - be it northwards with Brentwood or Chelmsford - or along the Thames with Castle Point and Southend - Thurrock will be a financial powerhouse. Its economy will empower change, and Thurrock needs to be best positioned to drive that change. I'm not sure the documents before us tonight reflect that drive, but I hope I am wrong.

And finally, the elephant in the room is Thurrock's debt. To be fair, it's becoming increasingly obvious that some of our colleague councils all across Essex have debt problems too. Some are large scale - and in Basildon's case likely to grow larger. But they pall in the presence of ours.

Councillor Anderson noted that Basildon had advertised for a few policy officer positions and queried if Thurrock will be using its budget to hire officers to assist with Devolution as no funding has been forthcoming from Government yet to help with the costs of Devolution. Councillor J Kent responded that £2 million pounds has been allocated in Thurrock’s budget for this.

Councillor G Byrne asked if this process will let the guilty off as Thurrock Council will cease to exist in a couple of years.

Councillor J Kent responded that they need to use the time they have to expose the guilty and recover the money. The time limit could be useful and will concentrate everyone’s mind.

Councillor Shinnick queried which other councils Thurrock could be combined with, Councillor J Kent responded that they are looking at populations over 500,000 and he would want communities to have a real connection with these authorities. They should be larger and strong enough to ensure they will succeed.

Councillor D Arnold raised concerns Thurrock Council has one of the lowest council tax levels in Essex. Councillor J Kent responded that the new authorities will deliver new services in new ways.

Councillor Raper queried if there were any obvious barriers with the other councils. Councillor J Kent responded that all 15 authorities are in the same position.

Councillor A Green queried what the Leader was most worried about. Councillor J Kent responded that Thurrock has incredible potential with the Freeport, Tilbury and DP World and proximity to London and he wanted to ensure local people are best served by Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation.

Councillor R Jones asked what measures are being put in place to engage with residents. Councillor J Kent responded that there has been a Government led consultation on Devolution. With Local Government Reorganisation they will make sure enough information is put out there and will look at the best methods of engaging with the community.

Councillor Massey queried when the consultation is complete if it will come back to full council. Councillor J Kent responded that it depends how the Government rolls it out, his strong view is it will be a string of executive decisions but the executive will be as inclusive as they can.

Councillor J Kent summarised that the powers in this country are too centralised and this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to change the way the country is run.

Councillor J Kent closed the session for non-executive members to ask questions so that Cabinet members could comment.

Councillor Muldowney welcomed the report and the huge opportunities it brings. It will bring the power back so instead of waiting for Westminster to make decisions we can make those decisions. There will be more funding, infrastructure, better transport links and skills opportunities. We can secure investment otherwise not available and cut waste and avoid duplication.

Councillor Watson agreed with Councillor Muldowney’s comments.

RESOLVED:

2.1Cabinet agreed the content of Thurrock Council’s response to government’s consultation on devolution in Greater Essex as set out in Appendix 1. 

2.2Cabinet agreed to delegate the submission of the consultation response including authority to make minor changes and alterations to the Assistant Chief Executive following consultation with the Leader and Deputy Leader.

Reason for the decision: as outlined in the report

This decision is subject to call-in