Best Value guidance should strengthen role of monitoring officers, LLG and AMO say

In a joint response to the now-closed consultation, the two organisations said they welcomed the proposed shift towards prevention, self-assessment, early intervention and strengthened governance arrangements.

They also agreed that councils should be supported to identify and address emerging risks before they develop into systemic organisational failure.

However, they said the revised guidance would benefit from "significant simplification" and that the new approach should more explicitly acknowledge that lawful, transparent and accountable decision-making is a prerequisite for achieving Best Value.

The consultation, which closed this month, sought views on the suitability of the seven Best Value themes. It also asked whether the Government's approaches to assessing compliance with the duty and its intervention models were sufficiently clear.

Responding to the proposals, LLG and AMO said the statutory role of the monitoring officer (MO) could be strengthened through explicit recognition of the position as a key source of assurance regarding organisational governance and institutional health.

They said the guidance should require evidence that the MO has direct access to senior decision-makers and elected leaders, and should recognise that MOs should be engaged at the earliest stages of policy development, transformation programmes and major commercial decisions.

The guidance should also encourage periodic reviews of MO capacity and recognise the importance of allowing MOs to provide independent advice, raise concerns and challenge decision-making without fear, the response said.

The response also said that effective democratic governance should be recognised as a core component of Best Value.

On this point, it said: "Local authorities derive their legitimacy from democratically elected members making decisions on behalf of their communities, supported by professional officer advice.

"Strong governance arrangements should therefore support democratic accountability rather than simply organisational compliance."

It added: "Experience from local authority interventions consistently demonstrates that governance failures often emerge before financial or service failures become apparent. Strong governance arrangements, underpinned by empowered statutory officers, effective scrutiny and a culture of constructive challenge, are therefore essential preventative mechanisms."

Elsewhere, the response called for greater emphasis in the guidance on the effectiveness of the golden triangle; the independence and resourcing of governance functions; governance assurance as a core indicator of organisational health; and the importance of lawful, transparent and evidence-based decision-making.

Helen Bennett, Executive Director of Policy & Governance at LLG, said: "We strongly support the Government's focus on helping authorities identify and address problems at an earlier stage.

"However, experience from local authority interventions repeatedly demonstrates that governance issues often emerge long before financial or service failures become visible. If we are serious about preventing organisational failure, governance must be recognised as a leading indicator of organisational health."

AMO chair Helen Bradley said the response highlighted "the unique role of Monitoring Officers in providing assurance on legality, ethical governance, constitutional compliance and standards of conduct".

She added: "Monitoring Officers should be recognised explicitly within the guidance as a key source of organisational assurance and councils should ensure they have appropriate independence, capacity and direct access to decision-makers."

In its own response to the consultation, the Local Government Association (LGA) broadly welcomed the changes, but said that the Government should make sector-led improvement support an alternative to appointing commissioners to councils at risk of failing to meet the Best Value Duty.

The response also said, among other things, that the current model of inspection and intervention was "highly" costly for authorities, which were often already under significant financial pressure.

Adam Carey