Eric Pickles will today (13/12/2010) publish the Localism Bill in parliament heralding a return of power to the town hall under a ‘new’ general power of competence, branding it as a ‘freedom for local councils to act in the best interests of residents.

The implications of these proposals are ‘vast’ and will allow local councils the power to change things, to provide services that are missing, to correct or public service failures – in short, to provide whatever it may be that local people want or lack and are prepared to pay for.

In return Councils are being forced to look at alternative means of service delivery, including shared services and outsourcing in respect of what might be termed their traditional functions, such as planning and building control. And yet, at the same time, the bill opens up the potential of councils moving into less traditional areas in direct competition with the private sector.

This brings with it a huge dilemma for local councillors who will now need to review if it remains an economic option to retain any of its core services house, to join forces with other councils or to outsource services fully.

Even before the Bill was announced we have seen alliances between local councils to provide building control supervision outside of their own boundaries ( http://www.swale.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=4442  ) and to outsource entire planning and building control departments to the private sector (http://www.capitasymonds.co.uk/partnerships/breckland.aspx).

On the other hand it also creates a wider concern for the private sector that councils can position themselves where they may be at an unfair trading advantage over its private sector competitors.

This follows on from existing controversy over Kent County Council running its own trading arms ( http://www.kentnews.co.uk/kent-news/KCC-denies-using-public-money-to-fund-companies-newsinkent11578.aspx?news=local  ).

The Localism Bill will truly create a sea change in the Local Government thinking and will have huge implications for planning and building control. For planning this should mean that power is given to neighbourhoods to decide the look and shape of their community and reduce or remove the need for planning consent for development in accordance with that plan.

For building control the introduction of localism goes against the concept of a national minimum standard and the stated aim to remove local building acts which require varying standards, such as the London Building Act which requires compulsory sprinklers in large buildings in London.

I look forward to reading more details of the bill and further announcements about the future of building control over the forthcoming weeks.