Written evidence submitted by the Local Government Association

 

 

13

 


 

About the Local Government Association (LGA)

 

The Local Government Association (LGA) is the national voice of local government. We are a politically led, cross-party membership organisation, representing councils from England and Wales. 

 

Our role is to support, promote and improve local government, and raise national awareness of the work of councils. Our ultimate ambition is to support councils to deliver local solutions to national problems.

 

Key messages

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community Sport

 

  1. What is the current quality and availability of facilities for grassroots sport? What interventions are needed to improve this provision?

 

1.1  Councils are the biggest public funder of public sport and leisure services, spending £1.4 billion a year in England. This sustains the country’s national infrastructure and keeps vital universal services running across the country, this includes:

1.1.1.    2,727 leisure centres in England;

1.1.2.    The majority of the 27,000 parks and green spaces across the UK;

1.1.3.    33 per cent of all swimming pools;

1.1.4.    31 per cent of grass pitches;

1.1.5.    20 per cent of all health and fitness facilities;

1.1.6.    13 per cent of sports halls.

 

1.2  Council provided leisure facilities provide a crucial network of activity offers depended on by a number of individuals and organisations in every part of the country:

1.2.1      They provide an affordable universal offer enabling local communities to be active. Currently they reach 8.9 million participants annually - research by Moving Communities shows a 7 per cent increase in usage in 2023/24 with the biggest increase in users coming from the most deprived areas (IMD 1 & 2).

1.2.2      Three quarters of grassroots sports clubs rely on affordable hire fees to operate without which these clubs would not be able to survive.

1.2.3      The NHS directly delivers exercise on referral schemes, social prescribing activities and rehabilitation services. 66 per cent of cancer rehabilitation takes place in public leisure facilities;

1.2.4      Over the past 5 years 94 per cent of councils’ leisure centres delivered schemes to tackle health inequalities.

 

1.3  In many areas, public facilities are the only ones available to communities, as commercial gyms are often restricted to core towns and cities to ensure they are commercially viable. While private operators have an important role to play in the wider health and wellbeing offer and choice to local communities, they are fundamentally different to, and cannot replicate the public sector offer.

 

1.4  The current quality of public sport and leisure facilities is not consistent with the quality expected by the public, the green credentials needed to tackle the climate emergency, and in some cases the needs of grassroots sports clubs.

 

1.5  The current challenges facing leisure facilities is resulting in a decline of the public leisure estate, service restrictions and often as a last resort price increases. This is having a profound effect on the current and future availability of these vital assets. For example:

 

1.5.1      Sport England estimates 63 per cent of main sports halls and 60 per cent of swimming pools are past their expected lifespans or overdue refurbishment resulting in outdated and inefficient facilities, compounding utility related cost pressures;

1.5.2      Leisure centres represent up to 40 per cent of some district councils’ carbon footprint . While energy prices have largely stabilised they remain substantially higher than before the energy crisis. In some cases, gyms, pools, and leisure centres have seen bills rise by more than 200 per cent;

1.5.3      A 2024 ukactive survey shows 24 per cent of council areas are at risk of closing or reducing leisure services this year due to ongoing pressures due to ongoing high energy and operational costs;

1.5.4      Conversely, for some sports that are wheelchair based, floor type is an issue with modern sprung wooden floors, which cannot be utilised unlike traditional hard wood floors often found in older leisure centres;

1.5.5      The DCMS Select Committee report ‘Sport in our communities’ (2021) highlighted grassroots clubs were struggling to afford and secure access to space in existing public leisure facilities, which offer more affordable access than private alternatives.

1.5.6      Research from Sheffield Hallam University found that 77 per cent of the grassroots sports clubs they questioned said the biggest limiting factor for people taking part is access to public leisure centre facilities.

 

1.6 Our analysis reveals that councils in England now face a funding gap of £6.4 billion over the next two years. This financial strain has forced councils to focus their spending on meeting their statutory obligations, leading to a reduction in spending on universal and preventative services and a greater focus on reactive, demand-led provision. Despite the growing body of evidence demonstrating the financial and social benefits of prevention, between 2010 and 2024 culture and leisure services saw a real-terms annual spending fall of £2.324 billion.
1.7 This funding gap means that councils are increasingly have to focus on commercial activity, reducing subsidy and therefore access to those on lower incomes. Fees for community groups are also likely to rise, putting these activities at risk. This runs counter to the desire of councils to provide affordable and accessible facilities where private operators are not viable. These are discretionary services and councils are not required to provide them, but choose to do so in recognition of the significant community benefits that arise from being active.

 

1.8 We are particularly concerned that in many areas, the sport development function provided by councils – reaching out to engage the least active members in their community, and to support coordination with school activity – has fallen away since 2010 due to reducing council budgets. This key component of provision needs to be restored if we are to effectively shift the dial on inactivity levels.

 

1.9 The potential closure of further public leisure and sport facilities due to current pressures would be hugely detrimental to the health and wellbeing of the nation, the operational ability of grassroots sports clubs, pathways into elite sport and delivery of the Government’s Missions to Build an NHS fit for the future; kickstart economic growth; Break down barriers to opportunity; Take back our streets and Make Britain a clean energy superpower.

 

1.20 We have long been calling for investment into these vital services. LGA research in 2021 demonstrated a need for an additional £875 million capital investment in leisure facilities, pitches, and parks. This strategic investment would help build/refurbish 25 new facilities per year over three years, creating a network of hubs to help people become more active, socialise and reduce loneliness, grow future sporting talent and provide the asset base that grassroots sports clubs and the NHS relies on to deliver their services. Additionally, green investment is needed to create sustainable, energy-efficient facilities and meet net-zero targets.

 

1.21 Alongside investment and perhaps just as crucially, there is a need for greater recognition by the Government that leisure services as core public services and are crucial to improving health, reducing inequalities, and strengthening communities and to delivering on the Government’s five missions specifically on the NHS mission.

 

1.22 Many councils across the country are taking a place based approach to sport and leisure service provision transforming the service into an active wellbeing service. This work recognises and implements principles of proportionate universalism i.e. providing a universal service for all to access while also implementing preventative interventions targeted at the least active groups with the biggest heath inequalities and integrating with wider NHS services and referral pathways. Ensuring provision in all its forms is available across the whole place for example via better walking and cycling paths to improve connections with local assets and schools and alternative settings for sport and healthy activity especially for those less likely to use traditional sports centres are available. Co-locating sport and leisure services with GP services, libraries within community hubs.

 

1.23 This transformation is happening in pockets across the country but interest and traction is growing. However, councils and the sport and physical activity sector as a whole need a national clear strategic plan and commitment to focus on this area and to align local and national systems to drive the agenda forward.

 

1.24         The gains from doing so can produce results across multiple policy areas and Government priorities. Research by Sheffield Hallam University shows community sport and physical activity generate substantial economic and social value—comprising of £96.7 billion in wellbeing value for adults, children and young people participating and volunteering in sport and physical activity - and a further £10.5 billon in wider savings to the health and social care system. This includes £1.3 billion in savings from reduced GP visits and mental health service usage and £9.3 billion saved from prevention of disease and chronic health conditions (across 14 health outcomes – e.g. depression and type 2 diabetes).

 

1.25 In Greater Manchester, the cancer prehab service improved survival rates of patients, and released 550 ward days, and 146 critical care beds.

 

2        What sources of funding are available for grassroots sport and are they sufficient? How can funds be distributed more effectively and application processes be improved?

 

2.1  Sport England and National Lottery grants provide valuable but often oversubscribed and short-term support to councils, swimming pools and grassroots sports clubs. Our recent report on women and girls activity levels highlighted the uncertainty and ad hoc nature of funding as a major issue because it causes instability within programmes. We received evidence that demonstrated that this was an issue for successful pilots and some had stopped delivering because of a lack of funding and/or are on hold until further funding could be secured. Respondents cited a number of different funding sources including This Girl Can funding, National Governing Bodies (NGBs) for sports, public health, funding from charities and philanthropic sources. All with different criteria, application processes, the length funding pots was available for differed between funders. “Community organisations are best placed to activate greenspaces in line with the needs of women and girls, but need certainty through appropriate long-term funding to continue their good work” - Bradford Local Delivery Pilot 

 

 

2.2  It was clear from the evidence we received that where it was available national funding made a huge impact on the ability for local areas to be able to deliver and sometimes sustain programmes focused on improving participation and activity rates in women and girls. This in turn improved outcomes for beneficiaries of the programmes. However, the responses showed a fragmented picture with different funding pots available from different Government departments, charities, NGBs for sports and arm’s length bodies. Many funding pots were time limited. Funding applications could be onerous and complicated and capacity issues affected respondents ability to apply.

 

2.3  Capital grants aimed at councils like the Levelling Up Fund require resource-intensive bids with no funding guarantees. Councils also access developer contributions through Section 106 and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), though these funds depend on new housing developments.

 

2.4  Partnerships with private operators, charities, and NGBs offer additional funding opportunities but vary widely across areas. Collectively, these sources remain insufficient to address the scale of need, particularly for maintaining and upgrading aging facilities. This challenge is greater in rural, coastal, and deprived areas, where disparities in access, coupled with limited public transport and high hire costs, prevent many residents—particularly young people and low-income families—from participating in grassroots sport.

 

2.5  Councils are key to addressing these challenges. By facilitating partnerships between schools, sports clubs, and community groups, local authorities can maximise the use of underutilised school sports facilities outside of school hours. This approach improves availability, supports affordability, and ensures facilities benefit both schools and their surrounding communities.

 

2.6  Local government is uniquely positioned to respond to community needs. Through resident consultation and targeted, place-based solutions, councils can ensure grassroots sports facilities are inclusive, accessible, and meet the needs of underrepresented groups, such as older residents and people with disabilities. However, sustainable investment and support are essential to unlock the full potential of grassroots sport and deliver vital health, social, and economic benefits to local communities.

 

simplifying and standardising application procedures would reduce administrative burdens on local authorities, enabling quicker access to funds for community sports projects. Offering multi-year funding would provide councils with stability, allowing for better long-term planning and investment in sustainable facilities. Targeted funding based on local needs, such as refurbishing aging infrastructure or addressing specific challenges in underserved areas, would ensure resources are used where they are most needed.

2.8 Over the past few years, councils have only received single year funding settlements which has made it very challenging for them to provide the multi-year funding grants to community groups that helps them plan ahead and flourish. Councils would like to return to being good grant-makers and effectively support communities, but will need greater and longer term certainty over their own finances for this to happen. 

 

2.9 Greater transparency and accountability in how funds are allocated will also help councils effectively manage and track investments. Strengthening collaboration between local authorities, NGBs, and other stakeholders can ensure that funding is coordinated and avoids duplication, resulting in more impactful investments. Providing capacity-building support for local authorities to help them submit high-quality applications and manage funding effectively would further enhance efficiency. These interventions would empower local councils to deliver more effective grassroots sport initiatives, improving health outcomes, community engagement, and social wellbeing.

 

2.10 Improving grassroots sport provision requires a series of targeted interventions to address existing challenges and unlock the full potential of local facilities:

 

 

2.11 We recommend moving away from activity-specific funds, such as for tennis or football, and instead creating a place investment fund which is led by the priority needs for the local area. Specialised funds may invest in a facility that is not in urgent need locally, while a vital facility of another type is entering disrepair; and also create tension points as they age, as multiple facilities all come to the end of their lifespan at the same time, when funding to replace them may not be available. A place-led investment fund means that councils can refresh community facilities as and when they need them, giving more flexibility in the type of funds that can be secured to make this happen.

 

3. How can volunteers be better supported and what is needed to attract and retain more volunteers to grassroots sport?

3.1 Adult volunteering to support sport and physical  activity has a value of £8.2 billion. However, sport development teams in councils have been cut due to real term annual spending falls in culture and leisure service budgets of £2.324 billion since 2010. This has resulted in councils having less capacity to support training and volunteering opportunities.

3.2 National support is needed to enable leisure operators/in house providers and professional bodies to recruit and train a more diverse and upskilled workforce to support more people especially those with the lowest activity levels and multiple barriers to be active.  For example our report cited workforce issues as a barrier to getting women and girls active, but from our work this appears to be an issue for all groups with the lowest activity levels. An increase in appropriately skilled workforce including volunteers is necessary to make progress.  Planned devolution of adult skills budgets to strategic authorities should support work address this gap.

3.3 The current workforce for sport and leisure does not adequately reflect communities or deliver the needs of the most physically inactive. In the case of our work on women and girls, there are recruitment and retention challenges in finding female staff to run women only sessions which is especially important for some cultures and religious groups, and for other women to feel comfortable exercising. Overall, the workforce is not adequately trained to help promote the safety and comfort of women, which is more acute when considering the cultural requirements of some women and girls.  

4. How can grassroots sport be made more engaging and accessible to under-represented groups

4.1 The most successful interventions and programmes to get underrepresented groups engaged in physical activity are ones that engage organisations that are trusted by the groups they are aimed at and are co-produced by those groups. These interventions do not always need to be delivered in formal settings, often they utilise free, informal settings like green spaces, parks, a local basketball hoop on a housing estate to deliver free, fun activities. This is especially important when working with children and young people.

4.2 In addition to the voice of those groups, high quality data and the right datasets can help councils and organisations understand the barriers facing underrepresented groups, to design effective interventions, make evidence based decisions, develop successful bids for funding activities.  

4.3 Our research shows that the sample sizes used by national surveys like the Active Lives Survey for Adults and Children and Young people was deemed as too small. This was particularly problematic for local authorities because when broken down to ward level it was insufficient to interrogate against multiple demographics like gender, age and socio-economic groups. Bigger sample sizes would enable better. understanding of the trends around who is/isn’t active in different types of activities and allow benchmarking and identify good practice.

4.4 Limited data prevents councils and wider organisations from developing a robust evidence base which is needed to build an effective case for investment. The unintended consequence is that the groups that need the support most are not receiving funding because there is no data to support the case. 

4.5 Our work on women and girls activity levels identified that there is a lack of national research and evidence on the barriers faced by women and girls and the interventions that effectively support them to be active, participate and sustain activity. It was noted that understanding what women and girls say are the inhibitors, views on motivation, access, availability of desired activities, transport infrastructure, safety is important to be able to design effective interventions. Our initial research on children and young people’s activity levels identifies that there is no national data collection on the activity levels of care experienced young people and care leavers. This is a group that is omitted from the Active Lives survey for children and young people. There needs to be more thought given nationally as to how we bring hidden groups to the fore and ensure they are addressed.  

4.6 The absence of national research means that councils and wider organisations have to carry out their own research. This is not efficient or cost effective because organisations are reinventing the wheel multiple times by carrying out similar research. In addition not all organisations will have access to resources and expertise to carry out research. A national repository would address this issue. “More research and evaluation to better understand the barriers and challenges faced by female wrestlers and to identify effective strategies for increasing participation and retention. This could involve collecting data on participation rates, dropout rates, and the experiences of female wrestlers to inform future initiatives and interventions.”- British Wrestling”

 

4.1 To make grassroots sport more engaging and accessible to under-represented groups, local authorities can play a pivotal role in addressing barriers to participation and creating inclusive opportunities. Councils can deliver targeted programmes designed to engage specific groups, such as women and girls, people with disabilities, older residents, and those from ethnically diverse or low-income backgrounds. This includes offering subsidised or free activities, improving public transport links to facilities, and providing accessible equipment and infrastructure, such as gender-appropriate changing spaces and disability-friendly facilities.

Partnerships with community organisations, schools, and sports clubs are key to understanding the needs of under-represented groups and co-designing initiatives that resonate with local communities. Outreach programmes, such as mobile sports initiatives or events in community spaces, can help bring activities directly to people who face geographic or financial barriers. Representation also matters: training and supporting diverse coaches, volunteers, and role models can inspire greater participation.

Lastly, councils can invest in awareness campaigns to promote the benefits of grassroots sport and challenge cultural or social stigmas that may discourage involvement. By embedding inclusion in all aspects of grassroots sport provision, local authorities can ensure that opportunities to participate are open, engaging, and accessible to everyone, regardless of their background or circumstances.

 

School sport

5. How can schools better enable children to develop positive and life-long relationships with sport and physical education? What can be done to engage groups with lower participation rates - such as girls, those with disabilities or from lower socio-economic backgrounds?

To ensure children develop positive and lifelong relationships with sport and physical education, schools must work in close partnership with councils. However, the academisation programme has, in some areas, weakened this connection, leading to a more fragmented and inconsistent approach to sports provision. Initiatives like the UKactive Opening School Facilities Project have started to rebuild collaboration, but further efforts are needed to align school and council-led opportunities. A more integrated system, with clear referral pathways and stronger links between schools and local authority services, would help ensure all children—particularly those with lower participation rates—can access and benefit from sport and physical activity.

5.1 Our research identified the following themes as key factors in successful programmes:  

5.2 The LGA Culture, Tourism and Sport (CTS) Board is committed to tackling inequalities, promoting equality and supporting councils to help communities to be active. We are taking an in-depth look at supporting councils and their partners to improve participation and physical activity levels in the following groups identified as having some of the lowest activity levels and biggest inequalities. This includes Women and girls, Children, young people and families, Disabled People, Older people, Black, Asian, Minority Ethnic groups. We would be happy to share this work with the committee.

6. How should schools and sports organisations work together to deliver better sporting opportunities for children in and outside of school hours?

Schools and sports organisations should collaborate to create a more integrated and accessible sports offer for children both during and beyond the school day. A revitalised school sports partnership (SSP) model could be instrumental in achieving this by establishing local hubs led by specialist schools with expertise in sports development, training, and innovation. These hubs could facilitate school-to-club links, easing the burden on schools while expanding opportunities for participation in a structured and sustainable way.

Schools, as trusted community institutions, are well-placed to provide physical activity opportunities before, during, and after the school day, as well as during school holidays. Many sports halls and playing fields are located on school sites, yet their potential remains underutilised. Expanding initiatives like the Opening School Facilities programme could help address this by increasing access to school sports infrastructure, particularly in areas with low participation rates or limited community sports spaces.

Embedding sports clubs within a broader co-curricular offer—including breakfast, lunchtime, and after-school clubs—can ensure that all children have the chance to engage in a wide range of activities. Hosting community sports clubs on school premises can also provide a vital transition pathway from school-based activities to long-term participation in local clubs, fostering lifelong engagement in sport. This approach not only increases physical activity levels in the short term but also nurtures future volunteering and employment opportunities within the sports sector, reinforcing the civic and community role of schools.

 

6.1 Schools including PE teachers should work with partners from across different sectors to increase engagement, reach and encourage participation from all children and young people and historically inactive subgroups of children and young people. For example collaborating with the target group themselves, hyperlocal organisations that are known to and trusted by communities to deliver fun activities, working with parents to identify and breakdown barriers to access and educate parents on the health, wellbeing and academic benefits to being active. Work with the school nursing service, park and leisure services to raise the profile of the local offer and participate in school visits to local gyms and other assets to support young people to become familiar with using them.   

6.2 Adopting a more informed approach to co-production, collaboration and partnership working and a more tailored approach to avoid pitfalls. 

6.3 Working with primary care providers to offer physical activity as a form of preventative care and improving referral routes for children and young people to local programmes e.g. linking the national child measurement programme into local referral pathways to tackle childhood obesity.

6.4 Liaising with Locally Trusted Organisations, community leaders and faith groups to develop understanding of cultural sensitivities and barriers and to expand reach to underrepresented groups from these faiths/communities.  

6.5 Ensuring there is specific regard to intersectionality and tackling the barriers these may present.  

6.6 Ensuring there is an offer such as Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) programme during holiday periods to avoid the drop off in physical activity.

7        Working in partnership with schools, councils help deliver inclusive initiatives that not only improve physical health but also support mental wellbeing, reduce anti-social behaviour, and strengthen community cohesion.

 

8        While provision of physical activity opportunities in a school environment is vital, it is important to ensure a diversity of complementary provision outside of a school setting for those who do not flourish in a formal environment or may have to travel long distances. It is in this context that council-run facilities and the voluntary groups that use them come to the fore. More can be done to use the school setting to support ease of transition between the two environments so that healthy behaviours learned in one setting can be maintained in the other.

 

5.1 How can schools better enable children to develop positive and life-long relationships with sport and physical education?

5.2 Significant research shows that the most effective preventative measure for ill health and wellbeing is being active. Yet despite the evidence, the level of physical inactivity in England is continuing; in 2022/23 22.7 per cent of year 6 children were classified as obese.

The Active Lives Children and Young People’s Survey for the 2022-23 academic year shows no increase in the number of  children and young people classified as active since the last academic year, with the figure being active remaining at 47 per cent.  

Efforts to address inactivity has been significantly hampered by barriers and difficulties created during and after the COVID-19 pandemic and ageing facilities. Stubborn inactivity levels are at risk of increasing further, particularly for less active groups, as communities face a cost of living crisis. The Department for Transport (DfT) active travel strategy set out objectives to get more people walking and cycling, and to increase the percentage of children aged 5 to 10 who usually walk to school from 49 per cent in 2014 to 55 per cent in 2025. Preventing and tackling inequalities and helping the whole of the nation to be done to engage groups with lower participation rates - such as girls, those with disabilities or from lower socio-economic backgrounds? Activity is a key aim of Sport England’s Uniting the Movement strategy, and councils have a key role to play in the realisation of this.

Governance

8. How effective are national and local government and sport governing body initiatives in delivering school and grassroots sport, and how might they be improved?

8.1 Councils have been very effective at delivering the Holiday Activities Food Programme, but is currently being hampered by the uncertainty over its funding for the future. The Government needs to urgently fund further rounds of the HAF programme which sees funding come to an end in March 2025. This needs to be underpinned by a multi year extension to allow for better planning and more strategic implementation by local authorities.

National and local government initiatives, along with sport governing bodies play a vital role in delivering school and grassroots sport. However, their effectiveness is often undermined by complex funding structures, inconsistent local support, and a lack of strategic coordination. While NGBs bring valuable expertise and we work well with many of them, funding is sometimes channelled through them when councils—who have a broader reach and deeper local knowledge—could deliver more effectively in partnership with NGBs. Councils are key to the successful delivery of sport and physical activity at the grassroots level, yet the current system is too fragmented, with multiple funding pots, competing policy priorities, and underutilised resources.

Sport England’s Uniting the Movement (UtM) strategy rightly focuses on reducing inequalities in access to sport, and we welcome the place partnership programme. However, the phased delivery means that some areas must wait extended periods for investment, potentially deepening disparities. A more strategic and universal approach is needed to ensure that all councils have access to resources and best practices, rather than limiting support to select areas. Currently, there is no central repository of resources for councils to learn from supported areas, which further restricts the ability to scale best practice.

A stronger partnership between Sport England and local government—similar to the existing collaboration with Arts Council England—would help streamline processes, simplify funding access, and maximise impact. Local authorities should be central to decision-making, working alongside NGBs to ensure funding is targeted effectively to meet local needs. Without sustained investment in facilities, workforce development, and local sports infrastructure, there is a risk that government and NGB initiatives will fall short of their potential. A funding model based on need, ensuring all local authorities can deliver a minimum sport and leisure offer, would provide a more equitable and effective approach to supporting grassroots and school sport.

9. How can the Government facilitate better coordination across the sport ecosystem to deliver grassroots and school sport? Is the Department for Culture, Media and Sport successfully leveraging the economic and community benefits of sport and physical activity across Government?

9.1             There is no clear strategic plan or commitment from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). A clear national strategy and vision for the sector is needed to drive the agenda forward.  

9.2             The new Government has committed to a number of related priorities including: focusing on women’s health as it reforms the NHS, tackling the social determinants of health, getting more children active by protecting time for physical education, supporting the role grassroots clubs play in expanding access to sport. A national youth strategy, neighbourhood and youth future hubs needs to connect into work on the sport and physical activity sector because without the sector the future sustainability of these hubs are at risk. 

9.3             We still do not know if the Department for Health and Social Care women’s health strategy’ the HAF programme or the DCMS ‘Get active strategy’ which set a target to get 1.25 million more women and one million more children and young people and targets for Black, Asian and disabled people to be more active by 2030 will continue. Local areas need urgent clarity about the continuation of these policy aims and leadership from DCMS. The engagement with key stakeholders which was taking place through the National Physical Activity Partnership has since ceased, this needs to be urgently re-established so that stakeholders can support the Government in the co-development of this work and ensure it lands at a local level.

9.4             A cross-government strategy is needed if progress is to be made. This needs to be at the heart of the Mission Board’s work for the health, economic growth, barriers and safer streets missions. We recommend continuing, but refocusing and restructuring the National Physical Activity Taskforce under the previous government, but with a stronger representation from local government and local delivery partners. This can act as a sounding board to inform the Department’s engagement with the Mission boards.

9.5             To date investment from the Government goes through NGBs and Sport England rather than via localing government directly. This investment is based on priorities set by these bodies and the Government. Councils are already the biggest funder for these services, but sidestepping them in this way hampers their ability to transform these services and deliver a coherent and coordinated offer to their local communities based on need. Councils are leaders of places, convenors of local partners and commissioners and providers of sport, physical activity, leisure, parks services in addition to having a remit for public health, children and adult services, active travel, planning and many more policy levers. Consulting local government directly, and engaging them to co-develop and deliver national policy is a more efficient and effective way of delivering national policy that is based on the needs of communities. Councils need to be at the heart of national strategies, implementation and investment.


 

13