The English Devolution White Paper is a significant development in the government’s plans for growth with regional mayors set to play a central role. While further detail is still needed, the proposals mark a step forward in decentralising power and enabling regional leaders to drive change, writes Alex Walker.
The ‘plan for change’, the clean power 2030 action plan, an overhaul of the planning system, and now the English devolution white paper. It may have been a slow start, but the detail of the government’s wider agenda and how it fits together is taking shape. And regional mayors with bolstered powers have a key role to play, especially – unsurprisingly – when it comes to the government’s plans for growth. While the English devolution white paper is not quite a ‘devolution revolution’ (to quote Angela Rayner), it does outline a sizeable step forward.
Local government reorganisation
Despite some shiny new powers on offer to mayors, it is ‘the biggest reorganisation of English local government in half a century’ that has dominated the headlines. Places that have two tiers of local government are being asked to present plans to move to a single ‘unitary’ authority that will be responsible for all local government services in the area. The government has several rationales for scrapping district councils. One is efficiency savings – research from PwC in 2020 found that unitarisation could save £2.9 billion over five years. Another is removing fragmentation in service delivery. The white paper also touts reducing workforce pressures by removing competition for staff, and a reduction in the number of politicians. The local government landscape in England is undoubtedly complicated and confusing, making it difficult for local residents to know who is responsible for what and therefore to hold the right politicians to account. And with the white paper’s ambition for a further tier of governance across every part of England, there is a logic to simplifying local government now.
But critics of the move argue that rather than shifting power closer to local communities it will make decision-making more remote. To counter this, the government will need to support town and parish councils and have a strategy for improving the places people engage with on a local level such as high streets. The ‘right to buy assets of community value’ (such as empty shops, pubs and community spaces) that will be introduced via the English Devolution Bill indicates the government’s appreciation of this. Nonetheless, local government reorganisation is likely to remain the most controversial aspect of the proposals.
The English devolution framework
The bulk of the white paper however is concerned with the government’s framework for moving more power out of the centre. Broadly speaking, the aim is a layer of mayor-led ‘strategic authorities’ covering ‘sensible’ economic areas across the whole of England with the powers necessary to drive growth. A three-stage process is the plan for getting there, from ‘foundation strategic authorities’ (with no mayor) to ‘mayoral strategic authorities’ and ‘established mayoral strategic authorities’. The language of strategic authorities is new, but this is largely a rebranding of the existing combined or combined county authority model (where a group of local authorities agree to come together to form a new legal body covering a wider area).
There is a substantial package of powers on offer to incentivise those at the foundation level to go mayoral. These including a statutory role for mayors in the local rail network and the ability to intervene in strategically important planning applications. The most advanced powers are reserved for the ‘established’ mayoral authorities, who will have access to a long-term integrated funding settlement which will enable much greater flexibility in how money is spent. But powers aren’t the only carrot on offer. There is also a place on the Mayoral Council, the Council of Nations and Regions, and the newly-announced Mayoral Data Council to sweeten the deal.
The starting point though is full coverage at least to the non-mayoral foundation level, and the white paper sets out a list of criteria for determining the right geographical boundaries for new combined authorities. It clearly won’t be possible to find geographies that satisfy every principle. Functional economic areas of the right scale do not always align with local identities, for example. Recognising this, the government will have the power to intervene to create strategic authorities when collaborative routes have been exhausted. What will take priority when making these decisions though is not clear.
Surprises and omissions
The government’s ambitions for English devolution remain primarily economic, and most of the powers on offer reflect this (namely, transport, infrastructure, regeneration, housing, planning and skills). This said, there was more on public services in the white paper than perhaps had been expected, with support for a mayoral convening and reform role, as well as a new duty related to health inequalities, plus ambitions for greater alignment of public service boundaries. In Greater Manchester in particular a more integrated, preventative approach to health has proved successful, something which the white paper acknowledges and looks to build on.
The white paper also went further than anticipated in strengthening the power of mayors vis-à-vis the constituent councils of their combined authorities. The previous model had been largely consensus-based, with mayors having to seek unanimity for most decisions. This model will be scrapped in favour of simple majority voting where possible. Coupled with the power to ‘call in’ strategic planning decisions, this will significantly strengthen the position of mayors.
This bolstering of mayoral power needs to come with enhanced scrutiny and accountability. The white paper recognises the importance of this, but doesn’t commit to any particular changes, with various different options under consideration. Where it is more committal, the focus is on accountability to Whitehall – in this instance via an ‘outcomes framework’ tied to the integrated financial settlements (the size of which we won’t know until next year’s spending review). A recent report from the Productivity Institute recommended, among other things, directly elected scrutiny committees and support for local journalism.
Fiscal devolution was an especially notable absence. Mayors such as Andy Burnham have been pushing for the power to raise a tourist tax for some time, but this was reportedly blocked by HM Treasury. Yet the door is potentially open to forms of fiscal devolution in the future. In the longer term, one of the most consequential aspects of the framework might be the ability to add to it. The powers set out in the white paper apparently represent ‘a floor… not a ceiling’ to the government’s ambitions. Established mayoral authorities will be able to propose new functions, with the government able to add new powers to the framework via statutory instrument.
Rather than rip everything up and start again, Labour has chosen to extend, enhance and systematise the existing model. Revolution it is not. But given the disruptive churn in approaches to regional policy over the years, this is welcome. Nonetheless, the white paper is a significant moment in the English devolution journey.
The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Bennett Institute for Public Policy.
