Devolution in England is going to be messy and slow, and brings with it huge risks that Andy Burnham ignores at his peril. The prime minister’s devolution push will be messy because Whitehall’s ingrained anxiety about handing over money and power will lead to piecemeal deals, starting with a deal for Cornwall that will lack the much-promised driving force of a newly minted mayor. And there is every prospect that it will be slow now that the reappointed housing secretary Angela Rayner’s reorganisation of local government, creating hundreds of unitary authorities where counties and districts once ruled, is mired in judicial reviews.
Some councils have run up huge debts in the last decade and it’s not clear how these debts will be divided among the new entities. There are claims that plans to divide some existing county councils into three, four or even five unitary authorities is politically motivated and that Labour has become seduced by the prospect of retaining a presence in local government through gerrymandering. Last week, Hertfordshire county council and Newcastle-under-Lyme borough council became the latest local authorities to send letters to Rayner, seeking clarity on how the government reached its decision in their areas.
A week earlier, Lincolnshire county council did the same. Farther south, Essex county, which is to be divided into five unitary authorities, found that the recommendation of Whitehall officials for just three new authorities was overruled by Rayner. Supposedly, all this infighting will be resolved by Christmas and England will be ready for an entirely new map of local authorities by next May when fresh elections will be held.
Surely these councils and combined authorities, many of which are also embryonic, will struggle to become public institutions with verve, drive, knowledge and experience, able to make good decisions in time for the next election in 2029. When devolution is the prime minister’s big idea, one that will energise Britain’s spirit of enterprise, how it works is going to be crucial. He cannot risk Reform UK and the Tories crowing about another broken promise; or how it shows the British state is clogged with officials waiting for their generous pension, and in need of a Trumpian deep clean.
Rayner’s plan is rooted in a belief that local government has failed to work properly and that structural reform is the answer, saving much more over the longer term than the estimated £2bn initial cost. It is a belief that has no basis in academic study. It would be a relief to all of those involved in local government and devolution to know that somewhere in the world there was data illustrating how this kind of structural change improves services, saves money and, as Burnham would have it, supercharges economic growth.
Unfortunately there isn’t any such evidence. It is, to use a well-worn cliche, just re-arranging deckchairs. And it is not just because the same people will be taking up the same roles in new offices (and yes, there will need to be five head offices instead of one in Essex).
Extract — continue reading at the source.
