‘The centre has not delivered' admits Labour, while the Economist calls for the government to 'Free the North'. But does anyone have the courage to end the decades-long hoarding of power in London?
Feels like we're in a bit of a moment with institutional decentralisation. I've been working on this stuff for a decade, so reading the Brown report and subsequent coverage is a bit like watching your favourite band headline Glastonbury after years of seeing them play The Castle.
Excellent article. Now we just need Angela Rayner for PM. No more blue/grey suited University educated, middle aged, white men living in Islington! Let’s have a PM who has walked the walk, female, from the North, highly intelligent.
Superb article. The views of the economists reflect the ones I have come to hold after a fifty year working life. Having seen how Thatcher's policies wrecked our industries and how the market has not provided any kind of replacement or alternative jobs, I am heartened to see both politicians and their advisers recognising the changes that are now imperative for our regions. I sincerely hope these policies are no more than a General Election away.
Superb and frankly hope inspiring article. However I would have to take issue with Andrew Sisson's suggested approach to "tidying up" LG boundaries. Given the objective here is to empower local decision makers, the worst possible way to begin is by enforcing a top down centralist diktat that (for example) Burnley, Blackburn and Preston are going to have to align and merge the way they collect the bins, subsidise bus services, run adult services, etc.. The concept of subsidiarity should (and in many cases- does already) form the basis of where decisions should be made, with local people via their elected officials able to decide to devolve up (or down) decision making to the appropriate level. Central government cannot be allowed to continue to helicopter parent and tinker under the aegis of "getting devolution right", and I would hope that any future settlement would take this into account.
Thanks veey much. And that's interesting - is there anything I can read on how this might work? (the idea of bottom up devolution arrangements). And do you think it risks chaos having all the different types of units?
Dec 25, 2022·edited Dec 25, 2022Liked by Joshi Herrmann
Hiya Joshi!
Firstly, apologies for the delay in responding - first day off for a while!
In answer to your questions, I suppose there's a couple of areas worth considering.
Firstly I would say that the idea of "bottom up"/"opt in" participation isn't an unknown concept in the UK. A very good example of voluntary "bottom up" participation would be Stockport's involvement with, then self-extraction from, the Greater Manchester Strategic Framework plan. They didn't like it, so they walked (for better or worse). In theory, in a world where direct decision making is further devolved, such opt-in participation in combined bodies could be more actively encouraged where this is suitable (e.g. on matters such as planning, skills, transport, or utilities).
In terms of chaos between geographies of different sizes, I fail to see how this is really an issue unless there is evidence of a substantive democratic or functional deficit. Is there much of a difference in how Birmingham (>1m people) and Bury (<200k) metropolitan councils provide services to their residents? Should we be suggesting breaking up Birmingham into five smaller boroughs, or alternatively merging Bury with Oldham, Rochdale and Tameside? There is a definite tidying tendency of what might be termed the technocratic class that leads them to impose what they consider optimum forms, rather than allowing a more varied, arguably appropriate, and certainly messier range of sizes and shapes of local government.
As for how "bottom up" devolution might work, it's probably easier to describe a theoretical arrangement rather than digging into specific existing examples at home or abroad. Therefore, given a 200 seat majority in parliament and an acquiescent public, I would personally take the existing structures of representation and adopt the principle of subsidiarity to them. This would mean that, picking an example completely at random, Handforth Parish Council could make steps towards taking over responsibility for recycling and upkeep of highways, rather than these remaining with Cheshire East. Or they could join with the nearby megalopolis of Wilmslow and Alderley and start specifying their own local bus networks. Equally however, people in the firebrand community of Handforth West could decide to cede from the debauched masses on the other side of Wilmslow Road and go it alone. Obviously, all the above (aside from being tongue in cheek) would be subject to legal oversight to ensure that people remained represented and that organisations remained able to deliver key services either alone or in combination with others. Frankly I suspect little would change from this arrangement. However it would perhaps go someway to resolve the democratic deficit in this country (perceived or actual).
Superb Joshi, and not just because you quoted three of my absolute favourite thinkers on economics and advocates for regional power.
Thanks too for tackling the London media’s obsession with the short term fixes, and therefore pulling out Lords abolition as the headline. Starmer could have said “I’m glad I got your attention, because we’re dead serious about a radical transformation”.
As I start my new adventure as Editor of The Business Desk I am heartened that the importance of this agenda is gaining traction. Like Diane, Mike and David, a lifelong cause worth fighting for. Keep up the great work.
The key to raising living standards is to invest more in the skills required to draw investment into this region.Whilst there are many initiatives focussed upon large cities such as Liverpool.and Manchester peripheral towns are still.ignored or underfunded.The gap in both infrastructure and educational standards funding from Westminster is significant.French cities and regions have benefited from a strong often mayor led pull against Paris but that has taken centuries to achieve.I don't see a new Labour led government as wanting to delegate vastly more funding powers from the centre where it might hold the pose strings and keep control of projects that win votes.
I am trying to get to a letters page as I am looking for contact with any one with information about Strangeways POW camp Rochdale in 1946, and the atrocities which went on there, where my father Rev Urien Evans was chaplain. I have interest from a writer and film crew but some more examples of memories and lived experiences would be of huge importance…Angie Butler ..Cornwall 07748963085
A brilliant article! It was for material like this that I subscribe to The Mill. Thank you!
Thanks Joanna.
Feels like we're in a bit of a moment with institutional decentralisation. I've been working on this stuff for a decade, so reading the Brown report and subsequent coverage is a bit like watching your favourite band headline Glastonbury after years of seeing them play The Castle.
Haha. Enjoy the set while it lasts Tom. (and email me so I can call upon your expertise in future)
Excellent article. Now we just need Angela Rayner for PM. No more blue/grey suited University educated, middle aged, white men living in Islington! Let’s have a PM who has walked the walk, female, from the North, highly intelligent.
Superb article. The views of the economists reflect the ones I have come to hold after a fifty year working life. Having seen how Thatcher's policies wrecked our industries and how the market has not provided any kind of replacement or alternative jobs, I am heartened to see both politicians and their advisers recognising the changes that are now imperative for our regions. I sincerely hope these policies are no more than a General Election away.
Absolutely
Superb and frankly hope inspiring article. However I would have to take issue with Andrew Sisson's suggested approach to "tidying up" LG boundaries. Given the objective here is to empower local decision makers, the worst possible way to begin is by enforcing a top down centralist diktat that (for example) Burnley, Blackburn and Preston are going to have to align and merge the way they collect the bins, subsidise bus services, run adult services, etc.. The concept of subsidiarity should (and in many cases- does already) form the basis of where decisions should be made, with local people via their elected officials able to decide to devolve up (or down) decision making to the appropriate level. Central government cannot be allowed to continue to helicopter parent and tinker under the aegis of "getting devolution right", and I would hope that any future settlement would take this into account.
Thanks veey much. And that's interesting - is there anything I can read on how this might work? (the idea of bottom up devolution arrangements). And do you think it risks chaos having all the different types of units?
Hiya Joshi!
Firstly, apologies for the delay in responding - first day off for a while!
In answer to your questions, I suppose there's a couple of areas worth considering.
Firstly I would say that the idea of "bottom up"/"opt in" participation isn't an unknown concept in the UK. A very good example of voluntary "bottom up" participation would be Stockport's involvement with, then self-extraction from, the Greater Manchester Strategic Framework plan. They didn't like it, so they walked (for better or worse). In theory, in a world where direct decision making is further devolved, such opt-in participation in combined bodies could be more actively encouraged where this is suitable (e.g. on matters such as planning, skills, transport, or utilities).
In terms of chaos between geographies of different sizes, I fail to see how this is really an issue unless there is evidence of a substantive democratic or functional deficit. Is there much of a difference in how Birmingham (>1m people) and Bury (<200k) metropolitan councils provide services to their residents? Should we be suggesting breaking up Birmingham into five smaller boroughs, or alternatively merging Bury with Oldham, Rochdale and Tameside? There is a definite tidying tendency of what might be termed the technocratic class that leads them to impose what they consider optimum forms, rather than allowing a more varied, arguably appropriate, and certainly messier range of sizes and shapes of local government.
As for how "bottom up" devolution might work, it's probably easier to describe a theoretical arrangement rather than digging into specific existing examples at home or abroad. Therefore, given a 200 seat majority in parliament and an acquiescent public, I would personally take the existing structures of representation and adopt the principle of subsidiarity to them. This would mean that, picking an example completely at random, Handforth Parish Council could make steps towards taking over responsibility for recycling and upkeep of highways, rather than these remaining with Cheshire East. Or they could join with the nearby megalopolis of Wilmslow and Alderley and start specifying their own local bus networks. Equally however, people in the firebrand community of Handforth West could decide to cede from the debauched masses on the other side of Wilmslow Road and go it alone. Obviously, all the above (aside from being tongue in cheek) would be subject to legal oversight to ensure that people remained represented and that organisations remained able to deliver key services either alone or in combination with others. Frankly I suspect little would change from this arrangement. However it would perhaps go someway to resolve the democratic deficit in this country (perceived or actual).
A detailed comment about devolution at 3am on Christmas. That's very Mill. Merry Christmas and thanks for your thoughts.
Superb Joshi, and not just because you quoted three of my absolute favourite thinkers on economics and advocates for regional power.
Thanks too for tackling the London media’s obsession with the short term fixes, and therefore pulling out Lords abolition as the headline. Starmer could have said “I’m glad I got your attention, because we’re dead serious about a radical transformation”.
As I start my new adventure as Editor of The Business Desk I am heartened that the importance of this agenda is gaining traction. Like Diane, Mike and David, a lifelong cause worth fighting for. Keep up the great work.
Thanks v much Michael.
The key to raising living standards is to invest more in the skills required to draw investment into this region.Whilst there are many initiatives focussed upon large cities such as Liverpool.and Manchester peripheral towns are still.ignored or underfunded.The gap in both infrastructure and educational standards funding from Westminster is significant.French cities and regions have benefited from a strong often mayor led pull against Paris but that has taken centuries to achieve.I don't see a new Labour led government as wanting to delegate vastly more funding powers from the centre where it might hold the pose strings and keep control of projects that win votes.
Yep, that's the fear and probably a veey justified one.
*very
I am trying to get to a letters page as I am looking for contact with any one with information about Strangeways POW camp Rochdale in 1946, and the atrocities which went on there, where my father Rev Urien Evans was chaplain. I have interest from a writer and film crew but some more examples of memories and lived experiences would be of huge importance…Angie Butler ..Cornwall 07748963085
Very interesting Angie. One of us will give you a call to see if there's a mini story we can do that would act as a call out.
Excellent article - much better than what I read in the national press. Thank you!