The recent flurry of announcements around new Combined Authorities and devolution deals in England has left many working in local government and placemaking scratching their heads. What do these developments tell us about the new government's approach to sub-national governance, and what challenges and opportunities lie ahead? In LEDC’s first Espresso Shot episode reviewing September 2024 David and Mike try to make sense of it all..
New Combined Authorities and devolution deals in England - what has been announced?
On the eve of the Labour Party’s Autumn Conference in Liverpool, the UK Government made a series of announcements regarding new Combined Authorities and devolution deals in England. Four new Combined Authorities were confirmed, covering East Yorkshire and Hull; Greater Lincolnshire; Devon and Torbay; and Lancashire. The new arrangements will grant these places access to investment and a range of strategic powers across areas like transport, housing, and skills.
There are two distinct models of devolution represented in these new Combined Authorities:
Mayoral Combined Authorities: Greater Lincolnshire and East Yorkshire & Hull will directly elect mayors in May 2025, with powers over transport, skills and economic development
Combined County Authorities: Lancashire and Devon & Torbay will establish Combined Authorities without directly elected mayors. These deals are more limited in scope, providing a small capital pot and some say in adult education.
Alongside these new Combined Authorities, government also signalled its intention to progress Level 2 devolution deals for Cornwall, Buckinghamshire, Warwickshire, and Surrey. The exact powers and funding offered by these deals vary for each county, although devolving control of the Adult Education Budget (AEB) to the County Council is common to all.
What recent announcements might signal about the new UK Government's approach to English devolution
Perhaps the most intriguing aspect to these announcements was MHCLG’s decision to void the previously agreed devolution deals for Norfolk and Suffolk. In an official statement, it said:
The government strongly believes that the benefits of devolution are best achieved through the establishment of combined institutions with a directly elected leader. Mayors should have a unique role in an institution which allows them to focus fully on their devolved strategic responsibilities, working hand in glove with council leaders who will vitally also focus on the delivery of the essential services for which they are responsible. Conflating these two responsibilities into the same individual and institution, as is the case under the mayoral Single Local Authority model of devolution, would risk the optimal delivery of both and is not in line with the government’s approach to English devolution.
So this move suggests that the UK Government sees Combined Authorities as primarily strategic bodies, rather than vehicles for the delivery of local services. MHCLG’s logic - that the Norfolk and Suffolk arrangements would blur the boundaries between traditional council functions and the more strategic role of Combined Authorities - provides some clues about its vision for sub-national governance in England. But it also raises questions about how easy it will be to maintain the distinction between strategy and delivery as devolution deals become deeper and more comprehensive.
In Greater Manchester, where city-regional devolution is most advanced, the remit of the Combined Authority extends beyond economic development, housing, transport, and skills into public health, with recent evaluation evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of this approach to improving outcomes. And with the recent launch of the Bee Network’s franchised bus services, the Mayor is increasingly the focal point for delivery of a crucial public service. As Mike notes in the episode, ‘if Combined Authorities are really strategic and councils are really delivery bodies, how can this distinction be maintained as devolution is deepened?’
Challenges and future of devolution in England
Looking ahead, the episode covers several key challenges and uncertainties surrounding the future of devolution in England. Firstly, there is a sense that the latest announcements represent more of a ‘mishmash of continuity’ rather than a truly new approach. The differences between the newly announced deals and previously published information appear to be relatively minor.
In the episode, Mike and David emphasise the need for local teams to continue advocating for their own needs, rather than simply accepting the current announcements as the final word. With ongoing processes like the development of Local Growth Plans, the English Devolution Bill, the emergence of new inter-governmental forums such as the Council of Regions and Nations, the policy landscape remains fluid and open to further change.
Comments