Labour and the politics of devolution within England
English devolution cannot be just another line in a Labour manifesto. It has radical implications for the whole way Labour approaches politics and government. Originally written for the Fabian Review, Summer 2021.
Numerous think-tank reports have identified England’s hyper-centralisation as the root cause of regional inequality, uneven growth and deprivation. The transition to zero-carbon emissions will require state leadership and empowered organisations at every level. Andy Burnham has been crowned ‘King of the North’, and Gordon Brown is leading Labour’s Constitutional Commission to explore a ‘union of the nations and regions’, and it was mayoral successes which provided the bright spots in the grim May elections. It is not surprising, then, that ‘English regional devolution’ is gaining support across the party.
But how well has Labour has grasped the radical implications of devolution? Our approach to government, our support for the culture of the union state and our attitudes towards other parties must all change. In 1997 we had not thought through these issues. As a result, we left office with England outside London as centralised as before. Tory ministers could sweep aside Labour’s regional structures with little public protest. Next time, we must understand the politics at the outset.
Reforming the centre
A precondition of devolution is to have an English tier of government to devolve power from. Nowhere in Whitehall coordinates the domestic policy for this nation of 55 million people. Contesting departments, some ‘England only’, some ‘England and Wales’ and some union-wide, defend their narrow turfs jealously. Whitehall’s entire culture assumes that governing is best done from London by the union state. It is the fragmented governance of England by the union that keeps England so centralised.
An incoming government must confront this entrenched culture by creating a machinery of English government with a powerful secretary of state for England, second only in power to the prime minister. Facing many pressing issues, the temptation will be to do what we can first and leave devolution until later. But if we do not insist that change starts on day one, the union state will block English devolution again.
Centre-local relations
Conservative ‘devolution’ has been a limited delegation whose aim is to get localities to do what the centre wants. ‘Devo deals’ — as they are often referred to — offer some extra finance in return for a promise to deliver government priorities. But the process excludes many local stakeholders and nearly all voters. Council leaders and mayors had little choice but to get the best deal they could — yet real power remains in Whitehall. And now Johnson’s government has dropped devolution and asserted more direct rule from Westminster.
Labour must create a right to devolved powers, conferred by statute and not subject to the political whim of ministers. Localities should be able to set their own priorities. Those powers must be enjoyed by elected political opponents, not just Labour colleagues.
Doing so will have a huge impact on how Labour governs. No longer will Labour ministers in London pretend to solve problems in every corner of England. MPs will no longer sit in the exclusive centre of power. Governing will require constructive engagement with autonomous and legitimate centres of power. Partnership and pluralism must replace top-down centralism and political tribalism.
Fiscal devolution and fair funding
Devolved power needs fiscal autonomy: a guaranteed fair share of funding according to need (and the varied ability of different areas to raise money locally); a much wider range of powers to generate income (including stamp duty, planning gain, and extended public asset ownership); and the power to coordinate all public spending — schools, health and social care, housing and transport — within a locality. This too must change how Labour governs. Stable long-term devolution will need underpinning by a cross-party consensus on a new funding formula. As the local becomes more powerful and autonomous, central government’s ability to favour some areas over others will be curbed.
Devolution: neat or messy?
With myriad local councils, combined authorities and mayors exercising different powers, it is often assumed that Labour’s devolution must take a uniform approach: perhaps requiring all councils to be single tier unitaries, with mayors in every part of England, and regions with equal powers. But what works in a city-region may not suit places with a different economic geography. Some regions reflect strongly held identities, but other regions mean nothing. Imposing uniform structures will fuel local opposition and the more uniformity demanded the bigger the upheaval before devolution even starts. Top-down reform in the name of empowering local people is a bad place to start.
The real problem is not local government structures but arbitrary decision-making by ministers and the instinctive centralism of the union state. Labour should start devolution by empowering the structures we inherit and allowing England’s local government to draw down the powers it needs, trusting local people to design the authorities that suit each area. Public demand for English devolution is as yet quite limited. By starting with the familiar, we can enable support for greater empowerment to grow.
Local leadership
Elected mayors may be powerful local advocates but, outside London, their formal powers are very limited. But empowering mayors would give a single elected office the powers that currently belong to many local councils or might be devolved to them. The London mayoralty is well embedded but requiring a power shift from several councils to a single mayor may create much deeper tensions elsewhere. Central government might prefer the convenience of dealing with a single powerful individual covering a large area, but, in starting from where we are, we should allow different models of local leadership to evolve.
Tackling regional issues
If devolution must start messy, issues like strategic transport will still need to be tackled at regional level. Whitehall designed regions will always take powers from more local areas and impose priorities from the centre. Real devolution favours a ‘bottom-up’ approach that supports local authorities to design the institutions and wield the powers they need to cooperate at regional level. Regions that work will grow from a diversity of local authorities that reflect places to which people feel they belong.
An English solution
However English regions evolve, they will not be devolved legislatures like those in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Leaving aside — for now — whether English MPs should make English laws, few people want nine regional law-making assemblies, with different laws on the NHS, higher education or farming. English devolution must be designed for England, not the pretence that English regions are like devolved nations or English mayors sit as equals with First Ministers. English localities need a voice alongside local government from other nations in a reformed union. But English regions don’t solve the ‘English question’ nor can they be forced into a template for Whitehall or the rest of the union. Alongside devolution, England’s national governance must be untangled from that union, with its own machinery of national government and democratic control over its own domestic policy. How best to do that is the biggest challenge of constitutional reform and one Labour’s new Commission must not duck.
Devolution and Labour politics
An audacious Labour can be the party of the country, leaving the Conservatives as the party wedded to Whitehall. Devolution is not an additional paragraph in a normal Labour manifesto but must be a profound change in how we do our politics: changing the way England is governed at the centre, empowering local authorities by right, limiting our ability to impose our will centrally, seeking a consensus on fair funding, and working with elected local leaders of other parties. If we are not prepared to change we should not start. But we cannot tackle regional inequality and exclusion, build a post-Brexit economy or transition to zero-carbon from Whitehall. We cannot transform England without learning how to govern when power is shared, not hoarded.
Professor John Denham is director of the Centre for English Identity and Politics at Southampton University. He is the former Labour MP for Southampton Itchen and served as secretary of state for communities and local government.
