The Liberal Democrats believe strongly that decisions should be taken at the lowest possible level of government so that the local issues are solved locally by people who know what they are talking about. So, the idea behind this White Paper is very welcome although in practice I think this will not achieve what it wants to achieve. I will set out the key areas where things will change and where I see difficulties.
We currently have one of the most convoluted systems of local government anywhere:
- Cambridge City Council (which is a District Level Council)
- Cambridgeshire County Council (CCC)
- Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) (temporary organisation, created in 2014 until 2030 to allow £500m funding from central government for a wider area with cooperation between Cambridge City, South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge County Council, business and the University who all have a seat at the board)
- Combined Authority (CA) covering Cambridgeshire and Peterborough established in March 2017 after initial suggestions from the then Conservative government that it should also cover Norfolk and Suffolk which would have been enormous
There is a vast overlap in some of the responsibilities of each of these organisations which are no doubt carved out when you get to the detail, which I will not go into here, but I would argue that it is generally difficult to say who is accountable for what. For, example, there is a bit of transport in the CCC, the GCP and the CA.
What does the White Paper say?
- Why is devolution a good thing?
The government thinks it will drive economic growth, increase trust in politics and satisfaction with public services.
Examples of intended benefits that are presented include – easier commutes through a single transport system, houses matched with infrastructure and skills matched to local jobs.
- Devolution for the whole of England
There are some areas of the UK that already have devolved local government e.g. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough. This is now coming to all areas of the UK with enhanced powers. See the map showing the current status:
Each area will have a strategic authority of various levels of devolution:
- Foundation Strategic Authorities – ones with no elected Mayor. The government wants everywhere to have an elected Mayor so these will ultimately disappear.
- Mayoral Strategic Authorities – one with a Mayor (like us)
- Established Mayoral Strategic Authorities – these will get further devolution and money in the form of an Integrated Settlement.
These Strategic authorities should cover about 1.5 million people, be a sensible economic area, reflecting travel to work patterns and be contiguous and leave no small areas out.
They will have a defined set of competencies that are supposed to bolster those of other public bodies such as the NHS and constituent authorities. These competencies are:
- Transport and local infrastructure
- Skills and employment support
- Housing and strategic planning
- Economic development and regeneration
- Environment and climate change
- Health, wellbeing and public service reform
- Public safety
The government intends to put legislation in place that will clarify that Mayors will have the ultimate power over these areas and will be able to override a constituent council that is not in agreement.
This is an opportunity for a responsibility salad that will not clarify the accountability mess that we currently have in Cambridge.
Local government will look like this:
- Removal of two-tier authorities
This is the current position of unitary vs two-tier councils in England. (Blue – unitary, Red – two-tier).
The government want to get rid of two-tier authorities i.e. areas that have both District and County Authorities and create unitary authorities with populations of approximately 500,000 people. Currently the populations within Cambridgeshire are approximately:
Cambridge City 150,000
South Cambridgeshire 162,000 (in 2021)
Huntingdonshire 186,000 (mid 2023)
East Cambridgeshire 88,000 (2021)
Fenland 102,000 (2021)
Peterborough 211,000
For us in Cambridge, this will be the biggest change. So, when the time comes, it will be point of discussion as to where the boundaries are set. I think 500,000 is rather large. They also say that they want to create authorities in places that people recognise and work in and yet we have a Combined authority of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough which I do not consider to be an obvious combination. I think this boundary will not now change.
The potential benefits are
- financial savings – in combining authorities you need fewer leadership roles
- Providing more holistic services e.g. combining housing and social care in one authority
- Improvement of local accountability. It will be clearer to the public who the local authority is. However, the government appears to be taking away the lowest level council and councillors and replacing them with a combined authority on top. I am not sure things will be much clearer to the public.
I think this makes local government far less local. The local council will now be much bigger, and there are potentially far fewer councillors and so less people to contact when there is a problem.
Elections for the new unitary councils will be in May 2027 or 2028.
- Alignment of boundaries
The government wants to align the boundaries of all public services so that the police, probation, the fire service and health services all have the same boundaries. This sounds very sensible to me. Non-department Public Bodies (NDPBs) and arm’s length bodies (for example: National Rail, Homes England and National Highways) will also be expected to align with the strategic authorities.
The Mayor is also expected to be appointed to the Integrated Care Partnerships as Chair or Co-Chair and be involved with appointments to Integrated Care Boards. Where the boundaries align, Mayors will exercise the functions of the Police and Crime Commissioner and Fire and Rescue Authorities. This is particularly welcome as the public interest in electing these functions has been dismal.
- Constitution
The devolution will no longer be at the whim of the Secretary of State but there will be a constitutional basis for it which I consider to be a very good thing. Consistency across the country with defined responsibilities leads to clarity. However, the government are initially broadening the number of combined authorities under the old system and are ‘committing’ to an English Devolution Paper in this parliament. We will see whether they get to actually enact and implement this.
- Funding
Local government funding needs a big overhaul so this ought to be the most crucial element of the whole proposal. However, the funding for the constituent unitary councils is not explicitly addressed in this white paper and this is where there is currently an issue.
The change will come with integrated settlements (ISs) which will be available only to the ‘Established Strategic Authorities’. Funding that currently comes from different streams will be consolidated into one pot. This will include for example transport, grant funding for regeneration and housing delivery.
The system of Mayoral levies on council tax will be broadened and Mayors will be able to raise a levy on all areas of their responsibility, including an Infrastructure Levy.
In order to monitor the outcomes of this funding the government want to set up a ‘single accountability framework’ so that there is no micromanagement by central government but some visibility on what is happening. It seems central government will be setting targets to align local activity with national priorities.
- Planning
The Strategic Authorities will be required to produce a Spatial Development Strategy and Mayors will be able to intervene on applications of potential strategic importance and make Mayoral Development Orders. Currently, Mayors need to consent of the Local Planning Authority (in our case Cambridge City Council) but this will be reviewed in light of the additional powers that Mayors are intended to have over development. It seems that the current powers of the Local Planning Authority will broadly continue but with Mayors having extra powers to shape the plans.
- Other interesting points
- They want to help local media as they play a vital role in keeping local government accountable to the public.
- Local Transport Authorities will be empowered to regulate micromobility scheme like e-bikes.
- They are working to address pavement parking
- They want to copy London for public transport ticketing so that you can buy a ticket that covers all types of public transport.
- Public appointments to major cultural institutions are not representative of the country and the government will work with Mayors to rectify this.
- Summary view
There is some that is good in these proposals, aligning boundaries for all services and putting things on a statutory footing rather than leaving this to the whim of local and central authorities. This has resulted in different levels of authority and funding in different parts of the country.
However, it does not simplify the local government system as it still keeps at least two layers everywhere. It also lifts local government to a higher level than it was before so that while the papers emphasise the need to make decisions locally, some local decisions will now be taken at a more distant level. Also, funding for the constituent parts of the Strategic Authorities is not addressed and so remains uncertain.
- Devolution Framework summary table
This is an overview of the different levels of devolution to give you an idea of where we are headed.
| Detail | Foundation | Mayoral | Established |
| Funding and investment | |||
| Access to a multi-departmental, long-term integrated funding settlement | X | ||
| Long-term investment fund, with an agreed annual allocation | X | X | |
| Removal of gateway review from investment fund, after Gateway One complete | X | ||
| Ability to introduce mayoral precepting on council tax | X | X | |
| Consolidation of local growth and place funding in a single pot | X | X | X |
| Strategic leadership | |||
| A statutory duty to produce Local Growth Plans | X | X | |
| Membership of the Council of Nations and Regions | X | X | |
| Membership of the Mayoral Data Council | X | X | |
| Transport and local infrastructure | |||
| Local Transport Authority and public transport functions, including bus franchising and responsibility for an area-wide Local Transport Plan | X | X | X |
| Simplification and consolidation of local transport funding** | X | X | X |
| Removal of certain Secretary of State consents, e.g. on lane rental schemes | X | X | |
| Duty to establish a Key Route Network on the most important local roads | X | X | |
| Mayoral Power of Direction over use of constituent authority powers on the Key Route Network | X | X | |
| Priority for strategic rail engagement (including mayoral partnerships) with Great British Railways | X | X | X |
| Statutory role in governing, managing, planning, and developing the rail network | X | X | |
| An option for greater control over local rail stations | X | X | |
| A ‘right to request’ further rail devolution | X | ||
| Priority for support to deliver multi-modal ticketing | X | ||
| A clear, strategic role in the decarbonisation of the local bus fleet | X | X | X |
| Active Travel England support for constituent authority capability | X | X | X |
| Formal partnership with National Highways | X | X | |
| Skills and employment support | |||
| Joint ownership of the Local Skills Improvement Plan model, with Employer Representative Bodies | X | X | X |
| Devolution of the core Adult Skills Fund | X | ||
| Devolution of non-apprenticeship adult skills functions through a consolidated skills funding pot** | X | X | |
| Central convening of youth careers provision including greater flexibility for Careers hubs | X | X | |
| A clear role in relation to 16-19 education and training | X | X | |
| Responsibility for developing local Get Britain Working Plans | X | X | X |
| Devolution of supported employment funding | X | X | X |
| Co-design of future employment support that is additional to core Jobcentre Plus provision | X | X | |
| Delegated delivery or commissioning of employment support that is additional to core Jobcentre Plus provision | X | ||
| Alignment of Jobcentre Plus boundaries with Strategic Authorities | X | ||
| Housing and strategic planning | |||
| A duty to produce a Spatial Development Strategy | X | X | X |
| Strategic development management powers (once the Spatial Development Strategy is in place) | X | X | |
| Ability to raise a Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy to fund strategic infrastructure (once the Spatial Development Strategy is in place) | X | X | |
| Ability to make Mayoral Development Orders | X | X | |
| Ability to establish Mayoral Development Corporations | X | X | |
| Homes England compulsory purchase powers (held concurrently) | X | X | X |
| Devolution of wider grant funding to support regeneration and housing delivery** | X | X | |
| Ability to set the strategic direction of any future programme to support affordable housing provision in their area | X | ||
| Strategic Place Partnership with Homes England | X | X | |
| Support to establish a public sector land commission | X | ||
| Economic development and regeneration | |||
| Partnership working with Department for Science, Industry and Technology and UK Research and Innovation to explore opportunities for closer long-term collaboration in strengthening local research and innovation capacity | X | X | X |
| Develop joint innovation action plans with Innovate UK to shape long-term strategies and investments | X | X | |
| Embed UK Research and Innovation lead points of contact for enhanced collaborative working on innovation with Mayoral Strategic Authorities that are committed to work collaboratively on innovation | X | X | |
| Responsibility as the accountable body for the delivery of Growth Hubs | X | X | X |
| Devolution of Growth Hubs funding | X | ||
| A Strategic Partnership with the Department for Business and Trade focused on domestic growth, exports, investment, and delivery of local growth priorities. | X | X | |
| Partnership working with Department for Culture, Media and Sport Arm’s Length Bodies to maximise culture, heritage, and sport spending in place | X | X | X |
| Environment and climate change | |||
| Devolution of retrofit funding this parliament subject to a successful transition period | X | ||
| Heat network zoning coordination role | X | X | X |
| Coordinating local energy planning to support development of regional network energy infrastructure | X | X | X |
| Green jobs and skills coordination role | X | X | X |
| A strategic role on net zero in collaboration with government, including on Great British Energy’s Local Power Plan and Warm Homes Plan | X | X | X |
| Responsibility for coordinating delivery and monitoring of Local Nature Recovery Strategies | X | X | X |
| Health, wellbeing and public service reform | |||
| A bespoke statutory health improvement and health inequalities duty | X | X | X |
| Mayors engaged during the Integrated Care Boards chair appointment process | X | X | |
| Mayors as members of local Integrated Care Partnerships, and consideration for position of chair or co-chair | X | X | |
| A role in convening partners and driving cross-cutting public service reform, including looking at areas such as multiple disadvantage | X | X | X |
| Public safety | |||
| Mayors accountable for the exercise of Police and Crime Commissioner functions where police force and mayoral boundaries align | X | X | |
| Mayors accountable for the exercise of Fire and Rescue Authority functions where fire and rescue service and mayoral boundaries align | X | X | |
| A clear and defined role in local resilience, working with the Local Resilience Forum to embed resilience into broader policy and delivery | X | X | X |
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.