David Cowan: Who speaks for England?

Decentralising power can help heal the regional divide

A project at Harvard University, led by former Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls, has published transcripts with leading British politicians, civil servants, academics, and experts responding to a simple question: why has regional policy failed? Boris Johnson made ‘levelling up’ the central promise of his vision for the post-Brexit era, but he was by no means the first to take on this challenge. Governments going back to the 1970s have grappled with the challenge of regional inequality in the wake of deindustrialisation. Unsurprisingly, the consensus is that there are no easy answers and no single solution. This might have something to do with the structure of governance in England.

The Conservative and Unionist Party, formed by the merger of the Tory Party and the Liberal Unionists in 1912, spent the twentieth century as the doughty defender of the United Kingdom as a unitary state. It opposed home rule for the constituent nations, preferring to pursue localist solutions such as granting more powers to local councils. Proposals for a federal constitution were mooted from time to time by the likes of Joseph Chamberlain and Winston Churchill but never gained any serious traction. Instead, Unionists believed the constitution worked well and should be left well alone.

As we all know, the arrival of New Labour brought about a constitutional revolution, the consequences of which we are still wrangling with today. A wave of devolution arrived for Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and London. England was to be the exception. Over the past thirty years, there have been several attempts to rectify this. One of the signature achievements of Conservative-led governments in recent years has been the steady increase in the number of metro mayors since 2017. However, this has still left English governance as a tangled mess of county councils, combined authorities, local enterprise partnerships, unitary councils, district councils, and civil parishes.

Conservatives have a natural affection for historic and local institutions. More traditionally minded conservatives lament the 1972 reforms to local government boundaries and want the old county boundaries restored. Much of the party’s activist base is made up of local councillors who carry out the groundwork needed to canvass support and get out the vote. This makes Conservatives more reluctant to engage in the kind of standardised restructuring that could rationalise local governance in England. Calls for an English Parliament also fail to appeal to Unionists who fear such a move could lead to a resurgent English nationalism, similar to what has happened in Scotland.

This leaves England in a quandary. England has the largest population and the most wealth in the United Kingdom but the least powerful voice in our politics. Devolution has left the constitution uncomfortably unbalanced. Successful mayoralties in the West Midlands and Tees Valley show how strong local leadership can bring about economic and civil renewal. We need an acceleration of metro mayors across England, a simplification of the levels of local governance in England, and more powers granted to local government including more fiscal autonomy. This would not match the devolved powers of the Scottish and Welsh governments, but it would help ease the imbalance in the constitution and create more positive outcomes for left behind parts of England.

Cities with active governance can bring about an agglomeration effect that ripples out and benefits towns nearby. This would do much more than handing out another £1 billion funding pot for MPs and local authorities to scramble for. Metro mayors also have serious convening power and can win business investment for their area. They can make major improvements in local education and transport links. Mayoralties increase democratic accountability by having an individual responsible for local administration and able to lobby Westminster. Simplifying local government structures would help transparency and accountability, ensuring the right hand knows what the left hand is doing.

Overhauling the local governance of England also goes to the heart of the UK’s fiscal challenge. There is much less money available for levelling up. Interest rates are at their highest in 15 years, and markets are increasingly jittery about the current levels of debt in western countries. Austerity economics is back and does not look like it will be leaving any time soon. Some have suggested that the time for the British government to spend invest more was during the 2010s when interest rates were at record lows. The sum of money spent to reunify Germany, which significantly is a federal country, was as high as €2 trillion. It was also largely achieved during the uniquely benign conditions of the 1990s and early 2000s. Finding our way back to economic growth will be the crucial pre-condition for a similar feat in the UK.

At a time when government at all levels needs to deliver more for less, it is critical to fix the structures currently in place. This was a lesson learned well during the Cameron years, leading to landmark reforms in education and welfare. It is time to do the same for local government on a much more ambitious scale. There is not enough time left in this parliament to enact such sweeping change, so it should be a firm commitment in the next manifesto. By creating a more efficient system with strong local leadership, resources will be better managed and lead to better results for local areas. Launching the first wholesale restructuring of local government since the 1970s will be difficult, but worth pursuing if we truly want to make a break from the muddle and confusion of the past thirty years.

David Cowan is co-editor of The Conservative Reader.