What Can Your Local Authority Do For You?: Examining the Constitutional Change of the English Devolution White Paper

Katherine Macdonald Smith 

As part of the Labour Government’s mission to ‘ignite growth’ and ‘national renewal’, further devolution to local authorities in England has been proposed as a solution to stagnated local economies and unstable local governments. 

Since before government, Labour has demonstrated a predisposition for constitutional reform. In 2020, Keir Starmer commissioned former Prime Minister Gordon Brown to establish and understanding of the UK’s constitutional status and proposals for change. Through the ‘Commission on the UK’s Future’, Brown and other Labour MP’s, Local Councillors as well as a variety of academics from political and legal backgrounds amalgamated the report “A New Britain: Renewing Our Democracy and Rebuilding Our Economy”. Local Government reformation was at the centre of proposals, with a renewed vision of decentralised power to local authority’s in England to drive economic growth. This included recommendations of additional powers for the metro mayor, the head of combined local authorities, in the areas of adult learning and skills commissioning, housing development and transport. The asymmetry of local authority power was also central to the argument of devolution. The expansion of traditional local governments into the mayoral combined authorities realised in Greater Manchester and Liverpool were proposed to be made into a national scheme, where authorities could reorganise themselves in ways that best serve their communities. The economic potential realised by the mayoral deals in urban areas were seen to be the key to the ‘unbalanced economy’ caused by the silencing of local practitioners in communities across the UK. 

The recommendations of this commission run as a golden thread throughout the English Devolution White Paper; a comprehensive guide to the constitutional change the Labour Governments seeks to invoke across local communities. Local authorities are envisioned to be joined in partnerships in so-called ‘Strategic Local Authorities’. Their competencies will be defined in statute through an English Devolution Bill. Mayoral-led devolution will be the idealised from of local authority partnership by allowing democratic accountability manifest in an individual. Authorities will be rewarded through expansions of powers only available to the mayoral form of local authority. Single authorities will be able to take a non-mayoral or ‘foundation level’ status, but only as a ‘stepping stone’ to considering a future as a mayoral combined authority.  

The central government is inevitably envisioned to take a back seat with regards to local competencies, but will have oversight functions and points for collaboration via the publication and sharing of priorities through ‘Local Growth Plans’. Through a new chamber of Nations and Regions which will be chaired by the Prime Minister, or the Mayoral Council chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister, local initiatives and the work of metro mayors will be scrutinised for their local responsivity and effectiveness. Again, this provides a further channel of democratic accountability beyond the usual channel of mayoral elections. 

Finally, it appears that the contention of the West Lothian Question is at an end. Where local issues are concerned, local authorities are now able to combine and deliver their priorities in simplified, clarified and responsive processes away from the competing national priorities of their centralised member of parliament. Local communities are seen to be at the forefront of the changing constitutional structure as they will ultimately benefit from localised economic growth initiatives, better transport, and better skills provisions. Communities will also have another representative in the form of their metro mayor, whose accountability rests upon the engagement of the electorate and the confidence of the councillors which they command. The Council of Nations and Regions, the Mayoral Council and the Leaders Council (representing individual principle local authorities), also provide another layer of accountability where a national forum can scrutinise, learn from and adapt their work to ever-evolving local and national priorities. Local people no longer face an accountability crisis for the status of their communities. These forums provide a basis for the most responsive governmental structure seen in UK constitutional history. 

The glaring issue, however, is the plan’s ambition. The benefits to decentralisation and the mechanisms by which it will be delivered are comprehensive and justifiable. Nevertheless, the white paper fails to answer two questions: when will the vision for strategic authorities be realised and what happens if Labour is not in power? 

The widening and deepening of devolution proposed will, ultimately, take time. Even with the introduction of ‘default’ devolution where statutory timescales will prevent the more indecisive among local authorities from resisting the tide of strategic authority-dom, there is no timetable for this.  

The Devolution Priority Programme, established by the government, has invited proposals from authorities who have the capacity for mayoral devolution to enhance their evolution and  will be able to elect mayors by May 2026. New mayoral combined authority agreements have been authorised by the government for both Lincolnshire and Hull & East Yorkshire and a number of authorities have agreed to establish combined authorities or foundation single authorities. This is without the passing of the English Devolution Bill which aims to streamline this process further. However, global political events have taken the UK government by surprise this year. The UK’s once ‘special’ relationship with the United States now seems to be on precarious footing. Ukraine and Russia are embattled in a US mediated dialogue which could change the construction and operation of Europe for good. Domestically, ambitious public service reforms are the top of the agenda with the abolition of NHS England and cuts to the civil service hovering over the heads of multiple governmental departments. Such proposals are just as ambitious as those for devolution. Where the time will come to comprehensively debate the issues surrounding local authority devolution, the passing of the English Devolution Bill and the establishment of the accountability mechanisms such as the Assembly of Nations and Reasons is not at all clear.  

Moreover, there is an element of short termism regarding the desire to pursue such ambitious constitutional change across changes in government. May 2026, when the first prioritised devolved authorities will host their first mayoral elections will be almost two years since the Labour government’s election. The next general election is to be held no later than August 2029, all being well with confidence in the current prime minister and parliament, which the 2023-2024 governmental period has shown is precarious at-best. It isn’t clear if there is appetite among other political parties to pursue ambitious English devolution projects. Until we can encourage other political actors to buy into the promise of decentralisation, and to have enough time to show local communities that this is of benefit to them, the development of English devolution could already be futile before it has even begun.