This has been a remarkable summer for devolution. Making the most of their election win, the Conservatives have moved rapidly on the northern powerhouse, devo Manc, metro mayors and firm commitments to further devolution deals.
In contrast, however, the Labour leadership contest has served to illustrate the difficulties the party faces in responding to the devolution gauntlet thrown down by the government.
The ongoing divisions within Labour were laid bare by Jeremy Corbyn’s statement last month, when he described the northern powerhouse as a “cruel deception”, and Sir Richard Leese’s blunt response – that this “completely ignores what Labour in the North is doing”.
Despite running so many of the major cities campaigning for greater devolution, the national Labour Party – having adopted a tentative approach to devolution in the run-up to the election – continues to struggle to offer a bold vision for the future of cities.
This issue was always going to pose challenges for Labour given its traditional centralised approach to policy making, borne out of a desire to ensure uniform standards across the country. But with the national debate sparked by the government’s northern powerhouse concept, and growing public interest in having greater local influence, no leadership candidate can afford to ignore it.
The candidates have offered some quite different ideas on devolution, with the only common theme being their assertion that the government is getting it wrong – particularly with the chancellor’s insistence on metro mayors being part of any deal.
Liz Kendall has been the clearest proponent of devolution, arguing that welfare, housing, health and transport should be devolved to combined authorities, and criticising Labour as too “timid” and too slow to seize the agenda.
Yvette Cooper has also argued for city regions to be offered even more devolved powers than the government has so far given to Manchester (including control over education, skills, and energy), but has stated that introducing a mayor should not be a condition of gaining these powers.
Meanwhile, Andy Burnham has argued that devolution needs to be “consistent”, but not “one size fits all” (an approach that seems somewhat contradictory). He envisages “devo max for local democracy” from the “bottom-up” – presumably meaning a focus on communities rather than combined authorities.
Finally, Corbyn’s Northern Future speech saw him rail against the northern powerhouse, and call for the reindustrialisation of the North as a solution to rebalancing the UK economy. Yet it is debatable whether that would be desirable for northern cities, many of which have worked hard to diversify their economies.
The uncertainty of what could happen in the leadership race matters to anyone committed to greater city devolution. In the remaining weeks of the campaign, it is likely that candidates will increasingly focus on offering attractive “retail” promises, such as the “reindustrialisation of the North”, reviving coalmines or renationalising railways. While this is understandable in a leadership race, whoever wins next week needs to recognise the significance of devolution for their long-term agenda.
By 2020 the political landscape of the UK will be significantly different, with a changed central state and cities that have had powers for a few years. Each of the candidates should be thinking now about how they can apply Labour values to a UK where power is more dispersed, and where city regions are recognised as the key building blocks of the national economy.
Uniting the Labour Party behind a coherent vision for devolution will be a tough challenge. Yet it is vital for the UK economy, which depends on successful cities, that we have greater certainty over this agenda across the different parties, so that cities can get on with making the most of their economies in the years ahead.
Alexandra Jones is chief executive at Centre for Cities
