Author Topic: A Case for Cities in Local Government Reorganisation and English Devolution  (Read 11920 times)

John Short

  • Global Moderator
  • PFM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
A Case for Cities in Local Government Reorganisation and English Devolution
https://www.caseforcities.uk

Interesting and very readable report by Inner Circle Consulting https://www.innercircleconsulting.co.uk that focuses on devolving greater power and responsibility to cities in England.  This may have a resonance in other countries looking at devolution.

Brief Summary
Cities are England’s growth engines, but too many are still governed by outdated boundaries defined a generation ago.
This report sets out a practical plan to right-size city governance, embed prevention into public services, and create a connected network of high-performing cities that drives national prosperity. It’s a time-limited opportunity created by Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and the new wave of devolution. We argue for decisive action now - before the window closes.

The Case for Cities report was prepared on behalf of the cities of Peterborough, Lincoln, Reading, Gloucester, Oxford, Norwich, Swindon, Exeter, Ipswich, and Cambridge. A coalition of fast growing cities of national significance
Harnessing the opportunities of population growth, while closing the productivity gap through the right powers, governance and geographies, is critical if cities are to realise their full potential as drivers of national prosperity. This will unleash the untapped potential of English cities
The data shows that cities in England have untapped potential when we compare them to international averages and perform unevenly when compared to national benchmarks. Some cities — from Ipswich to Swindon — perform strongly on productivity, most English cities fall well below international peers. Patterns of population growth are also varied: Cambridge, for example, grew by over 17% between 2013 and 2023, compared with 7% nationally and 6% in London.
Local government reorganisation and devolution represent a unique chance to address the barriers to urban growth and unlock potential for cities across England

A summary of the recommendations

To create the conditions for a network of enabled cities to contribute to our collective future, we need to:

Empower cities through single-tier governance
By creating a new generation of city-led unitaries, distinct from county-scale models, so cities can govern at the right scale to deliver growth, reform, and prevention for their communities.

Right-size city-led unitaries
By reforming outmoded boundaries so cities can plan and deliver across the real places where people live, work, and move.

Commit to a long term national cities strategy
By establishing a long term cross-government strategy that recognises cities’ role in delivering national missions and key commitments such as the spending review and industrial strategy.

Back a polycentric England
By investing in a connected network of high-performing cities, beyond the core city-led metropolitan areas, to drive balanced growth across England and the UK.

Hardwire prevention into public services
By equipping cities to lead on prevention by aligning health, housing, and care services at the urban scale, with the data, powers, and partnerships needed to act early.

Embed city-led unitaries in devolution deals
By ensuring all Mayoral Strategic Authorities (MSAs) have strong, empowered city-led unitaries, capable of driving delivery and shaping strategy from the ground up.


To me the most challenging recommendation is hardwire prevention into public services at the right scale so that the moment can be used to reform service delivery, giving cities the power to deliver effectively on prevention by aligning services across health, housing, and welfare at the urban scale, with the data, powers, and partnerships needed to act early.  This will require significant changes in how different agencies under different government structures work such as health care under central government and social care under local government.  This is something that has been talked about but nothing has actually happened. Will this require a city block grant system similar to that which is in place for Scotland?  This might require a change to the Barnett Formulae! And what about the surrounding rural areas with respect to specialist hospital health care which tend to be more city-located?  Perhaps a more regional approach combining rural and urban with a further city and rural focus within the region? Is this something that central government and a Treasury that is more focused on financial control would contemplate?

Perhaps the recommended scale of devolution may have a chance of being implemented as it may not frighten off the Treasury. Nevertheless this work is a great step forward in the area of devolution and brings me back to the Northern Region Strategy Team which reported in 1977!  Implementing its recommendations would have been a huge step forward and have achieved what the Cities report is aimed at.

John Short

  • Global Moderator
  • PFM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
As a follow up to A Case for Cities in Local Government Reorganisation and English Devolution attached is a paper I wrote with John Howard while at the Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies (CURDS) at Newcastle University in 1985.  Google AI assistant has kindly summarised the report which is below.  For readers interested in tracking public expenditure the paper develops a methodology based on the PE classification categories at the time.
The document discusses the role and impact of public expenditure on regional and subregional economic development in the UK.
Introduction
•   Public expenditure in the UK was 43.5% of GDP in 1981-82 and 42.5% in 1984-85.
•   It is classified by spending authority, functional program, and economic category.
•   The analysis of public expenditure began in the 1970s, focusing on regional comparisons and indicators of need.
•   Inter-regional differences in expenditure levels were linked to regional needs, such as unemployment and demographics.
Role of Public Expenditure in Subregional Development
•   Public expenditure is believed to positively impact economic development by increasing service supply and aggregate demand.
•   Limited empirical evidence exists to support the assertion that public investment leads to economic growth.
•   Infrastructure investment is a key focus, with the UK government aiming to stimulate economic activity in disadvantaged areas.
•   The European Regional Development Fund emphasizes infrastructure, tourism, urban renewal, and environmental improvements.
Methodology for Allocating Public Expenditure to Subregions
•   Public expenditure can be analyzed as expenditures made "IN" a region versus expenditures made "FOR" a region.
•   "IN" expenditures refer to cash flows within a region, while "FOR" expenditures focus on benefits accruing to the region.
•   The classification system helps in understanding the impact of public expenditure on regional development.
•   Subregional expenditures are categorized into those benefiting only the subregion and those benefiting the entire region.
Allocation of Public Expenditure Programmes
•   Public expenditure is allocated to four broad policy headings: economic development regeneration, infrastructure, social services, and income support.
•   Each subprogramme is classified based on its contribution to subregional development.
•   Examples include agricultural support, industrial grants, transport infrastructure, and health services.
•   The allocation aims to reflect the impact of public spending on local economies and communities.
Data Sources or Lack of Sources
•   Challenges in collecting data hindered the analysis of public expenditure at regional and subregional levels.
•   Responses from various government departments showed inconsistencies in data availability and willingness to provide information.
•   The lack of comprehensive data limits the ability to assess the effectiveness of public expenditure policies.
•   Recommendations include improving data collection methods and interdepartmental cooperation for better regional planning.
Conclusion
•   Effective regional planning requires comprehensive information on public expenditure impacts across departments.
•   Current systems are inadequate, and there is a need for improved data collection and analysis.
•   The study highlights the importance of recognizing the interconnectedness of public spending decisions and their regional effects.
•   Without political will and a focus on regional matters, progress in urban analysis and planning will remain slow.

I have scanned the hard copy of the report but it is too big in size to attach but I can send a pdf to anyone interested.

 

RSS | Mobile

© 2002-2025 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF