Memorandum by Professor Tony Travers (DRA
74)
REGIONAL GOVERNMENT IN ENGLAND: IMPLICATIONS
OF THE LONDON MODEL— A PAPER PREPARED FOR THE ODPM SELECT
COMMITTEE
1. The Greater London Authority, created
in 2000, can be seen as a prototype for regional government in
other parts of England. It has now operated for more than four
years, allowing a number of observations to be made about implications
for the North East, the North West and Yorkshire and Humberside.
Of course, the full proposals for regional government in England
have not yet been finalised. The government's May 2002 consultative
document Your Region Your Choice has, to some extent, been
overtaken by subsequent developments. The operation of the Greater
London Authority Act, 1999 offers a reasonable guide to issues
of importance to regional government reform in England.
THE CONSTITUTION
2. At the time of its passage, the 1999
London legislation was seen by the Government as having constitutional
importance. While by no means as radical as devolution to Scotland
and Wales, the London reform for the first time created a "regional"
tier of government in England. Although the Greater London Council
(GLC) had had the same boundaries as the new Greater London Authority
(GLA), the origins of the GLC—created by a Conservative
government in the early 1960s—derived from an effort to
create unified planning and transport for much of the built-up
area of London. There was no expectation that the creation of
the GLC would be the first step towards regional government elsewhere
in England. Of course, metropolitan counties (on the model of
the GLC as a city-wide council) were created in 1974 in the West
Midlands, Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Tyne and Wear, South
Yorkshire and West Yorkshire.
3. Any moves towards elected regional government
in England would, as in London, have constitutional implications.
The potential English regional governments, generally with populations
of between four and eight million, would be institutions capable
of undertaking virtually any aspect of government other than defence
and foreign policy. Equivalent bodies in Germany, the United States,
Canada and Spain have significant autonomy, often guaranteed by
a written constitution. Scotland, although fiscally constrained,
is also an example of advanced territorial devolution.
THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS
4. The passage of the GLA legislation suggested
a number of important issues relevant to the creation of regional
governments for other parts of England. First, a powerful and
committed team of civil servants, with direct access to ministers,
was essential to secure the necessary access to clear away impediments
to the creation of an effective institution. Second, devolution
within England is undoubtedly problematic for government departments:
the more that power is transferred downwards from the centre,
the greater the threat to the baronies of Whitehall. During the
preparation and implementation of the GLA legislation, some parts
of central government attempted to reduce the scale of powers
transferred to the new authority and to limit the autonomy of
the Mayor of London. It is almost certain that the passage of
legislation to create regional government in England would face
similar obstacles.
5. Third, the GLA Act is very long. The
scale of the legislation and the number of amendments introduced
at various Parliamentary stages inevitably reduced Parliament's
capacity for full and effective scrutiny. While legislation to
enact English devolution would not have such added complexities
as the London Underground public-private partnership, it would
go beyond the London legislation in, for example, giving the regions
housing responsibilities. Full scrutiny of such important constitutional
legislation is essential.
POWERS
6. The Mayor of London, as the executive
part of the GLA, is a strong mayor, but within a relatively weak
tier of city-wide/regional government. The GLA's key service responsibilities
are transport and strategic planning, with rather more limited
responsibility for economic development. The Mayor of London sets
the budgets for fire and police, and also appoints the boards
of the relevant authorities. However, the Mayor's direct policy
and service control over fire and police is very limited. By virtue
of his mandate, the Mayor has the capacity to influence other
service providers.
7. However, the London boroughs remain powerful,
with responsibility over schools, personal social services, local
planning, environmental services, economic development and local
transport. Central departments are also important, given their
responsibilities for the NHS, law and order, local government
finance, housing allocations, and as the final arbiter of major
planning decisions.
8. The GLA demonstrates there is a clear
risk of creating a relatively weak regional tier of government
that is squeezed between more powerful ones in Whitehall and local
government. Although the GLA has thus far avoided accusations
of irrelevance or efforts to abolish it, such possibilities are
never far away. The less extensive the powers given to the proposed
English regional governments, the greater will be the risk that
they will be seen as having no valuable function.
FINANCE
9. The GLA was given the power to set an
annual council tax precept. To this, the Mayor has added the relatively
modest yield of congestion charging. He also has access to the
yield of the fares charged by London's Underground and buses.
The government's original proposals envisaged giving English regional
governments only a modest council tax precept, to cover administrative
costs.
10. Compared with city governments overseas,
the GLA is able to raise only a modest proportion of its income
from locally-determined sources. Under the current proposals,
English regional governments would raise an even smaller proportion
of their income from local taxation. It is difficult to imagine
these new regional governments being autonomous and confident
if they are not given access to income sources equivalent to at
least half their annual budget. The GLA would certainly be a more
effective institution if it were more fiscally independent.
REGIONS AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
11. Historically, London-wide governments
often found themselves at loggerheads with lower-tier authorities.
The GLA has thus far managed to avoid any serious, long-term,
disagreements with the boroughs. The way in which boroughs choose
to set their local policies within the Mayor's London Plan
will be a major test of the extend to which the regional/city
level of government and the more local tier can work together.
The Mayor and some Assembly members have suggested that perhaps
there should in future be fewer boroughs. One consequence of the
creation of London-wide government has been a concern to rationalise
the number of boroughs.
12. The GLA took almost all its post-2000
powers from central government, from quangos, or from the London-wide
committees of boroughs set up following the abolition of the GLC.
This was surely appropriate, given that the purpose of the Government's
policy was to devolve power. There appears to be a risk that outside
the capital a number of local government services (or those still
linked to local authorities) may be "regionalised".
County planning, fire and emergency services, the police and even
transport could, according to some proposals, be transferred from
local to regional government.
MAYORAL GOVERNMENT
13. The creation of a directly-elected executive
mayor for London was a reform that is not being proposed for regions
in the rest of England. In regional governments set up within
England there will, as in Scotland and Wales, be a classic British
system where administrations and leaders are indirectly selected
by those elected to the authorities concerned. In Scotland and
Wales, the position of First Minister (chosen indirectly) appears
to be well-understood and recognised throughout the country. The
Mayor of London, by virtue of his large direct mandate, is assured
visibility beyond his formal powers. Perhaps the direct election
of an individual to lead an authority is more appropriate for
a metropolis or free-standing city than for a mixture of cities,
suburban authorities, towns and rural area. However, experiments
with a directly-elected regional "governor" should not
be ruled out.
THE FUTURE
OF LONDON
GOVERNMENT
14. Legislation to provide regions outside
London with directly-elected government would provide an opportunity
to re-visit the arrangements for the capital. A number of aspects
of the system created by the 1999 require change, including the
way officers are appointed, the duties of the Assembly and the
range of services provided. Accountability for the police and
fire services in London is muddled. In addition, it would be eccentric
to give powers to regions outside London (for example, over housing)
that were not also available to the GLA. Equally, regional governments
in England that did not approach at least the GLA's level of responsibilities
would be very weak. Asymmetrical devolution is one thing, officially-created
inconsistency would surely be another.
|
