Progress on devolution in England Contents

5Devolution of other powers

88.This chapter explores which powers currently held by central government should be devolved, adding to those already held by devolved authorities. We begin by addressing the overarching challenge to further devolution: the concern it will create or worsen the ‘postcode lottery’ in service provision. Next, we consider in turn the devolution of powers in different policy areas: health and adult social care; housing and planning; transport; education and skills; and other policy areas.

Postcode lotteries

89.A major concern with devolution is that it will create or exacerbate differences between areas in terms of public service delivery. To ensure the upholding of national standards, the trade union UNISON wanted central government to lay down “kitemarks or standards, principles for things you need to do as public services deliverers.”287 Similarly, differentials in adult education were emphasised by the Workers’ Educational Association (WEA). Its Chief Executive and General Secretary, Simon Parkinson argued there had been a narrowing of adult education provision in some mayoral combined authorities following devolution.288

90.By contrast Andrew Carter, Centre for Cities, when asked about the potential challenge of devolution creating postcode lotteries, countered by stating that, “We have a postcode lottery now … whatever indicator you wish to take, economic, health or social, there is huge variation.”289 Lord Kerslake argued that certain principles, for example that the NHS be free at the point of delivery, could be determined nationally, but that “You can have common standards and allow variation in the way in which services are delivered. That is how innovation occurs.”290 Likewise, Cllr James Jamieson, Chair of the LGA, argued that the postcode lottery was really “local choice and local priorities” and that:

What is right for Cheadle will not be right for Sheffield or for Harrow. There will be different priorities and different needs. We need to be able to deliver those.291


Existing health devolution

91.Our predecessor committee focused on health devolution in its 2016 report. It concluded that devolution did not accurately describe the situation in Greater Manchester, which was really “delegation of responsibilities or joint working”, but its arrangements could provide lessons for other areas. The Committee also urged that health devolution should have clearly defined objectives.292

92.Health devolution has taken different forms. The arrangements in Greater Manchester involved the creation of a Health and Social Partnership, made up of local NHS organisations and local councils.293 The metro mayor has no formal role in the partnership, though he is a member of the non-statutory Greater Manchester Health and Care Board.294 The Board had a degree of autonomy over the allocation of money in the Transformation Fund, which was a one-off fund which lasted until 2020–21 and was not replaced. The Greater Manchester partnership, alongside wider public health funding being devolved, was praised by Core Cities for “improvements in the prevention of ill health”.295 The chair of the partnership, Sir Richard Leese, noted the on-going assessments are incomplete, but pointed to achievements in “population health and health inequalities”, such as reducing smoking and hospital admissions for alcohol-related conditions. He argued Greater Manchester showed that areas with 30,000 to 50,000 people could, through devolution, get better outcomes.296 He acknowledged there had also been challenges, for example in transfers out of hospital.297

93.In London there is collaboration between the Mayor of London and the London Health Board instigated by the 2015 London Health and Care Collaboration Agreement.298 In 2017 a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between the UK Government and London partners.299 This arrangement has focused on public health.300

94.Cornwall was able to set up an integrated care systems (ICS) of the type now followed by the rest of the country through NHS restructuring.301 NHS England have jointly funded a dedicated strategic director role with Cornwall Council, who gave evidence to us. But we were told that NHS England had lacked the appetite to pursue health devolution to Cornwall.302 Cornwall Council’s representative acknowledged that Greater Manchester was a model it was keen to imitate, along with Scotland and Valencia.303

95.Given our predecessor committee’s doubts, we explored whether the current arrangements in different areas amounted to devolution. Cornwall Council were clear its arrangements did not.304 Greater Manchester argued it was “a mixture of devolution and decentralisation”. Sir Richard Leese from the Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership argued there was a dual accountability—NHS England being accountable to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and other services being overseen by local authorities. He also argued that Greater Manchester was putting a fragmented service back together again.305

Extending health devolution

96.We heard support for extending health devolution. This was alongside assurances that NHS standards would continue with devolution; and that devolution would not lead to privatisation.306 The British Academy commented that “Attendees at our health roundtable believed that the NHS is already national in name only and that this should be embraced. Taken to its logical conclusion this would be a service focused on outcomes in places, not national standards.”307 James Palmer, then Metro Mayor, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, commented that it was strange “that the only political figure who is responsible for health is the Secretary of State for Health.”308 There were specific proposals for extending devolution, with Greater Manchester gaining greater oversight to incorporate hospitals.309 We heard there was an appetite to “take on more of the decision making” in Lancashire, Cheshire and Merseyside.310 This echoed the Metro Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham’s, pronouncements in 2018 that he wanted “the ability to opt out of the activity tariff in the NHS”. It also appears there is appetite for types of health devolution in the combined authorities of Liverpool City Region, Tees Valley and West Yorkshire.311 There was also support expressed for the integration of London Ambulance Service into mayoral oversight, and the creation of a “London Health Commissioner, with dedicated resources” to co-ordinate all of London health matters and advise the Mayor of London.312 Likewise, Cumbria Council favoured strengthening the role and powers of health and wellbeing boards, primarily by having them control strategic commissioning, thereby enabling them to set priorities for their locality.313

97.However, there was caution about extending health devolution to other combined authorities. Jamie Driscoll, the Metro Mayor, North of Tyne, noted his combined authority had only been operating for eighteen months and so his answer was “not yet.”314 James Palmer thought the current geography of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough would permit it, but there would need to be a separate chief executive and separate staff to help run the health arrangements.315

98.There were varying views over the role of local authorities in the integrated care systems. Greg Clark MP proposed the devolution framework could provide a criterion to be met before health devolution proceeded.316 Lord Kerslake thought that it would be “harder for those areas other than Manchester to make the ICSs work.” But he thought local government had not had a sufficiently big role.317 Cllr James Jamieson, Chair of the LGA, also argued that there needed to be “genuine partnership at the local level and at place … You cannot have the ICS as the accountable body for the NHS that is dictated to by the centre, which is setting priorities.”318 The County Council Network proposed that the strategic commissioning should be shared between county councils and the NHS. This would build on existing arrangements and “close the democratic deficit that exists in NHS spend.”319

The Health Devolution Commission and the Health and Care Bill

99.During our inquiry the Health Devolution Commission, made up of a number of former health ministers,320 published its report.321 It recommended that “comprehensive health devolution” be developed throughout England “through a new Common Framework and a rapid joint implementation programme that best reflects local boundaries and organisational footprints.” Health devolution should be available to all areas, regardless of whether they had a metro mayor or combined authority. An Annual Joint Mandate should be established between the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and each devolved health area leader. There should also be formal roles for local leaders, and statutory requirements on devolved leaders to improve public health and for the patient group Healthwatch. New city region health and prosperity scrutiny committees would scrutinise the system.322

100.Following our inquiry’s final evidence session, the Department of Health and Social Care published a policy paper outlining reforms to health and social care in England.323 This was followed by the Health and Care Bill.324 The bill proposes to introduce integrated care systems (ICSs) across the whole of England. They would consist of integrated care boards (ICBs) and integrated care partnerships (ICPs). The ICB would be responsible for running the NHS day to day. The chair of ICBs would be appointed by NHS England and approved by the Secretary of State. Ordinary members would include at least one member nominated by NHS trusts, one nominated by primary medical care providers, and one nominated by local authorities in the area of the ICB.325 The ICB would have a formal duty to cooperate with local government. ICPs would include NHS, local authorities and wider social care and health stakeholders, and would develop an integrated care strategy to meet an areas health and social care needs.326

101.The LGA largely approved of the new structures, although it was concerned about the possible undermining of the role of local authority health overview and scrutiny committees.327 By contrast, the Health Devolution Commission, expressed concern that the Government’s reforms could lead to greater centralisation. Among its proposals was that the ICB should be a partnership of equals between the NHS and local authorities, and that the chair of the ICB should be chosen by local partners and have one vice-chair from the NHS and from local authority. The ICP board should be chaired by a local government leader or metro mayor.328

102.We retain our predecessor committee’s scepticism about whether health devolution accurately describes the current arrangements in Greater Manchester. It clearly does not in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. We support the recommendations of the Health Devolution Commission on the future of health devolution and the role that should be played by local and combined authorities in the new Integrated Care System. The Government should seek to implement these proposals. It should also explore the merits of establishing a London Health Commissioner to oversee all London health matters, and of devolving the London Ambulance Service.

Education and skills

Assessing current devolution of education and skills

103.From 2019 mayoral combined authorities have had powers over the adult education budget (AEB). Their money goes into a single pot; whereas similar funding for London is ringfenced and unspent funds can be clawed back if not allocated to future years’ AEB spending. Cornwall does not have similar powers.329 In 2019–20 the Government allocated £632 million in AEB funding to devolved authorities.330

104.We received mixed evidence on the experience of adult education devolution. Some submissions thought it was too early to say whether collaborative efforts had succeeded.331 There were also positive evaluations. Liverpool City Region explained it had been using its AEB funding to support low wage sectors and promote employment. It had moved to using fewer providers, capped charges to subcontractors, and linked AEB funding with other spending sources such as for apprenticeships.332 Greater Manchester and Liverpool have spearheaded a one-stop shop system for apprenticeships and employment.333 There was also praise for Tees Valley and West Midlands Combined Authorities.334

105.Criticism of devolution came mainly from the Workers’ Educational Association (WEA). Its Chief Executive and General Secretary Simon Parkinson explained the Association supported devolution, but were concerned recent devolution had added to the complexity and cost of its operations.335 The WEA wanted protections against adult learners being disadvantaged due to where they live; a focus by combined authorities on outcomes beyond employment and skills; and a two year extension of national grants as a transition period for national providers of adult education.336 These concerns followed an evaluation of the devolution of the apprenticeship grant for employers (since abolished) which concluded it had failed to improve outcomes.337

Extending devolution of education and skills

106.There has been support for additional devolution of parts of education and skills policy. The Education Committee praised devolution of the AEB to combined authorities, and supported consideration of further devolution of the AEB to “upper-tier authorities” and of national careers service funding to local and combined authorities and to LEPs.338 Our submissions included calls for greater devolution of funding,339 including devolution of all adult skills spending—not just the AEB—to combined authorities.340 There were also calls for devolution to local authorities.341

107.Proposals for greater education devolution extended beyond adult education. These included a long-standing call for greater devolution of control over aspects of post-16 education, particularly further education.342 Wider devolution of schools also featured, with calls for devolution of education, skills and childcare responsibilities to London;343 and to transfer to local authorities the powers of regional school commissioners,344 and the oversight over school places currently exercised by the Education and Skills Agency.345

108.The devolution of the adult education budget should be part of the devolution framework, accompanied by transitional support and measures to mitigate differences in course options between areas. The same powers over adult education should be available to all areas with devolution deals. Further education, in particular FE colleges, should also be included in the framework. The Government should work with the Local Government Association to agree proposals as to how local authorities’ oversight of schools and their funding should be strengthened. This should include devolving the functions of the Education and Skills Funding Agency to county councils and combined authorities; and the transfer of the powers held by Regional School Commissioners to local authorities.

Housing and planning

Assessing current devolution of housing and planning powers

109.The devolution of housing and planning powers differs markedly from place to place. Powers vary to make compulsory purchase orders, create statutory spatial plans, or to call in planning permissions.346 Opinions on the current use of those powers by combined authorities and by London were mixed. Greater Manchester’s efforts to tackle homelessness,347 West Midlands securing of funds on regeneration and influencing Homes England,348 and Liverpool’s spatial plans were singled out for praise.349 Admiration was expressed of the powers of the Mayor of London’s powers to formula the London Plan.350 More mixed views were voiced about the spatial plans in Greater Manchester.351 Concern was expressed about the West of England, with the problems posed by the differences between the boundaries of the authority and the housing market being singled out as a problem.352 It was also feared local authorities would be discouraged from joining combined authorities for fear of housing numbers being allocated to them by the metro mayor.353

Extending devolution of housing and planning

110.Lord Kerslake commented that “Housing is an area where there could be more devolution of power.”354 Devolution of housing powers to Scotland was cited as a precedent.355 Certain specific proposals for devolution enjoyed wide support. For example, the extension of the statutory spatial planning powers to the three combined authorities currently only possessing non-statutory powers: the West Midlands, Sheffield City Region, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.356 Lord Kerslake proposed devolving additional powers to London, notably permitting the licencing of private landlords without requiring the Secretary of State’s approval.357 Other recommendations for London included devolving funding for affordable housing, and the “devolution of housing benefit, right to buy receipts, and Help-to-Buy funds”.358 The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) particularly advocated devolution of housing powers to rural areas.359 Similarly, the County Council Network advocated extending statutory spatial planning powers to county councils, to enable them to duplicate the role of mayoral combined authorities. It called such devolution “a litmus test for any devolution to two-tier county areas.”360

111.There were also calls for the further devolution of housing funds. Presently, combined authorities receive limited funds compared to London;361 local authorities can lack funds to run spatial planning services; 362 and the details of existing housing funds are often obscure.363 One solution proposed was the creation of a ‘single housing pot’, or more generally greater flexibility over housing funding.364 A limited version of the single pot was judged to have succeeded in Sheffield in quickly responding to local housing problems. It was suggested that devolution of the pot could be made conditional on areas producing and adopting a spatial plan.365 The main benefit of such flexibility was portrayed as ensuring affordable housing could bolster regeneration,366 and address shortfalls (for example in rural areas).367

112.Various other reforms were proposed to us. These included empowering all metro mayors to form development corporations, to use compulsory purchase powers,368 to have ‘call-in’ powers for planning proposals, and to levy a strategic infrastructure tariff.369 The latter proposal appears to enjoy support from MHCLG.370 The tariff could also be extended to county areas to support large scale infrastructure.371 There were also calls for greater powers for parish councils, partly to entrench the role of neighbourhood plans,372 and for local authorities with oversight of regeneration and brownfield site funding.373

113.The devolution framework should provide for the devolution to combined and local authorities of the spatial planning powers, call-in powers for planning applications, the powers to establish development corporations, compulsory purchase orders, consultation on strategic planning applications, and strategic infrastructure levies, currently exercised by some combined authorities. There should be greater transparency about the process. The Government should also consider further devolution of housing powers to London. There should there be a single pot for housing, with a requirement that a spatial plan be adopted beforehand.

Transport and infrastructure

Existing transport devolution

114.There was general praise of current transport devolution.374 The creation of Sub National Transport Bodies (STBs) was stressed as particularly beneficial.375 Cornwall also emphasised how its devolved budget had, alongside private investment, enabled them to “mould services to better serve local need”, which had helped (pre-covid) to increase bus and rail passenger numbers.376 We did, however, receive criticism of the handling of transport in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority.377

Extending transport devolution

115.Given this general praise, there was consequently strong support for additional devolution of transport and infrastructure.378 The National Infrastructure Commission’s recommendations in 2018 of funding and empowering cities to establish integrated strategies for transport, employment and housing was cited in support.379 The benefits of devolution were seen to include fostering levelling up,380 ensuring access to freight ports in the south-east of England,381 and bolstering investment in rural transport.382 Jamie Driscoll, Metro Mayor, North of Tyne, stated that “Transport is a key part of anything that you are going to do in an area. By definition, it is place-based. You cannot have non-place-based transport. That is in line with the objective of coming together as a region.” He added that there should be integration of local public transport provision with the work of Highways England and Network Rail, with a mandatory duty to work together.383 Cornwall wanted to build on their successful pilot scheme by continuing to receive highways capital grants.384 Cumbria Council proposed devolving transport funding to Transport for the North and that “Funding should be decentralised as far as practical, with decisions taken locally.”385 On the other hand, the Regional Studies Association sounded a cautionary note about relying on city-regions, arguing that for the delivery of interregional transport systems they were too small; and that connections needed to be fostered between cities and with their hinterlands.386

116.There was particularly strong support for devolution of powers over railways and buses. This could include a single authority in a region overseeing all types of transport,387 and extending bus franchising to non-metropolitan areas.388 For existing combined authorities Centre for Cities proposed replicating Transport for London-style powers alongside control of local railway networks.389 The latter was also proposed for London.390 We raised the political challenges this poses over accountability for services to areas beyond the Greater London Authority. Cllr James Jamieson from the LGA acknowledged there might need to be either formal or informal cooperation, and that the case also demonstrated the need for devolution to every area.391

117.It was broadly acknowledged that devolution of transport would require amendment of governing arrangements in combined authorities.392 The Centre for Public Scrutiny argued that the subsuming of existing transport agencies into combined authorities had led to the continuation of old governance structures (e.g. transport committees).393

118.The Government should consider the case for extending powers for Transport for London-style oversight of local buses to all transport authorities, whether combined or local authorities. Where transport services cross local authority boundaries, joint working relationships should be encouraged between the local authorities affected. Similarly, Network Rail, Highways England and other comparable bodies should be required to organise joint working arrangements with transport authorities. Local government should ensure there is proper and transparent scrutiny of transport arrangements in their areas.

Devolution of other policy areas

119.We also received evidence calling for devolution of responsibilities over the environment and energy. This echoes recent calls for greater devolution of powers to help the UK reach net-zero.394 CPRE argued devolution could bolster the delivering of energy efficiency, pointing to Cornwall’s devolution deal as having delivered 500 to 1,000 social homes with energy efficient measures.395 This echoed wider calls for devolution of the duty to reduce carbon and improve the environment through the advent of statutory local strategies.396 This links with local authorities’ development of nature recovery strategies. National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty offered a possible framework for environmental devolution. CPRE noted the interest in the West Midlands for “an urban National Park”, similar to the approach taken in London which had delivered the Lee Valley Regional Park.397 CPRE also advocated devolution of farming and forestry policy, on a par with that given to Scotland and Wales.398 The LGA similarly highlighted that local government representatives in the south-west of England wanted “greater local influence over a domestic successor to Common Agricultural Policy”, namely the Environmental Land Management System.399

120.Another area where there was support for devolution was of public assets. Cllr James Jamieson from the LGA suggested that councils should be able to acquire assets such as former RAF bases or redundant hospitals in return for using them.400

121.We have heard, both in this inquiry and our inquiry into local government and the path to net-zero, that local government can play an important role in policies relating to energy efficiency. The Government should strongly consider the case for devolution of further powers in this area. It should also examine how additional oversight can be given to local government of the environment, aspects of farming and forestry policies, and the takeover of public assets.

287 Q85 (Mike Short, UNISON)

288 Q84 (Simon Parkinson, Workers’ Educational Association)

289 Q130 (Andrew Carter, Centre for Cities)

290 Q202 (Lord Kerslake, UK2070 Commission)

291 Q202 (James Jamieson, Local Government Association)

292 Communities and Local Government Committee, First Report of Session 2015–16, Devolution: the next five years and beyond, HC 369, paras 36, 84-92

293 Association of Greater Manchester Authorities, NHS England, NHS Greater Manchester Association of Clinical Commissioning Groups, Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Devolution: Memorandum of Understanding, May 2018

294 Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Strategic Partnership Board, GM HSC Partnership Governance Review: Proposals, January 2018, pp 3, 13

295 Core Cities (PDE0012)

296 Q111 (Sir Richard Leese, Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership)

297 Q102 (Sir Richard Leese, Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership)

298 London CCGs, London Councils, Mayor of London, NHS England and Public Health England, London Health and Care Collaboration Agreement, December 2015

299 HM Government, London Clinical Commissioning Council, London Councils, Mayor of London, NHS England, NHS Improvement, Public Health England, London Health and Social Care Devolution: Memorandum of Understanding, November 2017

300 London Assembly (PDE0021)

301 Q107 (Helen Charlesworth-May, Kernow Care Commissioning Group). See also HM Government, Cornwall Council, Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local Enterprise Partnership and NHS Kernow CCG, Cornwall Devolution Deal, 15 July 2015, p 18

302 Q103 (Kate Kennally, Cornwall Council)

303 Q110 (Helen Charlesworth-May, Kernow Care Commissioning Group), Q120 (Kate Kennally, Cornwall Council)

304 Q103 (Kate Kennally, Cornwall Council)

305 Q106 (Sir Richard Leese, Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership)

306 Q116 (Bill McCarthy, NHS England/NHS Improvement)

307 British Academy (PDE0008)

308 Q168 (James Palmer, Metro Mayor, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority)

309 Q112 (Sir Richard Leese Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership)

310 Q117 (Bill McCarthy, NHS England/NHS Improvement)

311 Oral evidence taken on 4 June 2018 by the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, HC (2017–19) 484, Q708, Q762 (Andy Burnham, Metro Mayor, Greater Manchester Combined Authority); Oral evidence taken on 14 July 2021 by the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, HC (2021–22) 534, Qq 74-5 (Tracy Brabin, Metro Mayor, West Yorkshire Combined Authority), Qq 74-5, Q85 (Ben Houchen, Metro Mayor, Tees Valley Combined Authority)

312 London Assembly (PDE0021)

313 Cumbria Council (PDE0035), Q120 (Kate Kennally, Cornwall Council), (Helen Charlesworth-May, Kernow Care Commissioning Group). See also Q118 (Bill McCarthy, NHS England/NHS Improvement)

314 Q167 (Jamie Driscoll, Metro Mayor, North of Tyne Combined Authority)

315 Q168 (James Palmer, Metro Mayor, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority). See also British Academy (PDE0008), Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Liberal Democrats Coordinating Committee (PDE0019)

316 Q209 (Greg Clark MP)

317 Q227 (Lord Kerslake, UK2070 Commission)

318 Q227 (James Jamieson, Local Government Association)

319 County Council Network (PDE0028)

320 Andy Burnham, Norman Lamb, Alistair Burt, Stephen Dorrell, Phil Hope. They were joined by Dr Linda Patterson, former Medical Director of Commission for Health Improvement, and Peter Hay former President of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services.

321 Health Devolution Commission, Building Back Health and Prosperity, August 2020.

322 Health Devolution Commission, Building Back Health and Prosperity, August 2020, pp 51-2

323 Department of Health and Social Care, Integration and innovation: working together to improve health and social for all, February 2021

324 Health and Care Bill, [Bill 140 (2021–22)] 

325 Health and Care Bill, [Bill 140 (2021–22)] Schedule 1B

326 Health and Care Bill, [Bill 140 (2021–22)] Clauses 19-20

329 Devolution to local government in England, No. 07029, House of Commons Library, March 2020, pp 10-11, 35

330 Education Committee, Third Report of Session 2019–21, A plan for an adult skills and lifelong learning revolution, HC278, para 110

331 Home Builders Federation (PDE0013), Regional Studies Association (POD0019)

332 Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (POD0018)

333Greater Manchester now has its own UCAS-style system for apprenticeships”, Manchester Evening News, 5 February 2020; Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (POD0018)

334 Policy Connect (POD0016)

335 Q81 , Q93, Q98 (Simon Parkinson, Workers’ Educational Association). See also Workers’ Educational Association (POD0020)

336 Workers’ Educational Association (PDE0010), Workers’ Educational Association (POD0020)

337 Centre for Vocational Educational Research, Devolving Skills: The case of the Apprenticeship Grant for Employers, March 2019

338 Education Committee, Third Report of Session 2019–21, A plan for an adult skills and lifelong learning revolution, HC278, paras 22-3, 122-3

339 Core Cities (PDE0012)

340 Civil Engineering Contractors Association (PDE0025), Centre for Cities (PDE0030), Greater Manchester Combined Authority (PDE0032), DevoConnect (POD0006), UK2070 Commission (POD0012)

341 Local Government Association (PDE0011), Cumbria Council (PDE0035)

342 Q166 (Jamie Driscoll, Metro Mayor, North of Tyne Combined Authority). See also CollabGroup, Devolving the Adult Education Budget in England: Challenges and Opportunities, November 2019, p 27; “Sadiq Khan: Extend skills devolution for London”, TES, 16 September 2019

343 Centre for London (PDE0018)

344 Q208 (James Jamieson, Local Government Association). See also Q193 (David Williams, Hertfordshire Council)

345 County Council Network (PDE0028)

346 Devolution to local government in England, No. 07029, House of Commons Library, March 2020, p 35; HM Treasury, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council, Calderdale Council, Kirklees Council, Leeds City Council, Wakefield Council, West Yorkshire Devolution Deal, March 2020, paras 100-101

347 Q57 (Abdool Kara, National Audit Office)

348 CPRE (PDE0004)

349 Midland Heart (PDE0027), Home Builders Federation (POD0013)

350 CPRE (PDE0004), Midland Heart (PDE0027), Home Builders Federation (POD0013)

351 Midland Heart (PDE0027) praised their efforts; whereas Home Builders Federation (PDE0013), Royal Town Planning Institute (POD0010) and Home Builders Federation (POD0013) voiced concerns.

352 CPRE (PDE0004)

353 Home Builders Federation (PDE0013), Royal Town Planning Institute (POD0010)

354 Q208 (Lord Kerslake, UK2070 Commission). See also Core Cities (PDE0012)

355 Core Cities (PDE0012)

356 CPRE (PDE0004), Home Builders Federation (PDE0013), Midland Heart (PDE0027), Centre for Cities (PDE0030), Royal Town Planning Institute (POD0010), Home Builders Federation (POD0013)

357 Q211 (Lord Kerslake, UK2070 Commission)

358 Centre for London (PDE0018)

359 CPRE (PDE0004)

360 County Council Network (PDE0028)

361 Home Builders Federation (POD0013)

362 Royal Town Planning Institute (POD0010)

363 Home Builders Federation (PDE0013)

364 Q208 (James Jamieson, Local Government Association), Core Cities (PDE0012), Home Builders Federation (PDE0013)

365 Home Builders Federation (PDE0013)

366 Midland Heart (PDE0027)

367 CPRE (PDE0004)

368 Home Builders Federation (PDE0013)

369 Home Builders Federation (PDE0013), Home Builders Federation (POD0013)

370 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (PDE0033)

371 County Council Network (PDE0028)

372 Councillor Barrie Taylor (Deputy Chairman at Wrington Parish Council) (POD0001), Kent Association of Local Councils (POD0011)

373 Q192 (Amy Harhoff, Durham County Council)

374 Local Government Association (PDE0011), Sheffield City Region Combined Authority (PDE0016), Centre for London (PDE0018), IPPR North (PDE0023), Centre for Cities (PDE0030), Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (PDE0033)

375 Civil Engineering Contractors Association (PDE0025)

376 Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly Leadership Board (PDE0014)

377 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Liberal Democrats Coordinating Committee (PDE0019)

378 Q211 (Greg Clark MP)

379 National Infrastructure Commission, National Infrastructure Assessment, (July 2018), pp 75, 77; Core Cities (PDE0012), Greater Manchester Combined Authority (PDE0032), DevoConnect (POD0006)

380 Q208 (Lord Kerslake, UK2070 Commission)

381 Local Government Association (PDE0011)

382 CPRE (PDE0004)

383 Q166 (Jamie Driscoll, Metro Mayor, North of Tyne Combined Authority). See also Cumbria Council (PDE0035)

384 Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly Leadership Board (PDE0014)

385 Cumbria Council (PDE0035)

386 Regional Studies Association (POD0019)

387 Civil Engineering Contractors Association (PDE0025)

388 County Council Network (PDE0028)

389 Centre for Cities (PDE0030)

390 Centre for London (PDE0018)

391 Q216 (James Jamieson, Local Government Association)

392 Q156 (Jamie Driscoll, Metro Mayor, North of Tyne Combined Authority)

393 Centre for Public Scrutiny (PDE0002)

394Give trusted local leaders the power to tackle climate change”, The Times, 13 July 2021; The Institution of Civil Engineers, The role of subnational leadership in achieving net-zero, September 2021

395 CPRE (PDE0004)

396 UK2070 Commission (PDE0020). See also Britain’s Leading Edge (POD0007)

397 CPRE (PDE0004)

398 CPRE (PDE0004)

399 Local Government Association (PDE0011)

400 Q208 (James Jamieson, Local Government Association)

Published: 1 October 2021 Site information    Accessibility statement