Alongside the 2023 Budget, the Government published new “trailblazer” devolution deals with Greater Manchester and the West Midlands. The written statement announcing them clarifies that they form part of the Government’s levelling-up agenda.

The deals signal additional powers and funding for the Greater Manchester and West Midlands combined authorities. They commit to providing a “single departmental-style settlement” for both areas at the 2025 Spending Review. They will also include plans for joint working between the Government and local areas. And they commit to more extended financial autonomy (but not tax raising powers) for the two areas.

Both deals explore strengthened accountability arrangements for the mayors and combined authorities in these areas. They were accompanied by a first edition of a new English Devolution Accountability Framework.

This Insight highlights some of the core ways in which these new deals represent a departure from previous practice in English devolution policy.

New funds and powers

The deals for Greater Manchester and the West Midlands both promise new funds and powers. For example, both areas will take on the Affordable Homes Programme. Funding for retrofitting houses for energy efficiency, part of the Government’s net zero ambitions, will also be devolved.

Elsewhere in the Budget, eight of the mayoral areas (including Greater Manchester and the West Midlands) share £161 million in capital regeneration funding and will be allocated an investment zone, attracting £80 million over five years.

The range of policy areas covered by these devolution deals has expanded considerably. The presence of culture, energy planning, and public services takes the English devolution agenda considerably beyond its original focuses of economic development and regeneration.

Joint working in policy making

The deals expand commitments to joint working between central and local government and permit mayoralties to take a strategic lead in certain policy areas.

Both areas will co-design employment support programmes with central government. They will establish joint governance boards to lead on policy around post-16 technical education, careers provision, and a culture and heritage framework.

In careers and housing, the deals seek to make the mayoralty the strategic lead actor. Where the mayor’s aims do not align with those of non-mayoral local public bodies, the mayor will be able to direct policy. This addresses an often complex question of who is in charge at local level when some matters are devolved but other closely related ones are not.

How are the deals different from each other?

The two deals have many similarities, but some substantial differences.

In some policy areas, the West Midlands will take on powers already held by Greater Manchester, such as a public health duty. In others, the deal indicates that the West Midlands is moving along the same road at a slightly slower speed than Greater Manchester: examples include the Affordable Homes Programme, rail partnerships, and energy planning.

The West Midlands will also establish some structures not available in Greater Manchester: these include joint-working arrangements with central government around international trade, business and tourism, and exploring the regulation of electric scooters.

Finance: A ‘single settlement’

The deals commit to introducing a “single departmental-style settlement” for both areas from the 2025 Spending Review. In effect, the two combined authorities would be treated like government departments and given single financial allocations, for which they would be accountable to Parliament. This would be a major shift away from the Government’s normal working practices.

Until now, mayoral authorities with budgets devolved from government departments have been required to report separately on each funding stream. This has increased burdens on mayoral combined authorities when they have sought to join up the functions they exercise.

The single settlement will be accompanied by a single accountability framework coordinated by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. The framework is expected to cover all devolved funding around five areas:

  • local growth and place
  • local transport
  • housing and regeneration
  • adult skills
  • retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency

Much of the detail of how the accountability framework will work is not yet public.

There is no mention in the deals of any additional fiscal devolution. The deals merely confirm that the current arrangements in both areas for the full devolution of business rates revenue will be renewed in the next Spending Review.

Prioritising accountability

Both Greater Manchester and the West Midlands will be expected to provide more resources to their scrutiny committees. This could be used to undertake “ambitious research and analysis” or to commission it from external sources. They will have the power to pay members of scrutiny committees, and training in scrutiny will be encouraged.

Officials within the combined authorities will be expected to give scrutiny committees time and opportunity to feed into decision making. Communications support is also expected, to help scrutiny committees to make the public aware of their work and findings.

In addition, both combined authorities have committed to facilitating quarterly sessions with all MPs in their area, allowing the MPs to scrutinise the mayor and portfolio holders (who lead on specific policy areas). The sessions are expected to be operated by the combined authorities, not by the House of Commons. However, the Government has also said it will discuss how this will be done with the Commons’ Liaison Committee.

These commitments sit within the broader English Devolution Accountability Framework (EDAF), which will apply to all devolved authorities (and to the devolved responsibilities taken on by single local authorities in some areas, such as Cornwall, Norfolk and Suffolk). The Government plans to work with all devolved areas to develop a ‘scrutiny protocol’, aiming to create a “sustained culture of scrutiny”.

The Government has not previously prioritised the accountability dimension of English devolution. Up to now, overview and scrutiny committees in combined authorities have struggled to achieve profile locally.

When the single settlements are in place, the accountability requirements may be different again from what the deals propose. This likely reflects that the exact shape of the single settlements, and how they are monitored, has yet to be decided.

About the author:  Mark Sandford is a researcher at the House of Commons Library, specialising in local government and devolution in England.

Photo Credit: © By dudlajzov – stock.adobe.com

Related posts