Having pledged a ‘devolution revolution’, the Government’s English Devolution White Paper sets out an ambitious agenda, introducing a raft of changes to the structures and powers of England’s sub-national governments to create a ‘floor’ rather than a ceiling to devolution in England.
It’s also the 25th birthday of England’s oldest devolution deal: London. The 1999 Greater London Authority (GLA) Act established the GLA and granted wide-ranging powers over transport, planning and – later – skills and education to London’s directly elected Mayor.
Since then, the capital has developed mature, competent city-wide institutions and led the way in urban policy innovation for 25 years. In transport, the Oyster Card has been imitated across the globe and the devolution-powered building of the Elizabeth Line has seen it become the most heavily used transport line in England. Air pollution has reduced significantly through initiatives such as the Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) and, when the Adult Education Budget was devolved to the GLA, enrolments rose faster than those in non-devolved areas.
These successes have seen London become the benchmark for devolution in England. Indeed, the Government’s agenda can be read in part as a testament to London’s devolution success story: some of the meatiest commitments in the White Paper involve extending powers already available to London’s Mayor – such as over transport - to other parts of the country.
It’s clear that the moment calls for a mature, purposeful and ambitious conversation about London’s future governance - and London’s funders, both public and civil society, have a vital role to play in this
What next for London?
While London’s devolution successes are well-acknowledged, the capital’s governance model is also complex and fragmented, with a range of powers and accountability structures split between the GLA, London Assembly, and the 32 borough councils and the City of London.
It is also well-recognised that London’s powers are limited compared to peer global cities such as New York, especially over tax and spend, and the capital still relies heavily on central government grants for services and major public works projects.
It's surprising therefore that - despite London’s devolution settlement being a quarter of a century old and, in areas such as health, outpaced by more recent deals with the Combined Authorities – the Government has only so far committed to explore how an integrated financial settlement could apply to the GLA, an arrangement already in place with Greater Manchester and the West Midlands. Meanwhile, combined authorities in Liverpool, West Yorkshire, and Cambridge & Peterborough are advancing ambitions for integrated transport, while London’s asks for suburban rail devolution and publicly-owned buses remain uncertain.
Reticence from the UK Government when it comes to further devolution for London is, to a certain extent, understandable. The future of the capital is a high-stakes affair: home to 16% of the English population and producing a quarter of the UK’s economic output, London is also home to a complex civic ecosystem of powerful institutions that have diverse perspectives and priorities for the capital’s future.
London Councils, the collective of London's borough councils, recently set out new proposals for London’s governance, seeking a unique joint decision-making structure for the capital where the Mayor and London Councils’ Executive Committee would sit around the same table on some devolved matters, including any future integrated settlement.
The specific merits and demerits of possible evolutions to London’s governance aside, it’s clear that the moment calls for a mature, purposeful and ambitious conversation about London’s future governance - and London’s funders, both public and civil society, have a vital role to play in this.
What could further devolution mean for London’s funders?
In Centre for London’s 2024 report, Devolution in London: the unfinished story, we set out some principles that should underpin the conversation on London’s future governance, and these highlight a few ways London’s funder community might shape the discussion on London’s devolution future:
- Purpose before financing. Devolution is a means to the end of an improved London. London’s funders have a vital role to play in constructing a vision for London’s future and how any new powers or funding streams can enable this.
- Devolution for good growth. Cities can use devolved powers to drive growth, as well as shape the character of that growth. Local government and as well community partners should be central to how any new levers are used to stimulate inclusive economic activity, where all Londoners have the opportunity to participate in economic activity, and entitled to a fair share of its proceeds.
- Thinking longer term. Devolution should offer longer-term funding certainty and flexibility. With an integrated funding settlement for London looking almost certain, Funders will need to be ready to seize the opportunities for long-term thinking this presents, especially in terms of cross-sector collaboration and building an evidence-led case for prioritised funding which synthesises policy objectives.
- Sending power downwards. Power should be exercised as close to those affected as possible, and this doesn’t stop at the borough council level. Funders can play an important role in enhancing community control - with or without changes to the current governance structure.
- Scrutinising local power. More power should come with greater accountability. Funders, especially those in the voluntary and community sector who are embedded in communities, could play a vital role in evolved mechanisms of scrutiny and governance of London’s regional and local government should more powers be transferred from Westminster.
- Public services excellence. Funders wield the sector-specific knowledge to shape how devolution can improve and innovate public services to influence better outcomes at a local level. Policymakers need to know how these proposals will change public services, and London’s institutions and communities are best-placed to extol the benefits of locally driven change.
Devolution is a means to the end of an improved London. London’s funders have a vital role to play in constructing a vision for London’s future and on how any new powers or funding streams can enable this
What now?
With 9 million residents and an economy twice the size of Scotland and Wales combined, led by the now-historic Mayoralty and 32 powerful boroughs (as well as the influential City of London), the question of ‘what next’ for London’s devolution might be tempting to put on the ‘too difficult’ pile.
But we must resist both this temptation and another one: the assumption that London will simply ‘look after itself’. Thanks in no small part to the ‘levelling up’ agenda, it’s become easy for national politicians to either talk London down or, more recently, generally avoid talking about it altogether.
But London, like the rest of the UK, faces big challenges, and ones that will need to be risen to if the Government is to achieve its ambitious vision for a revitalised nation. The capital’s productivity has flatlined, its housing crisis rages unabated, and inequality has risen while remaining static elsewhere in the country.
Devolution is not an answer to these problems in and of itself. But, with a once-in-a-generation legislative agenda firmly on the table exploring what new powers could enable the UK’s regions to thrive, it would be a blunder to not pose the same questions for our most populous and economically important region: the capital.
That’s why, as London’s independent think tank, we are inviting to organisations and institutions across London to join a fresh conversation on what the future of our city’s governance should look like.
If you want to be a part of that conversation, get in touch.
Rob Anderson is Research Director at the Centre for London.