Genuine regionalism could save the economy and Labour

By Sam Bacon  / @SamBaconSam

Looking at the 2005 general election map at the start of the animation by Philip Palfrey of the University of Sheffield (right) there are two startling visual traits. The first is that from the 2005 general election, almost all of the significant clusters of Labour constituencies are based around the major urban conurbations of England, and - given the geographical distribution the major cities of England - nearly the entire north of England was red in 2005. The second stunning part of this animation is that as the hypothetical swing towards the Conservatives grows, given the distribution of Labour constituencies, it is the city constituencies that start to turn blue.

To me, this reveals a startling truth: despite what centrist politics seems to believe, the battle for the election is not in rural 'middle England' but as Cameron seems to have realised; the key to election victory is winning and holding our major cities and their wider city regions.

Unfortunately, when it comes to policy, this truth seems to remain an open secret in Westminster. Statistically as of 2008, the 8 major cities outside of London (Bristol, Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham and Sheffield), and their wider city regions, are responsible for 27.4% of England’s Gross Value Adde (greater than London itself) and are home to 31% of the country's working age population.

It is clear, therefore, that for the UK economy to succeed, our major cities and their surrounding partners must also succeed, not just London and the south east. Put simply, the future of the economy is in a genuine devolved regionalism giving growth and prosperity to all regions of England and not simply the South East.

However, the opportunity that these statistics point to has sadly never been fully realised or developed by Governments of either colour since the start of the local government modernisation programme in the 1980s.

At this point, I should declare an interest in this topic. I’m a northerner, born and bred. And unlike a large number of my friends and university contemporaries, I still live in the north. But I know that sooner or later, if I want to push my career to its fullest, I will have to move to London. I happen to work in the world of politics and the public sector, but the same sentiment could be applied to almost any other industry: journalism, law, finance, central government, charity work, publishing, PR, etc. Those of us from ‘the regions’ (as they are often unhelpfully labelled by central government) simply do not see a future in our own communities; we are constrained by policy and practice to move to London which ultimately further enriches the self fulfilling cycle of London-centric policy and behaviour.

I believe no young person growing up in 21st century Britain should feel that there is a glass ceiling on their career because of where they live. But as long as they do, the south east (and London in particular) will remain on track to be economically overheated and statistically overpopulated - and the rest of our regions will lag behind.  Government must challenge this and make plans and proposals to unlock the massive potential that exists outside of our fair capital.

This isn’t just a case for philanthropy towards the regions, however. The communities outside of London have earned their place at the political decision making table. And as with any other self respecting northerner, I am not whining for a handout from London. Over the past decade, there has been an urban renaissance in our cities, with places like Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool and Sheffield truly turning themselves around and becoming desirable, modern, economically competitive cities. But they have done this in spite of the Government's policy towards local authorities, rather than because of them. The leaders and people of our cities have simply got on with the job of developing their communities into successful, vibrant and attractive places to live and work. However, there is so much more that could still be achieved.

The overwhelming trend of Labour’s past 13 years in office has been to centralise power away from local authorities and into the hands of central government bodies. Compared to the OECD average, for English local councils very little (around 17%) of their finance is locally raised. Too little local money is available to spend without ringfencing, and only now is the prospect of devolving decisions in areas such as transport, skills and housing - in a way similar to the powers already held by the major of London - being considered, and only for Leeds and Manchester.

To be fair, the government have shown some interest in regional issues over the years, and would likely counter any centrist accusations with examples of the creation of RDAs, the further geographical decentralisation of the civil service, major funding and support for physical regeneration across the UK (and particularly the north) and other such schemes. Without getting into the success or failure of these schemes, even in the best case they have not gone far enough to truly unlock potential and give local places the power and responsibility to control their own destiny that a radical left wing devolutionary approach could bring.

With the election looming, the government must become more radical and commit to a truly devolutionary agenda. Allowing local "regions" to take back and develop powers and responsibilities in areas such as finance, skills, education, transport and housing and planning (amongst others) would show real commitment to the people outside of the south east, and a real commitment to creating a new, balanced and sustainable UK economy.

If Labour offered this support to the UK’s cities and regions, it would offer a real change and be a compelling vision of the UK’s future that voters could believe in. It would ignite a vision for the country, and rekindle people’s connection with their local politicians and MPs, who would be more able to reflect and deliver local priorities and commitments. Further, it would deliver the balanced and sustainable growth that the recession has so clearly shown this country needs.

All well and good, but does the prospect of voters getting excited about devolution sound a little far fetched? Here’s a little known fact: of the eight regional capitals in England outside of the south east, half are under the direct council control of the Lib Dems, and they share power in a further two. In all they have direct or indirect control in six of the eight biggest metropolitan authorities in the country. This fact alone should provide a shocking wake up call to all Labour members. Is it a coincidence that the Lib Dems have been the loudest party when calling for greater devolution and pursuing a ‘localist’ agenda and have now ended up in control of the majority of our biggest cities? Or has the public in these areas responded to their calls for greater regional power and the vision of a country and economy no longer fixated on the south east?

Many Labour activists like to think that all Lib Dem gains are made purely because of local ‘protest votes’ towards the national party. That not only underestimates the Lid Dems, it more importantly disenfranchises the people of these cities, suggesting that they don’t really understand or respond to policy. Both are dangerous assumptions to make.

This is not a call for London to fail; London should succeed. But along with the rest of the country, it is an underused resource that has more economic capacity then is currently being used. And it is not a call to appeal to the core vote in the north. It is a call for Labour to develop plans to genuinely and radically devolve power and responsibility to regions and cities, and allow places to take control of their own economic and social destiny.

Share