Working to make government more effective

Comment

The new English question?

Is English devolution the next step?

The prospect of further devolution to Scotland and the home nations makes decentralisation in England more likely – but far from certain.

Whatever the outcome of Thursday’s referendum on Scottish independence, we will soon see further devolution to Scotland. Even if the Scots say No to independence, then substantial powers are likely to be devolved given the commitment from the main Westminster parties to produce a draft law devolving substantial powers by Burns Night on 25 January 2015.

We have examined the range of possible outcomes for Scotland and for the Welsh and Northern Irish governments that will also almost certainly gain some additional autonomy in light of events in Scotland. But further devolution has implications for English government – beyond the practical challenges of disentanglement. First, there will be pressure to provide a better answer to the long-standing ‘English’ or ‘West Lothian’ Question – the anomaly which sees Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs able to vote in Westminster on laws which apply only to England, while English MPs are denied a vote on devolved matters.

Second, there will be pressure for decentralisation within England itself. Politicians from the leading Westminster parties appear to accept the idea that Scottish dissatisfaction with Westminster rule is connected to a wider crisis of trust and legitimacy. And several leading politicians are presenting decentralisation as one way of bringing the people and government closer together.

As Nick Clegg said, speaking at the launch of an IPPR North publication on decentralisation last week, “You only need look at how the Scottish referendum debate has re-energised people's interest and engagement in politics over the last few weeks to see that this [decentralisation] is an idea whose time has come.” And writing in the Observer on Sunday, Ed Miliband said: “Scotland's example will lead the way… we have proposed changing the way we are governed in England, with extensive new devolution to local government from Cornwall to Cumbria.” George Osborne has already committed to building a ‘northern powerhouse’, though, like many calling for decentralisation, his emphasis is on devolution as part of the answer for increased growth more than the need to rebuild trust in politics.

Many are convinced this means that decentralisation is coming but it is far from certain that decentralisation follows devolution. It is striking that both the Scottish and Welsh parliaments have centralised powers to Edinburgh and Cardiff, merging local tiers of government and, in the case of Scotland, the management of services like policing and health. Indeed, the leaders of the Scottish parties opposing Scottish independence, Johann Lamont, Ruth Davidson and Willie Rennie implicitly attacked the centralist tendencies of the Scottish Parliament when they issued a joint statement confirming further devolution to Scotland. “When we talk of [giving Scotland] new powers”, they wrote, “we are not just talking about powers for Holyrood. We will be true to the central principle of devolution and devolve power down from Holyrood to people and local communities.”

As our past research has showed, there are also considerable practical obstacles to decentralisation. In particular, it is difficult to get national politicians, local politicians and the public to agree precisely which geographies should receive more powers and which governance arrangements are appropriate. And pre-election promises to decentralise have failed to turn into change many times in the past, as shown by the failed experiment with Regional Assemblies.

There may be enough political will to overcome these obstacles. And there are ways in which devolution does make things easier. Arguments that it is too risky to decentralise certain tax and spend powers to Greater Manchester, for example, are somewhat undermined when it is possible for Scotland (with a population that is not much bigger). But, overall, the jury is still out.

As we note in our Programme for Effective Government, if politicians really want English decentralisation they need to plan carefully and take the following steps. First, they must set out a clear manifesto pledge that details precisely what tax and spend powers will be devolved and to where. Second, they must refrain from making policy commitments in areas that they have promised to devolve. And third, they must run the 2015 spending review differently – to ensure that departments don’t backtrack on these commitments. If these steps happen, we can start to believe the hype.

United Kingdom
England
Publisher
Institute for Government

Related content

08 FEB 2024 Insight paper

The Union and the state

Whether the UK survives in its current form or what it will look like if it doesn’t stay together, will hinge on which vision prevails.