Nine things we learned from the English devolution white paper
What the white paper does and does not contain, and what challenges lie ahead for the government.

The government’s English devolution white paper – Power and Partnership: Foundations for Growth – sets out, in 118 pages of detail, how it intends to deliver on its promised ‘devolution revolution’ over the course of this parliament. Headlines include plans to extend devolution to all parts of England, additional powers and funding flexibility for mayors, and the replacement of two-tier local government with unitary authorities. Here are the Institute for Government’s nine key takeaways from the white paper, highlighting what it does and does not contain, and what challenges may lie ahead for the government.
1. The government plans to deepen the powers of mayors to help deliver its growth mission
A centrepiece of the white paper is a new three-tier devolution framework. Primary legislation will set out the powers on offer to ‘strategic authorities’, which is the new term that encompasses combined authorities, the Greater London Authority and (in rare cases) individual local authorities. The government is also firm in its preference for all strategic authorities to be led by mayors, although non-mayoral arrangements may be permitted as a transitional step.
Perhaps the most substantial new powers announced are around spatial development and planning. Every strategic authority will have a duty to develop a spatial development strategy, apportioning housing targets across local areas. Mayors will also be granted call-in powers, allowing them to override local planning decisions in some circumstances.
The paper also confirms new economic powers for most authorities. In particular, almost all the powers already being devolved to Greater Manchester and the West Midlands will be extended to a wider group of ‘Established’ Strategic Authorities, including Liverpool City Region, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire and the North East in the first instance. At lower tiers of the framework, powers and funding flexibility will also be greater, although most powers are reserved for places with mayors.
The paper also confirms that the spending review will set out additional control over employment support and plans for new innovation funding for combined authorities with the role of mayors expanded in areas such as health, energy and net zero. Inevitably, the government does not go as far as mayors would have liked – for instance, on areas like 16–19 education and fiscal devolution.
Overall, the new framework announced represents a substantial transfer of powers. And importantly, the powers are in the right areas: our previous work has highlighted the importance of devolving skills, transport, housing, employment support and innovation to combined authorities to drive growth. And the legislation proposed is flexible enough that the government could quite easily add additional devolved responsibilities in future without requiring further primary legislation.
2. The government will make it easier for mayors to build houses and infrastructure
The white paper sets out plans to reform how combined authorities take key decisions. In particular, in line with past Institute for Government recommendations, the proposal is that mayors should be able to exercise their functions with simple majority support from other local leaders “wherever possible”. This will make it significantly easier to implement spatial development, transport and investment strategies, which currently often require unanimous or two-thirds approval of combined authority boards.
These reformed decision-making powers will help the government to deliver its ambitions to roll out regional planning across the country and to build 1.5 million homes in this parliament. Currently, just five of the mayors have powers to create these plans and only London has one in place. Local opposition has been a significant barrier so far – in 2020 Stockport council pulled the plug on Greater Manchester’s spatial development strategy, even though the other nine local councils and the metro mayor himself favoured the proposals.
The government has also said that it will review the arrangements for establishing mayoral development corporations (MDCs), including considering whether local authorities should no longer have a veto over the establishment of an MDC in their area – a move we recently called for.
These reforms have the potential to make mayoral devolution more effective, but they may face resistance from local authorities already unpersuaded of the merits of mayoral devolution. The government will need to work hard to convince local leaders that the powers and funding on offer are worth accepting these reforms.
Devolution and urban regeneration: How can metro mayors transform England’s towns and cities?
More mayoral development corporations are key to getting Britain building.
Read the report
3. The funding of combined authorities will be reformed – but fiscal devolution is not on offer
The white paper sets out plans for simplifying local authority funding, building on proposals outlined in the recent finance policy statement. This clarity and commitment to action will be welcome for combined authorities which have been trying to pull together local growth plans without confirmation of their funding model going forward.
The six top-tier ‘Established’ Mayoral Strategic Authorities will be granted single-pot ‘integrated settlements’ that can be allocated flexibly in line with local preferences. As not all places will be ready to take on this level of responsibility, less advanced Mayoral Strategic Authorities will get separate consolidated funding pots covering local growth, place, housing, and regeneration, non-apprenticeship adult skills and transport following the next spending review. We had previously recommended multi-year funding pots, but the white paper does not confirm any timeframe.
The government has also committed to reducing competitive bidding and rationalising the number of pots, acknowledging the burden and costs placed on local authorities by the existing model. The tiered approach aims to empower all places to take on greater responsibility and build strategic capacity for effective spending.
The white paper provides some clarity for authorities awaiting details on Integrated Settlement outcomes frameworks. Rather than individual frameworks for each department, there will be one overarching framework to align national missions with local growth plans. These details will be mutually agreed upon between the government and local authorities.
These reforms aim to ensure funds reach the places that need them most, when they need them. However, delivering meaningful change requires cross-government commitment, not just from Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). The white paper has also completely sidestepped the question – directly from mayors – about fiscal devolution, or even some tax experimentation such as a tourist tax, suggesting that the Treasury clearly remains cautious about fiscal devolution.
4. Ministers intend to fill the devolution map by creating large regional authorities
Following a manifesto commitment to widen devolution in England, the government has now outlined a new approach for filling in the devolution map. Importantly, in line with IfG proposals, it has clarified the principles it will use to decide upon the geography for future devolution agreements: scale (with a preference for more than 1.5 million people), economic geography, alignment to public service footprints and local identity.
Although the government has not outlined a timetable for when it expects full coverage across the country, there are three indications that it wants to make rapid progress. First, it has launched the Devolution Priority Programme, accelerating devolution in areas with a sensible geography and a willingness to adopt mayoral devolution in 2026.
Then with the roll out of a standardised devolution framework and the emphasis on devolution by default, the government has moved closer to an off-the-shelf approach to devolution. This will potentially speed up the transfer of powers outside of Whitehall to so-called devolution deserts.
Finally, it has introduced a “ministerial directive” to compel areas to establish strategic authorities if they are unable to agree – or to prevent small devolution ‘islands’ being left out of the process. Given how many past devolution proposals have foundered on the rocks of local disputes, this mechanism might well be needed for the government to complete the devolution map. It may not even need to be used as it will incentivise places to reach consensus before ministers are forced to step in.
Overall, the extra clarity around the process for widening devolution to the rest of England is welcome and paves the way for another busy period of devolution negotiations in many parts of the country. Past experience tells us that local buy-in is crucial for devolution to work well, so the government will have to pay particularly close attention to the establishment and operation of new strategic authorities in areas where local government was reluctant to go ahead with devolution.
5. The government recognises the need for investment into combined authority governance and capacity
The white paper acknowledges that strategic authorities need additional capacity to deliver on their expanding responsibilities. As part of this, the government will enable mayors to appoint and remunerate ‘commissioners’ to lead on key functions. At present, members of combined authority boards are typically asked to lead on portfolios for the region, with no remuneration and alongside their day job as council leaders.
The government has also committed to introducing a secondment scheme between central government and strategic authorities, as the IfG has recommended. But the focus appears to be on “seconding out from central government”. 34 English Devolution White Paper, 16 December 2024, www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-devolution-white-paper-power-and-partnership-foundations-for-growth/english-devolution-white-paper Interchange should go both ways, with officials from strategic authorities and local government brought into Whitehall to improve mutual understanding.
Another important commitment is the plan to explore a Local Public Accounts Committee model, to improve scrutiny of devolved spending and performance. Key design features of such a system should include an independent chair, cross-party and representative membership, and independent funding from the body it scrutinises. 35 Paun A et al, A New Deal for England, Institute for Government, 9 May 2024, Annex C www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/next-government-complete-english-devolution
The government also sets out its intention to create a single point of accountability for value for money. We previously recommended turning MCA chief executives into accountable officers, and to give further teeth to this system, the government should create a system of ‘mayoral directions’. 36 Similar to ministerial directions, as set out in our explainer: www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/ministerial-directions. These would be issued when an MCA chief executive considers that spending fails to meet regularity, propriety, feasibility or value for money criteria, but the mayor wishes to proceed regardless. The mayor would then be held personally accountable for the decision.
It is welcome that the government is taking seriously the need for accountability reform and investment in capacity. Getting these matters right will be crucial if strategic authorities are to deliver the improved economic and social outcomes that the government wants them to.
6. The government rightly commits to public service reform – but success will be about more than structures and governance
The white paper correctly identifies better integration of public services at a place level as a crucial step to more effective working. Joining up services at a local level is not easy; many governments have tried and failed. The governance structures – such as a requirement that mayors are appointed to the integrated care partnership (ICP) – proposed in this white paper may help but are no guarantee of a change in approach.
Similarly, lining up the boundaries of organisations such as strategic authorities, NHS integrated care systems (ICSs) and local authorities may be helpful, but is unlikely to be a cure-all. Relationships between frontline staff in different agencies are more likely to determine whether services cooperate effectively than the extent to which organisational boundaries are coterminous.
A key source of friction – and therefore poor relationships – between services is money. Siloed, scarce funding means that agencies often compete to avoid costs, rather than cooperating. 45 Hoddinott S, Davies N, Darwin K, A preventative approach to public services, Institute for Government, p.27, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/preventative-approach-public-services There are some relatively cost neutral steps that can help. The government has wisley committed to moving to multi-year funding settlements for local authorities and reducing the number of ringfenced pots of money, 46 www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-government-finance-policy-statement-2025-to-2026/local-government-finance-policy-statement-2025-to-2026 and it could also establish more shared funding streams across services. 47 Hoddinott S, Davies N, Darwin K, A preventative approach to public services, Institute for Government, p.45, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/preventative-approach-public-services
Unitarisation may deliver some savings from the consolidation of back office functions, but the government may be disappointed by the extent of those efficiencies. Within a year of unitarising in 2023, Somerset council warned that it was at risk of having to issue a section 114 notice, 48 www.somerset.gov.uk/news/stark-warning-as-somerset-council-sets-balanced-budget-for-2024-25/ requiring the government to provide £76.9m of exceptional financial support in 2024/25. 49 www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptional-financial-support-for-local-authorities-for-2024-25
Bluntly, shuffling structures and governance will not solve the fact that there is not enough funding for many agencies to provide the quality of services that the government expects. Local authorities ration access to adult social care 50 Performance Tracker 2023: Adult social care , Institute for Government, November 2023, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/performance-tracker-2023/adult-social-care#a-decline-in-people-receiving-long-term-support-is-unlikely-… because need far outstrips funding, 51 Hoddinott S, Davies N, Rowland C, Pope T, Dellar A, Nye P, Austerity postponed? The impact of Labour’s first budget on public services, Institute for Government, 2024, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/impact-labour-first-budget-public-services not because they do not sit neatly within an ICB boundary or because there is no mayor telling them what to prioritise. Relatedly, it will be difficult for services to shift towards prevention as the government hopes while they are still required to fund more acute services. 52 Hoddinott S, Davies N, Darwin K, A preventative approach to public services, Institute for Government, p.33, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/preventative-approach-public-services
7. The white paper will kick off a radical reorganisation of local government
The government has announced a programme of local government reorganisation to replace all ‘two-tier’ county and district councils with single tier ‘unitary’ authorities. It will also reorganise existing unitary councils “where there is evidence of failure” 55 English Devolution White Paper, 16 December 2024, www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-devolution-white-paper-power-and-partnership-foundations-for-growth/english-devolution-white-paper or their size or boundaries are limiting public service performance. The government will write to council leaders to invite proposals and aims to deliver a first wave of reorganisation in this parliament.
The white paper sets out a clear rationale for these changes. The government sees unitarisation as an opportunity to deliver efficiency savings and improve public services by bringing together ‘lower’ and ‘upper tier’ services in the same organisation. Reorganisation is a welcome step towards simplifying the local government landscape and making it clear who is accountable for service delivery. It will bring the 29% of the English population currently covered by two-tier authorities in line with the rest of the UK.
New unitary councils will be required to have populations of at least 500,000, although there may be exceptions. The government has made plain that individual local authorities will not be eligible for mayoral devolution so the new unitary authorities will need to join with neighbouring areas to form mayoral strategic authorities across one or several historic county areas.
As the IfG has previously concluded, unitarisation could make it easier to agree new mayoral strategic authorities and create more stable institutions. With the government “clear that reorganisation should not delay devolution and plans for both should be complementary”, 56 English Devolution White Paper, 16 December 2024, www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-devolution-white-paper-power-and-partnership-foundations-for-growth/english-devolution-white-paper important questions of sequencing reorganisation with mayoral devolution will need to be answered.
The intention to learn from previous waves of reorganisation is welcome. Doing so will be essential not only to the success of these new local authorities, but also to the strategic authorities they will be part of.
How the government can extend devolution to the whole of England
Half of England's population currently is not covered by any form of devolution.
Read the report
8. It is still unclear how the government wants to hold local government to account
The government has made clear that it wants to provide local government with more flexibility over how it spends money and designs services. It is reasonable for the government to seek some assurance over how that money is spent, disseminate best practice and step in where variation in service quality reaches unacceptable levels.
The previous government established the Office for Local Government (Oflog) in 2023 to play at least some of those roles, but the white paper confirms that this administration will abolish Oflog. That will be welcome news to a sector that never fully embraced the body. But what succeeds Oflog is less clear.
Local government accountability also slipped under the previous government as the backlog in unaudited local government accounts grew to unprecedented levels, likely contributing to some of the section 114 notices that were the result of local authorities taking on unacceptable levels of financial risk without sufficient scrutiny.
This government committed in July to establishing the Audit Reporting and Governance Authority (ARGA), but the white paper does not mention ARGA, and instead says that the government “will fundamentally reform the local audit system”.
Improved oversight of local government is welcome. But the government’s vision for that body is very unclear from this white paper. On one hand, it says it does not want to return to a “bloated Audit Commission” but on the other says that it will “bring as many audit functions as possible into one body”.
We have previously argued that a reformed Oflog could play a valuable role in holding both local and central government to account, while acting as a conduit for best practice to flow around the sector. 59 Hoddinott S, Davies N, Darwin K, A preventative approach to public services, Institute for Government, p.50, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/preventative-approach-public-services We still believe there is a role for a body along those lines but it should be more collaborative than Oflog and potentially supported by the expansion and strengthening of the LGA’s peer review model of accountability. 60 Hoddinott S, Davies N, Darwin K, A preventative approach to public services, Institute for Government, p.52, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/preventative-approach-public-services
9. The white paper proposals will put English devolution on a firmer constitutional footing
A significant implication of the government’s package of proposed reforms is the potential they offer to place English devolution onto a firmer constitutional footing. The plans in the white paper could establish strategic authorities as a permanent tier of governance with its own distinct functions and responsibilities, with a more consistent single tier of local government below this.
Putting the devolution framework into legislation would, for the first time, see the powers of strategic authorities defined on the face of an Act of Parliament, with a default that all places will eventually take on the full package of powers along with an “integrated settlement” giving budgetary flexibility and certainty. There will be a ratchet mechanism in which additional powers can be added to, but not removed from, the devolution framework by secondary legislation. And the promised establishment of what the Institute for Government has previously called a “devolve or explain” principle would see places make a formal request to take on additional powers and will receive a reasoned response from ministers.
The white paper also reaffirms that all mayors will be members of two key intergovernmental bodies: a Mayoral Council chaired by the deputy prime minister, and the larger Council of Nations and Regions that also includes the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The precise role of these new forums remains something of a work in progress, but the government seems committed to the principle of working in partnership with devolved leaders. There is also a specific commitment that the Mayoral Council will discuss on an annual basis proposals for additions to the devolution framework.
This white paper promises to make a substantial down payment on the Labour manifesto promise of a radical transfer of power from Westminster to devolved and local leaders. However, many of the details remain to be worked through. This week’s announcement therefore marks the beginning of a debate over how to deliver on the government’s ambitious vision for reform.
- Topic
- Devolution
- United Kingdom
- England
- Political party
- Labour
- Position
- Metro mayor
- Public figures
- Angela Rayner
- Publisher
- Institute for Government