Labour went into the last election promising to create elected regional councils where there was popular demand. This was seen as the natural counterweight to the establishment of devolved government in Scotland, Wales and, with its rather different circumstances, Northern Ireland.
Since then Labour has certainly pursued a vigorous regional agenda, but it has been an economic rather than a political agenda. Its centrepiece has been the creation of the Regional Development Agencies. The Government has also re-organised regional training structures. Its planning and urban regeneration initiatives have buttressed regional programmes.
But the political dimension of regional development has either disappeared from view or has floundered in confusion. The Government has beaten the drum for elected mayors but so far only a handful of cities are showing much enthusiasm. Regional assemblies and chambers have been created involving existing local councillors and the Regional Development Agencies pay polite deference to them, but they have little influence and no power. Of elected regional assemblies practically nothing has been heard. The speculation was whether the commitment to regional government might drop out of the next manifesto altogether.
It is easy to see why enthusiasm has waned. Devolution to London demonstrated how easily governments can pick up bloody noses in elections with not much at stake, and the European elections rubbed this message home. Elections for regional parliaments with powers feeble even by the standards of the Welsh Assembly and attracting a derisory turnout of voters looked like an invitation to a political hijack.
But has the tide now turned? There are some reasons for thinking it has. The lesser reason is that the argument about what devolution to Scotland and Wales has done to England will not go away. There are 72 MPs representing Scottish constituencies at Westminster (56 of them Labour). They have virtually no say on what happens in Scotland because that is the responsibility of the Scottish Parliament. But they do vote on English matters. It is possible to envisage a Labour Government dependent entirely on its Scottish MPs in Westminster for its majority. That would bring the constitutional issue of "who governs England?" racing back to the fore.
But there is a more persuasive reason - Gordon Brown. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is said to have thrown his weight behind the cause of local accountability as regional economic agencies get more power and money. His speech in Manchester last month dealt largely with the regional economic agenda, but he linked that with a demand for more political accountability. True, what he proposed was pretty small beer - annual hearings by regional assemblies to examine the activities of the Regional Development Agencies plus greater scrutiny of regional development by the Select Committees of the House of Commons. He referred to, but did not amplify, the manifesto commitment to regional government.
But this is enough to reanimate the debate. For a start it suggests that John Prescott will find an ally - and a key ally - in at least restating the commitment in the manifesto for the imminent election. But it also suggests that Gordon Brown has identified this as yet another area he can occupy politically in his permanent campaign to capture the hearts and minds of the Labour activists and make him the inevitable choice as next Prime Minister. It may all sound rather conspiratorial. But it is impossible to exaggerate the extent to which this Government rotates around the complex relationship between Blair and Brown and the determination Brown demonstrates in establishing intellectual dominance and management control.
There is talk of a green or white paper in the summer following an assumed Labour election victory setting out what powers could be handed to the existing assemblies and how referendums could be triggered to make them directly-elected. Control of Regional Development Agencies, planning, infrastructure and Learning and Skills Councils are candidates to be handed over.
Even if this does come to pass a lot of confusion will remain - notably the coherence between directly elected regional assemblies and directly elected big city mayors and whether assemblies would have the same powers throughout England or different competencies. The Government needs to sort its ideas out if it is not to create a rod for its own back - and a maze of responsibility for business to unravel.
Source
Building Homes
