Theresa May is to abandon plans to devolve powers from Whitehall to directly elected mayors for city regions, according to a report published yesterday.
The supposed reason behind the change of policy? The prime minister’s wish to avoid establishing ‘new powerbases’ for the moderate wing of the Labour party. This comes in spite of directly elected mayors being a core part of George Osborne’s strategy.
The Local Government Information Unit (LGiU) believe this is not a sound basis for policy making and nor should devolution be driven by national party politics. We should remember it’s not about what works for Westminster, but rather what works for areas such as Manchester, Liverpool, Tees Valley and the other regions around the country that are set to benefit from increased powers.
So far, the Department for Communities and Local Government and Lord Heseltine have denied the claims, saying that mayors “remain the best way to make [deals] work”. This does not mean they will not row back on the mandatory element of the mayor programme before the 2017 elections.
Though the government stopped short of forcing it on local authorities, directly elected mayors were a core part of George Osborne’s strategy.
Directly elected mayors can be very positive for a region: they can provide a figurehead and political voice for that area and speak on a national platform for the local community. They have direct accountability to their electorate. In a recent article, we argued that mayors could use their powerful local mandate to ensure that those operating within the region are accountable and transparent, while maintaining acceptable standards.
But LGiU has always argued that the decision to establish a directly elected mayor should be a local one and that different models might be appropriate in different areas of the country.
Mayors provide one answer to questions around leadership and accountability at a local level – but they are not the only answer. If this week’s reports are correct, there are plenty of other models for regional governance, from a rolling chairship to a committee structure.
Two-tier rural areas, in particular, have found it difficult to reconcile their ambitions for devolution with the introduction of a mayor. Other parts of the country have already voted in local referendums against the idea of mayors. And, without a mayor, you will still need to answer questions of governance and accountability.
It’s no surprise that Labour MPs have realised that running a city is a bigger draw than spending years in opposition. However, Theresa May’s reasoning for her U-turn on mayors shouldn’t be politically driven – it should be about what’s best for the regions: sharing prosperity and growth as well as increasing democracy and local accountability.
This is an edited version of a blog that originally appeared here.
Talk to us on Twitter via @Guardianpublic and sign up for your free weekly Guardian Public Leaders newsletter with news and analysis sent direct to you every Thursday.
