8.4.2 The extent to which devolution should be extended in England.

Introduction

The question of whether and how devolution should be extended in England has been a significant political issue, particularly in the context of the UK's asymmetrical devolution. Unlike Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, England does not have its own parliament or assembly, leading to debates about the fairness, practicality, and desirability of extending devolution within England. This overview will explore the arguments for and against extending devolution in England, considering key issues such as the Barnett formula, regional identities, the impact of Brexit, and the complexities of parliamentary sovereignty.

---

1. The Case for Extending Devolution in England

A. Addressing the Asymmetry of Devolution

• Current Situation: The UK's devolution settlement is asymmetrical, with Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland enjoying varying degrees of legislative power, while England is governed centrally by Westminster.
• English Parliament: One proposal is the creation of an English Parliament to ensure that England has a similar level of representation and autonomy as the other devolved nations.
• English Votes for English Laws (EVEL): Introduced to address the "West Lothian Question," EVEL has been criticized as a limited and ineffective solution to the asymmetry problem.

B. Distinct Regional Identities and Needs

• Cultural Differences: England is home to distinct regions with their own cultural identities, such as Cornwall, which has a unique Celtic heritage, and the North East, which has distinct socio-economic challenges.
• Regional Devolution: Extending devolution could involve empowering regional assemblies or combined authorities, allowing regions to address their specific needs. For example, Cornwall has distinct needs related to tourism, infrastructure, and preserving its cultural heritage.
• Cornish Devolution: There is an ongoing campaign for greater devolution to Cornwall, reflecting its distinct identity and the belief that local governance could better address its unique challenges.

C. Economic Inequality and the Barnett Formula

• Barnett Formula: The Barnett formula is used to determine the distribution of public spending across the UK. Critics argue that it is outdated and disadvantages England, particularly the regions outside London and the South East.
• Levelling Up: Extending devolution could be part of a broader strategy to "level up" economically deprived regions in England, giving them greater control over local economic development, infrastructure, and public services.
• Financial Autonomy: Greater devolution could involve granting regions more control over local taxation and spending, reducing reliance on central government funding and addressing regional disparities.

D. Localism and Enhanced Democracy

• Local Decision-Making: Devolution could empower local communities, allowing decisions to be made closer to the people affected by them, leading to more responsive and effective governance.
• Engagement and Accountability: Local assemblies or parliaments could enhance democratic engagement and accountability, as voters would feel a stronger connection to their representatives and the decisions that affect their daily lives.
• Building on Existing Structures: The success of metro mayors and combined authorities in cities like Manchester and London demonstrates the potential for devolution to improve local governance. Expanding this model could strengthen local democracy across England.

---

2. Arguments Against Extending Devolution in England

A. Complexity and Fragmentation

• Potential Fragmentation: Extending devolution could lead to a fragmented governance structure within England, creating complexity and potentially weakening the unity of the country.
• Coordination Challenges: With multiple regional bodies, coordinating policy across England could become more challenging, leading to inefficiencies and conflicts between different levels of government.
• Overlapping Jurisdictions: There is a risk of overlapping jurisdictions and responsibilities between regional assemblies and Westminster, complicating governance and accountability.

B. Parliamentary Sovereignty

• Sovereignty of Westminster: The UK Parliament in Westminster remains the sovereign body, and extending devolution in England could challenge this principle by creating multiple centers of legislative power within the country.
• Retention of Power: Some argue that Westminster should retain control over key areas such as defense, foreign policy, and macroeconomic management, to ensure consistent and coherent national policies.
• Reversibility of Devolution: Unlike the devolved parliaments in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, which have been made permanent by law, devolution in England could be designed to remain reversible, preserving parliamentary sovereignty. However, this could undermine the stability and legitimacy of any devolved bodies.

C. Economic Viability

• Economic Disparities: There are significant economic disparities between regions in England. Some regions, such as the North East and Cornwall, are less economically developed and may struggle to raise sufficient revenue through local taxation to fund public services.
• Central Government Support: These regions currently rely heavily on central government funding. Greater devolution might lead to underfunded services in poorer areas unless accompanied by significant financial support from Westminster.
• Efficiency Concerns: Some argue that central government can achieve economies of scale and greater efficiency in delivering public services, which could be lost with further devolution.

D. Impact of Brexit

• Centralized Control Post-Brexit: Brexit has shifted significant powers back to Westminster, particularly in areas like trade and immigration. There is a debate about whether these powers should be devolved further or retained centrally.
• Regulatory Divergence: Extending devolution could lead to regulatory divergence between regions, particularly in areas like agriculture, fisheries, and environmental standards, complicating trade and economic policy post-Brexit.
• National Unity: In the post-Brexit context, some argue that extending devolution within England could undermine national unity at a time when the UK is already facing challenges related to Scottish independence and Northern Ireland's status.

---

3. Current Devolution in England: Successes and Limitations

A. Metro Mayors and Combined Authorities

• Success Stories: The introduction of metro mayors in regions like Greater Manchester, the West Midlands, and London has been largely successful, with these leaders taking on significant responsibilities for economic development, transport, and housing.
• Increased Local Control: These devolution deals have allowed regions to tailor policies to their specific needs, leading to innovative approaches to local governance.
• Limitations: However, the powers of metro mayors are still limited compared to those of devolved parliaments in Scotland and Wales. The scope and depth of devolution vary across regions, leading to inconsistencies.

B. City and Regional Devolution Deals

• City Deals: City and regional devolution deals have allowed some areas to gain more control over economic development, infrastructure, and skills. However, these deals are often piecemeal and negotiated individually, leading to an uneven distribution of powers across England.
• Patchwork Devolution: The ad-hoc nature of these deals has created a patchwork system of devolution, with some areas enjoying significant powers while others remain under direct Westminster control.

---

4. Future Directions for Devolution in England

A. A More Uniform Devolution Framework

• England-Wide Devolution: Some propose a more uniform devolution framework across England, where all regions or counties would have similar levels of autonomy. This could involve establishing regional assemblies or extending the metro mayor model to all parts of the country.
• Federalism: Another proposal is the creation of a federal UK, where England would be divided into several regions, each with its own parliament or assembly, while a reformed Westminster would handle only UK-wide issues.
• Empowering Local Government: Enhancing the powers of existing local governments, including county councils and city councils, could be a more straightforward approach to extending devolution without creating new layers of governance.

B. Addressing Economic Disparities

• Reform of the Barnett Formula: Reforming or replacing the Barnett formula with a needs-based funding model could address concerns about fairness and ensure that all regions of England have the resources they need to manage devolved responsibilities effectively.
• Targeted Investment: Any extension of devolution should be accompanied by targeted investment to ensure that less economically developed regions have the financial capacity to deliver high-quality public services.

C. Balancing National Unity and Regional Autonomy

• Maintaining National Cohesion: Any extension of devolution in England must strike a balance between enhancing regional autonomy and maintaining national unity. Clear delineation of powers and responsibilities is crucial to avoid conflict and ensure effective governance.
• Reform of Westminster: Reforming the Westminster Parliament to reflect the new devolution arrangements, possibly through changes to the House of Lords or the introduction of an English Grand Committee, could help manage the complexities of extended devolution.

D. Public Consultation and Support

• Engaging the Public: Successful devolution requires public support. Any proposals for extending devolution should be subject to extensive public consultation and, where appropriate, referendums to ensure legitimacy.
• Awareness and Education: Increasing public awareness of the benefits and implications of devolution is essential to building support and ensuring that any new arrangements reflect the will of the people.