Patrick Traynor looks at what 2018 has in store for devolution in England.

On 4 May last year, voters in Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, West Midlands, West of England, Cambridgeshire & Peterborough and Tees Valley went to the polls to cast votes for metro-mayors for the first time. Whilst these represented landmark elections, the future of devolution in England remains at a crossroads.

The Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016 brought into law a framework that has enabled devolution to spread across the UK. However, what this act did not do is establish exactly what devolution should look like, and who should be given these extra powers.

What has followed has been a series of agreements between the Government and local regions, with a mismatch of different powers allocated across England.  Take Greater Manchester, where Andy Burnham has been granted the most extensive powers of all the newly elected metro mayors, including control over the health and social care budget. Just a short journey up the M62, Liverpool City Region Mayor Steve Rotheram’s powers are much more limited.

The next major planned event in the English devolution calendar is the election of a Mayor for the Sheffield City Region, originally envisaged to comprise Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield. However, this has been overshadowed by a major debate between competing visions for devolution in Yorkshire.  Local support has grown behind an alternative, pan-Yorkshire devolution settlement, labelled ‘One Yorkshire’.  Recent referenda held in Doncaster and Rotherham saw 85% of respondents vote in favour of the ‘One Yorkshire’ option, rather than the Sheffield City Region. 

What is clear is that cities and regions across in England will have one eye on what happens in Yorkshire.  A ‘One Yorkshire’ arrangement would have immense economic power, with a combined economy comparable to some nation states. Furthermore, existing devolution agreements have predominantly covered urban areas, and by its very nature, ‘One Yorkshire’ would also cover vast rural areas.

The Government has opposed the idea, stating that “a deal and governance across the whole of Yorkshire, given its scale and diversity, would [not] in practice deliver the benefits that the proponents of such a deal seek”.  Meanwhile, the Sheffield City Region mayoral election is still scheduled to go ahead in May, without a clear understanding of what powers the mayor will have.

The debate in Yorkshire is symptomatic of the wider problems facing the future of devolution in England. By voicing its opposition to ‘One Yorkshire’, the Government is implicitly setting out that the scope and scale of devolution in England should be limited to city-sized regions.  However, going forward, questions remain about what powers the Government is prepared to give away, and to whom. Those in rural areas may also start to ask why they aren’t being given the same autonomy as their urban counterparts.

Regardless of the merits of the EU referendum, what is clear is that many who voted to leave the European Union voted for a return of powers, and an increased say over their own political destiny.

For many, devolution provides a clear opportunity to do this. At its best, devolution can be at the heart of any industrial strategy, allowing regions to enact the policies they need to flourish and to boost regional productivity. The election in May will certainly be one to watch.