Articles
Mayors need the powers to get the glory
by Dermot FinchLocal Government Chronicle - 05 May 2005
City mayors are back in vogue. Thanks largely to the impact of Ken Livingstone in London, Labour is promising us “a new generation of city mayors”.
This week, prime minister Tony Blair championed the London mayor as the model for city mayors outside London. He said: “The mayor of London has shown how an independent mandate can provide the authority for innovative policy. Strong city leadership will not always agree with national government — but that is a source of strength, not weakness.”
Most would agree that the London mayor has had a positive impact on governance of the capital. But we don't have mayors in our other big cities such as Manchester and Birmingham. How can we ensure that the next generation of city mayors improve the performance of our major cities?
Power is key. To be successful, city mayors need substantive and unique powers. In particular, they need economic levers — spending, borrowing and revenue-raising powers. Only then will they have the necessary flexibility and agility. And only by having real power will the role attract high-quality candidates.
But before going for more city mayors, we need to reach a new consensus on the whole sub-national framework of government in England.
The picture is over-crowded: RDAs, GOs, SSPs, LSPs, LSCs, LAAs, LAs — the list goes on and on. This is very confusing, not just to voters but to businesses and the agencies themselves. Instead of promoting enterprise and growth, we've ended up with institutional inertia.
The current framework is weighted too much towards the regions at one end and neighbourhoods at the other. We need to recalibrate to put a stronger focus around cities and city-regions. That would make democratic and economic sense.
Regional development agencies suffer from an accountability deficit. Citizens identify more closely with their city than their region. Power should therefore gravitate towards cities. When it comes to economic development, cities and city regions are more useful units of analysis and action. Regional development agencies are too big and neighbourhoods are too small.
RDAs are here to stay. They perform an important strategic, co-ordination and brokerage function. But they can't do everything. In essence, they've hit the limit of their usefulness. They need to focus on what they do best, and make room for cities and city mayors. In fact, city mayors could be a helpful means to defining and embedding city-regions. Given their higher accountability, they could form part of the answer to public service reform too.
There's talk of a governance green paper later this year. It will have to face up to these difficult choices to make room for city mayors. We can make them work, but only if we make room for them — and only if they have real power.
Nick's blog >
ippr podcasts >
RSS feeds >