Andy Burnham’s Devolution Agenda Faces Scrutiny Deficit
Andy Burnham has positioned English devolution as the central pillar of his premiership, aiming to rectify what he describes as an "unaccountable state" that is simultaneously too powerful and too distant from the daily lives of citizens. His plan involves granting England’s mayors unprecedented authority and financial resources. However, the editorial in The Guardian asserts that these proposals must confront significant structural realities, primarily a landscape where the scrutiny of local government has been vastly diminished.
The publication argues that power without corresponding oversight creates inherent risks. As the map of English devolution has evolved over recent years, vital accountability mechanisms have withered. The editorial contends that for Burnham’s vision to succeed, the government must address this gap in supervision rather than expanding mayoral powers within a framework that lacks robust checks and balances.
Abolition of Audit Commission Removed Key Oversight
A primary factor in the current lack of oversight was the decision to abolish the Audit Commission in 2015. This move deprived Whitehall of essential information regarding local government spending, removing a critical layer of financial monitoring for central authorities. The abolition occurred during the tenure of former Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron, as part of his broader initiative known as the "bonfire of the quangos." This period coincided with significant financial pressure on local councils, which were cash-strapped and facing difficult fiscal choices.
During this era, many councils resorted to selling off assets and making risky investments to manage their budgets. The removal of the Audit Commission meant that Whitehall lost a key source of independent data about how local funds were being utilized. The editorial suggests that this decision contributed to an environment where governing occurred with less transparency, setting the stage for subsequent financial vulnerabilities in local administration.
Scandals Highlight Risks of Governing in Darkness
The consequences of diminished oversight have manifested in a series of bankruptcies and scandals across England. These incidents serve as examples of the dangers associated with governing without adequate scrutiny. The editorial points to specific cases where the lack of transparency has led to public concern and official investigation.
One prominent example cited is the Teesworks development, a project led by Ben Houchen, a Conservative mayor. A damning 2024 government report on the project highlighted that a "culture of excessive confidentiality" had prevailed within the organization. This finding underscores the editorial’s argument that increased power for mayors, without parallel improvements in accountability structures, can lead to environments where transparency is suppressed and public funds are managed with insufficient external review.
Implications for Future Devolution Policy
The Guardian’s position emphasizes that any expansion of mayoral powers must be accompanied by strengthened scrutiny mechanisms. The editorial implies that the current trajectory, which has seen accountability frameworks erode while local authorities have taken on more responsibility, is unsustainable. By citing the Teesworks case and the historical context of the Audit Commission’s abolition, the publication argues that future devolution plans cannot ignore the need for robust financial oversight.
The article does not offer a timeline for when these changes might be implemented but stresses the necessity of addressing the "tricky realities" of the current governance landscape. It suggests that Burnham’s administration must take note of these historical precedents to ensure that the promised benefits of devolution are not undermined by a lack of transparency and accountability.
Contrasting Views on Centralization
While Burnham criticizes the current state as "unaccountable" due to its distance from everyday life, the criticism of his own proposed powers lies in the potential for concentration without sufficient checks. The editorial does not attribute specific counter-arguments from Conservative officials regarding the 2015 abolition but notes that the decision was part of a broader political strategy under Cameron. The focus remains on the functional outcome: a landscape where vital accountability mechanisms have withered, leaving local government spending and major development projects like Teesworks exposed to risks that were previously mitigated by independent audit bodies.
The publication concludes that for English devolution to function effectively, the balance between power and scrutiny must be restored. The editorial does not predict specific outcomes of Burnham’s premiership but asserts that the failure to address the deficit in oversight could replicate the issues seen in previous years, where a lack of information for Whitehall and excessive confidentiality at the local level led to financial instability and public scandals.