So what is the model of devolution being offered in the English case? Parallels can be drawn with the administrative devolution that characterised Scotland before 1998, rather than a process of real devolution of power to localities and citizens. The creation of the Scottish Office in the late nineteenth century led to a central government body effectively administering Scotland locally. The Scottish Office was allowed the administration of a range of polices (such as Education) with a local influence but without any concomitant democratic processes (Mitchell 2003); a reproduction of imperial governance. Decisions were made in Whitehall and administered locally and adjusted to local custom. The present case of CAs in England, reveals that devolution is mainly about administering certain polices by adapting to local conditions. Gains (2016) contribution on Mayors’ and her study of Manchester elsewhere in this ‘Metro edition, offers an example of this dynamic. The new devolved authorities have no legislative power and limited financial power. Britain has the second most centralised budgetary system in the world (after New Zealand whose population is about the same as Yorkshire) (OECD 2015). Devolution will not fundamentally challenge such asymmetry, as most taxation continues to be raised by the Treasury. The CAs’ position is one of administering central government policy in the context and clear parameters laid down by Whitehall. As the Manchester agreement makes clear (see Gains 2016), the policy undertaken by the new authorities will undergo extensive ‘an programme of evaluation’ by the Treasury and: next five year tranche of funding will be unlocked if HMT is “The satisfied that the independent assessment shows the investment to have met the objectives and contributed to national growth’ and to rub
So what is the model of devolution being offered in the English case? Parallels can be drawn with the administrative devolution that characterised Scotland before 1998, rather than a process of real devolution of power to localities and citizens. The creation of the Scottish Office in the late nineteenth century led to a central government body effectively administering Scotland locally. The Scottish Office was allowed the administration of a range of polices (such as Education) with a local influence but without any concomitant democratic processes (Mitchell 2003); a reproduction of imperial governance. Decisions were made in Whitehall and administered locally and adjusted to local custom. The present case of CAs in England, reveals that devolution is mainly about administering certain polices by adapting to local conditions. Gains (2016) contribution on ‘Metro Mayors’ and her study of Manchester elsewhere in this edition, offers an example of this dynamic. The new devolved authorities have no legislative power and limited financial power. Britain has the second most centralised budgetary system in the world (after New Zealand whose population is about the same as Yorkshire) (OECD 2015). Devolution will not fundamentally challenge such asymmetry, as most taxation continues to be raised by the Treasury. The CAs’ position is one of administering central government policy in the context and clear parameters laid down by Whitehall. As the Manchester agreement makes clear (see Gains 2016), the policy undertaken by the new authorities will undergo ‘an extensive programme of evaluation’ by the Treasury and: “The next five year tranche of funding will be unlocked if HMT is satisfied that the independent assessment shows the investment to have met the objectives and contributed to national growth’ and to rub
BPT_and_Devolution_Paper_Representation_Journal_Revised_Feb_2016.docx