In the third of three blogs, in which Newcastle University academics offer different perspectives on Burnham's first months in power, Andrew Stevens, Visiting Fellow at the Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies, examines whether Burnham's experience in Greater Manchester can translate into a fundamentally different relationship between Westminster and the regions – and what challenges could stand in the way.
Contents:
- Burnham's first days
- Is devolution the way forward?
- Changing how the state works
- Two interlinked tensions
- A way forward
Burnham's first days
It's difficult to find a Manchester band Andy Burnham hasn't name-checked since his rapid ascent to Downing Street (the Paris Angels?), but The Smiths are pretty much up there.
Well, 'Stop Me If You Think You've Heard This One Before', but Burnham was in the Gordon Brown government that, days after replacing another worn-out (though thrice election-winning) Prime Minister in 2007, published a radical blueprint to rewire the state – the Governance of Britain green paper.
Almost two decades later, Burnham put devolution on top of his in-tray, issuing a Cabinet paper on it as his first priority. For any new Prime Minister, that in-tray usually screams crises; the economy, public services, international affairs, the horse-trading of posts.
Devolution does not scream SW1A in-tray. Yet for Burnham, it appears to be the prism through which these problems might be tackled.
Newcastle University is not at a distance from this topic. After all, the recent creation of its new Institute of Devolution, with renowned economist Andy Haldane as its first Professorial Fellow demonstrates how devolution presents one of the most important policy opportunities of our generation. So, we have a lot to say and do.
Is devolution the way forward?
Can Burnham succeed where Brown, subsequently preoccupied with rescuing the global banking system rather than constitutional chat with sympathetic Lib Dems, faltered?
One key difference: he arrives not just a former cabinet minister with a reforming agenda, but having spent over a decade as Mayor and de facto Secretary of State for Greater Manchester, building one of English devolution's most ambitious experiments.
His first days could therefore show whether devolution becomes just another square on the media grid, or the organising principle for governing Britain.
Burnham's plans have had a long, public gestation, not least in his well-received 2024 book ‘Head North’, pressuring him to make good on them in office. His faster tempo of devolution than an at-times disinterested Keir Starmer, who'd promised in opposition a 'Take Back Control Bill' as centrepiece of his first King's Speech, took even fervent home rule advocates by surprise. The speedy formation of his Number 10 North operation – a Whitehall first – more so still.
Changing how the state works
The Rewiring the State Cabinet paper of late July consolidated existing Labour devolution policy through fiscal devolution to metro mayors and gave it coherence.
The ambition is not simply more powers for regions, but changing how the state works; shifting decision-making, resources, and responsibility out of Whitehall towards places, with mayors playing a more decisive role. It presents devolution less as a constitutional add-on, than machinery for tackling weak growth and an over-centralised state.
This matters in a political economy where the aftershocks of austerity, Brexit and the Truss 'fiscal event' continue to erode voter trust and living standards.
Devolution should not compete for capital with Burnham's other mooted reforms - the outmoded Commons electoral system, an unelected second chamber often a byword for cronyism - so much as make them coherent.
Polling suggests the public shares this disdain for politics as usual; Burnham knows it may be Labour's last chance in their eyes.
Two interlinked tensions
This however, is not without its complications.
One is a Parliamentary Labour Party of MPs, many accidental occupants of hyper-marginal rural seats where devolution has long been resisted (though mayoralties have proven a convenient berth for Westminster retreads). A new 30-strong WhatsApp group of Labour MPs in non-mayoral areas made its feelings known during last month's Labour Conference, decrying “two-tier” policy favouritism.
The other is that Burnham could place too much stock on devolution squaring circles previously unattainable to the Downing Street machine, not least welfare reform, which he suggests mayors can lower the benefits bill by getting the long-term unemployed into work.
While Burnham basked in the customary honeymoon this summer, fronting regional visits, his post-recess return to Westminster saw what many considered a shambolic, Starmer-esque U-turn - pausing the shake-up of English local authorities away from the two-tier system in the shires.
At first glance this smacked of ineptitude, but it could represent a chance to revisit some decisions on council boundaries that would potentially create the Avons and Clevelands of the future. Little consolation perhaps to officials who beavered away to make it work for next year's elections.
Nor is it just backbench Labour MPs likely to oppose the agenda. The Tories are unlikely to repeat the trick of landing a Conservative in London City Hall, or generating another Ben Houchen with cut across Northern appeal, and now instead see devolution as a chance to place clear blue water between the parties, restoring Westminster's primacy over domestic affairs across the Union - upending a decade of quiet consensus.
Equally, the Lib Dems and Greens bristle at his preferred executive mayoral model, already a sticking point for his new cross-party way of doing things. Reform UK thinker Danny Kruger dubbed the plans '1970s dysfunctional on a regional scale' at their recent Birmingham get-together.
A way forward
Once Westminster observers tire of parlour games – clips of ‘Yes, Minister’ denigrating regional control, or more Smiths allusions – it might be liberating to ponder whether Burnham's industrial strategy flex could finally end a decade and a half of sluggish growth.
This is something felt by households far more keenly than Rachel Reeves's Local Growth Plan PDFs ever touched.
After all, you would have to be ‘Made of Stone’ to want any other outcome.
You might also like:
- read part 1 of this series, in which academics offer perspectives on Burnham's first months in power: Can Burnham bring stability to British politics?
- we’re shaping the first dedicated hub for insights on devolution, regional growth, and public policy - read the press release, Andy Haldane appointed to new University Institute of Devolution
- find out more about Andrew Stevens, Visiting Fellow at the Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies at Newcastle University
- explore the Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies (CURDS), where experts undertake research for international, national, regional, urban and local organisations