With Andy Burnham taking over as Prime Minister and publishing his devolution plan, it was inevitable that there would be another effort to promote directly elected mayors or provosts in Scotland. Gordon McKee MP makes such a claim in The Herald, albeit with an argument stronger on vision than merit, and the BBC has outlined the issue.
I wrote more broadly about Manchesterism in June, broadly supporting Matthew Lawrence's pitch in his new book. However, I also argued that this must be more than devolution to regions and nations. It has to filter down to real communities of place, as I argued in this paper.
There are various claims about how successful Manchesterism under Andy Burnham has been in practice. Anyone travelling from Scotland across Manchester has to be impressed by the Bee Network, when all that has been achieved in Scotland is working parties on transport integration. It isn't perfect, being stronger in the centre than in areas of deprivation, but Greater Manchester saw the largest increase in passenger satisfaction of any area in England in the first full year of the Bee Network. His housing policies started well, particularly on housing, but weakened as the cash ran out. On productivity, the raw data looks impressive, but regional economic data is always challenging, and it is hard to see how Manchester is actually that much better (see chart below) than the country as a whole. At best, it has been a mixed picture in the whole region, as the need for a Good Growth Fund demonstrates.
As Ian Harvey puts it, Manchesterism is bigger than Manchester; it's about system change. "Manchester doesn’t have all the answers. But if Manchesterism means anything, it is that lasting national renewal depends on ensuring places have the power, strong institutions, effective leadership and trusted partnerships they need to shape their own futures." James Mitchell and colleagues examine what this might mean for Scotland, pointing out that "A devolution agenda is straightforward to pitch in a political speech, but thorny to implement in practice." Applying a city-regional and regional devolution impulse to the Scottish context is complicated by our different governance structures, most of which require support from the Scottish Parliament. Not least the question of directly elected mayors/provosts, although Burnham's rewiring proposals don't require them anyway. However, it does offer a space for regions and local government in Scotland to make a pitch for a move away from the centralisation that has been our experience since devolution. A point the Building a Local Scotland group has been making,
Economic growth is a particularly challenging issue for all English mayors because they have very limited powers. In many ways, this reflects that mayors have so far largely been about cheerleading for their region. There is no doubt that Andy Burnham has been good at that. In fact, he is probably the only mayor (other than London) that most people could name. We shouldn't forget that English regions have rejected mayors for good reasons, and many see it as a drive to further centralisation.
So why not mayors/provosts for Scottish regions, whatever a region might be in Scotland.
The primary problem is its concentration of power in a single person. As local government expert George Jones explains, "the advantage of collective leadership is it enables exploration of policy from different perspectives. Colleagues can consider possible impacts of policy in a variety of contexts, spotting pitfalls ahead and the consequences for different people and groups. A single person is unlikely to represent the diverse complexities of a large urban, metropolitan or county region area better than can collective leadership." This would certainly be the case in Scotland, once a Glasgow mayor starts to second-guess what is best in Renfrewshire, Ayrshire or Lanarkshire.
A single person cannot possibly pay attention to all the issues facing a regional organisation. This means power spreads to appointees or chief officers. Democracy is the loser locally and regionally. There was rightly a kickback when the Scottish Government wanted to introduce regional directors of schools. Regional mayors would face the same issues. Worldwide, the myth of the single leader also increases the risk of corruption and the rise of autocracy. Archie Brown, in his book, The Myth of the Strong Leader, makes an excellent argument for the virtues of collegiate leaders.
Regional mayors may not be for life, but they are there for four years, regardless of performance. In councils, ineffective leaders can be removed, and the same applies to Prime Ministers/First Ministers. At best, a recall provision would be required, but without other elected persons, this could lead to a public challenge after every controversial decision.
At devolution, we were promised devolution to communities, not more centralisation. Holyrood has centralised services that were once the responsibility of councils. Our councils are already too big to be local and too small to be strategic. What we need in Scotland is a comprehensive look at local government. Councils in Scotland have an average population of 170,000, compared to 10,000 in Europe. We need genuine local councils representing real communities of place, who would then share services at an appropriate regional level.
