Your Time Starts Now – Vol 2

Devolution delivers

by Tracy Brabin

Labour’s devolution plans will lead to a fundamental rewiring of England’s political system

When Keir Starmer talks about “fixing the foundations” of our country, he means it.

Just one week after his election, our new prime minister invited the country’s 12 metro mayors to Downing Street. He knows that to achieve his mission of the highest sustained growth in the G7, he must re-empower the regions of England to deliver it.

This means an English Devolution bill, spreading power and opportunity to every community; single funding settlements, with greater freedoms and flexibilities over local growth funding; and a Council of Nations and Regions, so that the local leaders who know their areas best can take a seat at the national decision-making table.

Taken together, these three initiatives will be gamechangers for the UK economy. Never before has central government looked so closely to its regional partners to help it shape and realise its vision for the country.

Since 1999, devolution has rapidly transformed the way our political systems work in the UK. Ordinary people have been brought closer to the decisions which affect their lives. But the arguments for deeper and wider devolution aren’t just political; they’re economic.

According to the Institute for Government, decisions taken outside of Westminster and Whitehall lead to better outcomes and greater returns on investment.

Yet the full potential of English devolution has been held back by an outdated political system which bakes in the neglect of villages, towns and cities outside of the M25. Our country is simply too centralised to harness the opportunities and tackle the challenges facing each of our regions. From our transport networks to our housing stock, Britain’s infrastructure is creaking under the weight of over a decade of underinvestment.

But devolution can and will be the green shoot of hope. Whichever of the government’s missions you look at – kickstarting growth, unleashing green energy, tackling crime and anti-social behaviour, providing opportunities to young people, and rebuilding public services – mayors and combined authorities are perfectly placed to deliver. The prime minister recognises this, and so has tasked us all with developing ambitious, long-term plans for growth – plans which identify barriers to opportunity and outline the tools we need to overcome them.

In return, the Labour government will equip us with those tools – the powers and support we need to get Britain building again, repair our crumbling infrastructure, and create the well-paid jobs our communities need and deserve.

The reason for this new approach is simple: elected mayors can respond more quickly and effectively to local challenges than the centre, because we understand the places that elected us.

We know what skills courses our residents need to secure well-paid jobs in the local labour market. We know what support our small and medium sized businesses need to succeed and scale. We know the challenges our commuters face getting to work quickly and reliably. And we know how many new homes we need to build, and where.

Here in West Yorkshire, we’re bringing buses back under public control. Consulting on new tram routes to better connect our region. Building the affordable and sustainable homes our families need. Tackling violence against women and girls. And creating a region of learning and creativity where everyone can get the skills they need to succeed.

With greater devolution of powers locally, we can do so much more.

Labour’s plans will deliver a fundamental rewiring of England’s political system. It will ensure that the national industrial strategy works for all of our communities, and gives every part of the country the chance to take on devolved powers, allowing them to take the bold decisions that are right for their areas.

The devolution decade is upon us. It couldn’t be more needed.

Tracy Brabin is the Labour mayor of West Yorkshire

Home advantage

by Paul Swinney

To deliver the homes we so desperately need, the planning system must be reformed

A big part of Labour’s election campaign was centred around getting Britain building again. And they have wasted no time – Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ claim to have advanced the planning system further in 72 hours than the Conservatives did in 14 years is a bold claim, but she did, in very short order, reverse some of the less helpful changes made during the previous parliament.

But why have Labour singled out an area that for decades has been a political quagmire? It is largely because the existing planning system, brought in just after the second world war, is acting like a handbrake on the UK economy.

Centre for Cities’ estimates suggest that, since the introduction of the modern planning system, the UK has built up a backlog of 4.3m ‘missing homes’ that should have been built but were not. This is because – unlike in Europe – our discretionary, case-by-case planning system means proposed developments can fit all the rules and the requirements of a local plan and still be rejected.

And that is to say nothing of the commercial space that hasn’t been built over this period.

In case that still all sounds very tangential, let’s have a look at how a housing shortage has impacted Bristol, one of the UK’s stronger-performing cities. From 2004 to 2021, its economic output almost doubled, fuelled by an increase in skilled graduates who were able to fill the vacancies in the city’s fast-growing digital, science and technology sectors.

Even before 2004, Bristol had a housing crisis, with housing being some of the most expensive in the country and homes per head being lower than the national average. Unsurprisingly, the economic growth of the past two decades has exacerbated the pressure. While the city has built more homes, with the total number of residences increasing by almost a fifth, this has been nowhere near enough to meet the ever-growing demand in the city. The result is that house price growth has far outstripped national increases and local increases in wages, and there are now even fewer homes per person than there were in 2004. The lowest-income families are squeezed the most. On average, the cost of a house was 11.7 times the average annual wage in 2022, above the national average of 9.8. But the lowest quartile housing cost around 13 times the average wages of those in the bottom quartile of earnings.

A look at where houses have and haven’t been built in the city gives an indication as to why. Bristol is one of the least dense of all of the UK’s largest cities, which as a group are much less dense than their western European counterparts. And, outside the city centre, there has been very little building within Bristol’s existing footprint over the last two decades – most neighbourhoods look exactly like they did 20 years ago. The discretionary nature of the planning system makes this very difficult to change.

This leaves building out as the answer. Some of this has happened, particularly to the north of the city. But it now finds itself in the stranglehold of the greenbelt, which is 4.5 times larger than Bristol itself.

The experience of Bristol is replicated all across the UK. For a country that is in a close to two-decade productivity slump and desperately needs growth to lift wages and generate money to pay for public services, this is not a good thing.

So, what does this analysis mean for the government’s reforms? Short-term changes, including stronger housing targets, new towns and building on the ‘grey belt’, are all welcome. But if we are to deliver the homes the country needs we need to do something about the fundamental cause of the problem – the planning system itself.

This means replacing the current system with a rules-based, flexible zoning system where proposed housing developments that meet all the requirements of the local plan are automatically granted approval, as has been done in New Zealand. This doesn’t take local consent away from the process. It just moves it upstream, setting the rules of the planning game. Once these are set, developers will know what will and won’t be allowed. And this injection of certainty into the system will make it easier for developers, both large and small, to come forward with new homes.

This is a big change. But Labour has promised big change. If it is going to deliver on the homes it has recognised we rightly need, then it needs a system that supports cities like Bristol to built both up and out.

Paul Swinney is director of policy and research at Centre for Cities

Underlying condition

by Sasjkia Otto

If it is to fix the economy, Labour must promote healthy workplaces

Of all the unfortunate legacies of 14 years of Conservative rule, the health of our workforce is one of the most serious. A record 3 million working-age people are currently out of the labour force due to ill health. The new Labour government must act quickly to promote healthy workplaces.

The stakes are high. Solving poor health among workers is key to addressing the UK’s low growth and public service pressures. The NHS, in particular, is feeling the pressure from both ends: healthcare professionals are dropping out, while waiting lists remain stubbornly long. Fabian Society survey research shows that, among workless over-50s, 16 per cent say they are on an NHS waiting list and that it is affecting their ability to work.

More broadly, the Times Health Commission found that the economic cost of working-age ill health is £150bn per year. The cost to government from benefits, lost taxes and healthcare is £70bn. For comparison, the total NHS budget for 2023/24 was £170bn.

This problem is the result of gaps in support for workers to stay well in work and to rehabilitate or effectively manage their symptoms if they become ill. Complicating the matter, work itself is often a cause of ill health: musculoskeletal and mental health conditions are the biggest contributors to being off sick and to sickness benefits claims, and most experiencing these conditions cite work as a contributing factor.

Working conditions are key. Workers at risk of ill-health often receive poor support. This is especially the case if employers do not view them as ‘disabled’ under the Equality Act and so believe them ineligible for ‘reasonable adjustments’ required by law. Other employers do not understand what kind of adjustments could help someone stay well at work, or they do not think the necessary adjustments are ‘reasonable’. Some workers face detriment after sharing confidential medical details; many don’t take the risk. Our survey found that among over-50s who have experienced health problems in the past five years, just 17 per cent say that they have asked for reasonable adjustments and that their request was granted in full.

Compounding the problem, access to occupational health services is far from widespread. The Department for Work and Pensions reports that only 45 per cent of workers in Britain currently have access to some form of occupational health service, which is significantly lower than many comparable countries. And while 92 per cent of large employers provide some kind of occupational health service, this rate drops to just 18 per cent of small employers – meaning support is missing in exactly those workplaces where older and disabled workers are more prevalent.

But issues with occupational health support in the UK go beyond poor access. Often, the problems are ones we have known about for a long time: many were identified in Dame Carol Black’s 2008 review. Occupational health is detached from mainstream healthcare, making it difficult for workers to access joined-up support. It also tends to be reactive rather than proactive, and neglect those not in a formal employment situation. Quality is inconsistent, and employees find it difficult to trust support that is integrated with HR functions.

The past decade has shown that, if we continue on the current trajectory, we will see mixed results at best. We have seen little progress on workplace health while government has taken a back seat. No wonder so many are out of work sick. We need radical action on health at work. Now is the time to ask seriously whether the UK needs a National Occupational Health Service, and what this might look like. Previous Fabian Society research has recommended free access to occupational health services for those working for small and medium-sized employers and the self-employed. The government should also take action to raise provision among large employers to 100 per cent. But looking at access isn’t enough on its own. The government should also review occupational health standards, how different organisations work together to deliver them, and whether existing employment rights, responsibilities and practical support are fit for purpose.

Our economy and public services depend on getting this right.

Sasjkia Otto is a senior researcher at the Fabian Society

Local potential

by Bev Craig

Labour needs to set out a coherent role for local government to achieve its ambitions of national renewal

There are few institutions as central to fixing the fundamentals as local government.

Whether it’s delivering the core tenets of the social contract through the likes of housing and social care, or acting as convenors of place to foster inclusive economic growth, local leaders play a central role in maintaining the architecture of prosperous and vibrant places.

Despite this, over the past decade, local authorities have had to engage with a national government prevaricating between active cost-cutting and mere indifference to the mounting scale of the challenges they face. Manchester alone has had to make £443m of savings since 2010, while the sector nationally faces a £6bn black hole over the next two years, on the basis of the previous Conservative government’s plans.

Nevertheless, if we can realise the latent potential of local areas across the country, the opportunities are immense. For example, were members of the Core Cities group and their hinterlands to match the performance of their European peers, it would boost economic activity by over 20 per cent, adding £100bn per year to the UK economy in perpetuity – a huge potential economic dividend, which would also see over a million people removed from poverty and tens of millions of years gained in improved health.

Given these challenges and opportunities, and in the context of a new Labour government, the capacity of local government to deliver must be at the forefront of our minds. The mission-driven agenda underpinning the government’s approach speaks not just to the need to reimagine Whitehall’s ways of working: a reformed core must be accompanied by a dynamic and empowered local level.

To facilitate this, local leaders also have a responsibility to foster best practice and transformation, even in this incredibly challenging fiscal environment. In Manchester, we have acknowledged the need to get on the front foot.

Investing in prevention, early years and education has seen our schools now outperforming the national average for the first time in our history, while our work to reform public services – bolstered by our Making Manchester Fairer plan – has applied renewed focus to supporting those experiencing multiple disadvantage, and our trajectory on social care is exceptionally positive. Manchester shows what can be possible if a long-term plan, devolution of power and momentum of delivery are aligned.

This demonstrated energy and ability to innovate can be found in local areas across the country – you need only skim through the Local Government Association’s ‘101 Achievements of Labour in Power’, produced ahead of the election, to see countless examples of Labour local and regional authorities leading the way on this agenda.

Despite the optimism represented by this activity, the budgets underpinning local government are creaking. Importantly, this is not solely a problem with the local government finance settlement – ie, the money that flows from central government to local authorities. It is just as much to do with the fact that local government has been asked to address the inadequacies of the centre as they have played out across the country’s localities. This is a multi-faceted challenge, but it poses an opportunity in that cross-government solutions can contribute to an improvement in what local government must deal with.

And the payoff for addressing pressing local issues reaches beyond local government. Stabilising social care helps stabilise the NHS. Addressing soaring homeless[1]ness improves life chances and reduces spending.

Reforming under-pressure special educational needs and disabilities support improves educational attainment.

This government was elected on a mandate to deliver growth and reform, with the understanding that one is required for the other to flourish. To bring its major national ambitions to bear in a manner no previous government has to date, a defined and coherent role for local government is required – underpinned by new robust financial arrangements and further devolution, enabling accelerated delivery that is tailored to suit local areas’ different strengths and needs and the aspirations of their residents.

Local government is in the business of improving lives and strengthening communities. Having taken on the role of Labour group leader at the LGA following the general election, this year’s conference season represents an exciting opportunity to explore how we can strengthen the role of local government in the delivery of this Labour government’s missions.

Image credit: crabchick via Flickr