Who guards the Metro Kings?
Summer reading… before you head to the sun lounger…
Our Metro mayors’ super powers are soon to be turbocharged. A new breed of political celebrity has been born with some Labour Mayors enjoying media profiles and influencer status beyond the dreams of many a government minister. This is probably healthy for democracy and for Labour’s street cred in some areas but with more powered-up, full-fat Mayors on the horizon who is going to be left in charge of these Metro Kings?
With great power comes great responsibility. With great responsibility comes the need for greater accountability. The English Devolution and Community Empowerment bill could revolutionise how we are governed but it’s pretty limited on future governance. Yes, mayors can be voted out every four years but real accountability means scrutiny, and guardrails. As the Institute for Government said, “Whitehall may be reluctant to genuinely let power go so long as local accountability systems are weak”. The answer is not to claw powers back, but to hard‑wire muscular scrutiny into every deal.
In their new deal for England report, the IfG recommended three key reforms to keep mayors in check.
Statutory Devolved Public Accounts Committees (DPACs): IfG wants a DPAC in every Level‑3 deal and above: an independent chair drawn from the opposition, cross‑party membership, the power to send for persons and papers, its own research budget and a red‑flag route to the Commons PAC when fraud or profligacy rear their heads.
Accounting‑officer status for chief executives: The IfG proposes that every combined‑authority chief executive should be designated accountable officer for the devolved budget, just as Whitehall permanent secretaries are. This would focus scrutiny on delivery metrics rather than party point‑scoring and give officials the statutory duty (and protection) to call out waste.
Mayoral ‘letters of direction’: When a combined‑authority chief executive believes a scheme flunks tests of regularity, propriety, feasibility or value for money, the mayor could still proceed—but only by issuing a published ‘mayoral direction’ and carrying personal, public accountability, mirroring the ministerial directions that keep permanent secretaries honest.
Other wonks have been rethinking the ‘cabinet’ model of mayoral devolution. Re:State argues that mayors should appoint paid commissioners as portfolio leads (transport, housing, skills, etc.). Council leaders would remain on the Strategic Authority board, but the current ‘Manchester model’ of “double‑hatting” (both council leader board member and portfolio lead) should be phased out, sharpening accountability and ending mutual back‑scratching.
Meanwhile, the Productivity Institute says metro areas should pick the executive model that best fits local politics. That could be Manchester‑style leader nominees, mayoral selection like Re:State’s proposal, or even direct or indirect election. But every deal must meet three tests: (i) a directly elected leader, (ii) representation that mirrors political and geographic balance, and (iii) mechanisms to avoid stalemate.
Don’t get me wrong there are some really good bits in the bill like the introduction of Local Audit and an Accountability Framework for established mayors, but if we are going to power up people and places and make devolution work we need to crack the ‘A’ccountability Factor.
Politics is changing and if devolution is to be the agency of change we will also get the democratic renewal we need. The voters in Wigan and Waveney, Blackpool and Blyth will judge the Prime Minister not on intergovernmental committees but on whether buses turn up, apprenticeships appear and A&E waits fall. For that change to be seen, good devolution and our new breed of Metro Kings need the powers and accountability to match.
There needs to be a far more positive dynamic between the MPs and Peers of all parties; Parliament, No:10, Whitehall and regional Mayor, one which is genuinely inclusive and collaborative. We need to see clear lines of communication, responsibility and accountability emerge. Voters need to know who’s in charge of what and who they are voting for and why?
For full-fat devolution to become a reality, our Metro Kings need power over tax, not just task-forces; it means mayors able to set rail timetables or raise bond finance. That would turn constitutional theory into faster infrastructure, stronger local growth and public services that finally keep pace with demand. What’s not to like? The next 12 months must show that Number 10 and the Treasury can really let go, or the promise of regional renewal will curdle into yet another semi-skimmed Westminster brew.
THE 'A' FACTOR - WHO HOLDS MAYORS TO ACCOUNT IN THE DEVOLUTION ERA
TO JOIN THE CONVERSATION TUNE IN
SUMMER SOIRÉE LIVE PODCAST• WEDNESDAY 30TH JULY • MANCHESTER • ONLINE
