The new North of Tyne region explained…
An Overview…
If everything goes according to plan, from summer 2018, a new English region will be created called “North of Tyne” comprising the current local authorities of Newcastle, North Tyneside and Northumberland. In May 2019, elections will be held for a directly elected regional mayor who will take control of powers and funding devolved from Westminster to the newly formed region.
The main elements of the new funding and powers are:
· £20 million per year over 30 years to invest in economic development with a focus on digital and low carbon sectors.
· Regional control of the £23 million per year budget for adult education with the aim of skilling up local people to take on the estimated 10,000 new jobs that are created as a result.
· More powers to raise investment from the private sector.
· Powers to develop land for economic growth, regeneration and housing.
· A pilot to target the development of Northumberland’s rural economy.
You can find out more on the website at www.northoftynedevolution.com and if you are feeling particularly keen you can read the full “minded to approve” document here.
Similar arrangements are already in place for several areas across England, including Greater Manchester, West Midlands, Liverpool and Tees Valley. Originally the proposed “North of Tyne” region would have covered the whole of North East England, except Tees Valley (so including Gateshead, South Tyneside, Sunderland and County Durham) but the local authorities south of the Tyne pulled out of the deal. The main reason they cited was the government’s failure to guarantee replacing EU funding that the North East will lose post-Brexit (though I heard on the grapevine that it was as much about concerns over the dominance of Newcastle in any future partnership).
The Criticisms…
The south of Tyne local authorities certainly have a point about EU funding. For the North East region as a whole, we received approximately £80 million per year from the EU (ERDF and ESF) between 2007 and 2013. When applied proportionately (on a per capita basis) to the area covered by the North of Tyne devolution deal, this works out at about £27 million per year. The only “new” money we are getting through the devolution deal is the £20 million per year for economic development (the adult education budget is just the devolution of existing money), therefore if the government fail to replace the grant funding we receive from the EU post Brexit, we will already be worse off — on balance — than we were before.
Another criticism is that the deal doesn’t even begin to make up for the extensive cuts to local authority budgets under the austerity regime. Newcastle alone is having to make an average of over £20 million of cuts per year between 2010 and 2020 — so when you add in the cuts being made by the two other local authorities involved in the deal, the “new” money doesn’t come close to making up for government cuts elsewhere. When combined with the potential loss of EU funding, the new money we are getting through this deal is miniscule.
In 2004, a referendum was held on devolution for North East England and is was overwhelmingly rejected by 78% of those who voted (I am one of the minority who voted “Yes”) — not to mention the referendum in 2012 regarding the establishment of city mayors which again was rejected by Newcastle residents. Hilton Dawson, Leader of the North East Party which campaigns for the establishment of a North East Assembly believes that any devolution of powers should be put again to a referendum.
But…
There again, the deal that is on the table this time is very different to what was being proposed back in 2004 or 2012.
In 2004 the proposal was to establish a regional assembly (or to be more precise, democratise the one that already existed): a whole layer of political representatives which would have been modelled on the Welsh or London Assemblies — though with far fewer powers.
However the “North of Tyne” arrangement is part of an England-wide programme of devolution which involves constitutional “tweaking” rather than significant constitutional change. Whether it should be put to a referendum is therefore debatable — though I agree that the unique position of North East England in being the only English region to have held a referendum on the issue does make it feel like it is going ahead without a democratic mandate.
The new powers will be devolved to a directly elected mayor, whose “cabinet” will be made up of six representatives from the three councils in the partnership (“combined authority”) — two each from Newcastle, North Tyneside and Northumberland. A representative of the Local Enterprise Partnership will also attend as a non-voting member. As the representatives from the three councils are likely to be “existing politicians”, you could argue that the “extra layer of politicians” amounts to just one: the directly elected mayor.
The regional mayor is carrying out a completely different role to the role that would have been fulfilled by a directly elected mayor of Newcastle. The governance of the local authorities which make up the new combined authority — including Newcastle –will remain unchanged and these local authorities will continue with the same responsibilities because the new regional mayor will take on powers that were previously exercised in London.
I feel very ambivalent about this deal though fundamentally, as a keen federalist, I cautiously support it. We live in one of the most centralised countries in Europe. Newcastle is — technically — the most provincial city in the UK in that it is the furthest city from any power base, and (in my view) this shows consistently through our bottom-of-the-league-table statistics concerning child poverty, unemployment, average income and so on.
Therefore devolving decisions around housing, economic development and skills/training that are currently exercised in London here to the North East is surely a common sense start and whilst far from ideal, better than nothing at all. And ‘nothing at all’ is realistically the only other option for the foreseeable future. After all, even if a Labour government isn’t that far off, other than talk of a regional investment bank, they are a little quiet on issues around devolution — Jeremy Corbyn’s response to then-Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale’s calls for a Federal Britain were somewhat lukewarm.
The powers are relatively paltry, and anything initiated by a Conservative government should be treated with huge scepticism. Is this about devolving powers? Or is it about devolving ‘blame’ by handing down powers without adequate funding to exercise them?
However the experience of Scottish and Welsh devolution tells us that initial devolution only leads to more, never less, so in my view, this is about taking tentative steps to put initial structures in place and then over time fighting for the devolution of more decisions and funding from Whitehall concerning our NHS (as is already the case in Greater Manchester), our schools and public services — whilst continually evolving the governance structures — vitally through a referendum once the democratic mandate for such powers needs to go beyond a single directly elected regional mayor.
It is concerning that — unlike devolution deals with other combined authorities — decisions around transport are not being devolved to the North of Tyne mayor’s portfolio. This is because the south of Tyne authorities are not part of the deal, and as transport is something that is so interconnected north and south of the river it is something that will become the responsibility of a new statutory body comprising the North of Tyne Combined Authority and the North East Combined Authority — i.e. the four other local authorities south of the river. However I believe the lack of a direct democratic mandate — and therefore accountability — will continue to stymie the potential of bold decision-making to build an integrated transport network that our region so urgently needs. This is evidenced by the recent failed attempts to return regulation to North East bus services.
Therefore on a practical level the south of Tyne local authorities need to get on board as soon as possible so that transport can come fully within the remit and accountability of the regional mayor.
However, I think that the biggest challenge facing North of Tyne is how the 816,000 citizens of the new region are engaged in what will be a new democratic process. The optics don’t look good at the moment because — no matter what the technical arguments are to counter this — the new region will be seen by many to be ignoring the 2004 and 2012 referendums. Turnout at the first metro mayor elections in 2017 hovered dismally at around 25%. “North of Tyne”, and the parties that stand in elections for the new mayoral post, need to think radically if we are going to buck that trend.
- Referring to North of Tyne as a “City Region” (as Centre for Cities unhelpfully does) and the mayor as a “Metro Mayor” should be avoided. Instead, we will simply be a “Region” with a “Regional Mayor”. Here is a fact. North of Tyne is almost entirely a rural region. The beautifully wild Northumberland makes up a whopping 96% of the land area. The new region will be two and a half times larger in area than the Greater Manchester City Region yet Manchester has three times the population. Referring to the region by “Newcastle-centric” titles will only serve to alienate those living outside of Newcastle who are already sceptical that the new powers and funding will only benefit Newcastle. It will act as a major deterrent for local authorities south of the Tyne (particularly Sunderland) to get on board. As part of this, the rural development plan for Northumberland should be front and centre and involve meaningful engagement at local level in the county through partnerships with community and third sector organisations.
- Put the above point into practice by rotating the location of North of Tyne combined authority cabinet meetings between Newcastle, North Tyneside and Northumberland — and don’t let “Northumberland” mean simply County Hall in Morpeth. Rotate Northumberland cabinet meetings throughout the county too: to Wooler, Berwick, Alnwick, Hexham, Ashington and Haltwhistle.
- The mayoral candidates should then commit to holding a Town Hall meeting after (or before) each cabinet meeting, which should be widely advertised and open for the public to attend and hear what decisions are being made and have the opportunity to question and challenge the mayor and their cabinet on the measures that are being proposed.
- Local parties should consider Open Primaries for selecting their candidates. By simply signing up to the core values of the party — the public can vote for the person who becomes the mayoral candidate for that particular party (without having to become a member). If one party is brave enough to do this, others will feel under pressure to follow suit.
- The right for constituents to “recall” the Mayor and trigger a by-election ( currently the case for MPs) should be seriously considered.
- The new mayor should think carefully about how they engage with the local third sector, who play such a vital role in the region and who are a gateway to meaningful engagement with people, particularly those who are the most marginalised.
The new deal for North of Tyne is certainly not without its faults and I understand why there is such considerable scepticism towards it. However, not following in the footsteps of Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, the West Midlands, West of England and Teesside carries huge risks of the existing social and economic disparities that our region experiences — already amongst the greatest in the UK — becoming even worse. I’m not arguing that this is a “magic fix” — I’m arguing that it is better than having no devolved powers at all.
Assuming this deal goes ahead I believe it is up to us — the people of “North of Tyne” — to ensure that we elect a mayor who is able to strengthen democratic engagement, therefore become as accountable as possible to the people they serve, so that as a region, we can collectively have a strong and assertive voice at national and international level.
The North East has been ignored for too long.
