Power, Place & Purpose: JP Spencer on Devolution, Mayors, and Rebalancing Britain

In the evolving landscape of British politics, few issues are as pressing or as promising as the question of devolution. As the United Kingdom continues to grapple with entrenched regional inequalities, economic imbalances, and a growing sense of political disconnection, the call for local empowerment is becoming not just a policy preference, but a democratic necessity. At the forefront of this movement is JP Spencer, Director of Devolution Policy at Labour Together. In a recent episode of The Truth About Local Government, hosted by Matthew Masters, Spencer laid out a compelling and deeply informed vision for the future of devolution, mayoral leadership, and regional rebalancing. His insights offer not only a roadmap for reform but a rallying cry for those who believe that power should reside closer to the people it affects.

Devolution: A Technical Term with Transformational Potential

Spencer began by challenging the perception of devolution as a dry or overly technical concept.

“Devolution is a bit of a dry technical term for a very important process,” he explained. “The ambition isn’t for devolution for devolution’s sake… it’s an ambition for people to live better lives.”

This distinction is crucial. Devolution, in Spencer’s view, is not merely about shifting administrative duties from Whitehall to town halls. It is about enabling communities to shape their own destinies. It is about recognising that those who live and work in a place are best positioned to make decisions about its future. He pointed to transport as a prime example. London’s integrated, locally controlled transport system has long been a benchmark. Now, regions like Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, and South Yorkshire are beginning to emulate this model. “This empowerment leads to better decision-making,” Spencer said. “People understand their area they’re going to make better decisions about what should be happening.”

Subscribe to the Truth about Local Government podcast

From Patchwork to Full Coverage: The Institutional Challenge

Currently, around 70.5 percent of England is covered by strategic authorities combined authorities with elected mayors. Spencer believes that reaching 100 percent coverage is a critical milestone. “That won’t be the end of the devolution story,” he said, “but it’s a good proxy for deep devolution.” Why does this matter? Because without full coverage, central government departments are reluctant to devolve key functions like skills, housing, and transport.

“They’ll say, ‘We can’t fully devolve that function because the strategic authorities only exist in certain parts of the country,’” Spencer explained. “When we get to 100 percent coverage, that barrier will be removed.”

This institutional gap is not just a bureaucratic inconvenience it is a structural impediment to progress. Without the necessary governance frameworks in place, entire regions are effectively excluded from the benefits of devolution. This creates a two-tier system where some areas enjoy local control and investment, while others remain dependent on distant decision-makers in Westminster.

Empowerment Must Come with Resources

One of the most persistent criticisms of devolution efforts is that they often amount to little more than decentralisation of responsibility without the power or funding to match. Spencer is acutely aware of this risk.

“In a previous role, I helped support the work around creating these integrated settlements that mayors are going to get,” he said.

These settlements involve formal agreements between mayors, strategic authorities, and central government on how funding particularly for transport and skills is allocated.

The results are already visible. “Starting in April of this year, over one billion pounds has been transferred to Greater Manchester and the West Midlands for them to control and spend locally,” Spencer noted. This is not just a symbolic gesture it is a structural shift in how public money is managed and deployed.

The Role of Legislation: Locking in Progress

To ensure that devolution is not subject to the whims of changing political tides, Spencer emphasised the importance of legislative backing. The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, currently before Parliament, is a step in this direction.

“This is a floor, not a ceiling on devolution ambition,” he said. The bill includes provisions such as the “right to request powers,” which would allow mayors to formally seek additional responsibilities.

“That’s going to set that kind of long-term framework for making sure this is devolution as empowerment, rather than a kind of delegation of responsibility without any means to address it.”

This legislative approach is essential for creating a stable and predictable environment in which local leaders can plan for the long term. It also sends a clear signal that devolution is not a temporary experiment, but a permanent feature of the UK’s constitutional architecture.

Metro Mayors: The Future of Local Leadership

The rise of metro mayors has been one of the most visible aspects of the devolution agenda. But what does the future hold for these regional leaders? Spencer sees two major trends on the horizon: public service reform and fiscal devolution. “Public services support economic growth,” he explained. “Health and housing are good in themselves, but they also help the economy grow.” Labour Together’s report by Sam Freedman argues that mayors should play a greater role in shaping public services, not just economic development. The second trend fiscal devolution is perhaps even more transformative. As mayors take on more responsibilities, they need control over revenue streams to plan effectively. “That doesn’t necessarily mean tax increases,” Spencer clarified. “But it does mean thinking about the assignment of revenue levers.”

Checks and Balances: Avoiding Regional Centralisation

One of the recurring concerns in the debate around devolution is the potential for metro mayors to become overly dominant figures regional autocrats who centralise power at a new level, potentially side-lining local voices and undermining democratic accountability. This fear, while understandable, is largely unfounded when one examines the structure and function of combined authorities in England.

JP Spencer addressed this issue directly, offering reassurance that the current model of strategic authorities is designed to prevent such concentration of power. “These authorities bring together all of the local authorities within a different area,” he explained. “Decisions are taken in concert.” This collaborative framework ensures that metro mayors do not operate in isolation but are instead part of a wider governance ecosystem that includes council leaders from across the region.

Take West Yorkshire as a case in point. Mayor Tracy Brabin, elected by the people of the region, works alongside five council leaders representing Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees, Leeds, and Wakefield. Together, they form the West Yorkshire Combined Authority, a body that makes strategic decisions collectively. “They take decisions collectively,” Spencer emphasised. “It’s about shaping a vision for the place together.” This model of shared leadership is not only democratic but also practical. It allows for a diversity of perspectives to be brought to the table, reflecting the varied needs and priorities of different communities within the region. It also fosters a culture of collaboration and consensus-building, which is essential for effective governance in complex, multi-layered societies.

Moreover, the presence of multiple elected leaders within a combined authority acts as a natural check on the power of the mayor. While the mayor may serve as a public figurehead and hold certain executive powers, they are ultimately accountable to the combined authority board. This board has the ability to scrutinise decisions, challenge proposals, and ensure that the mayor’s actions align with the broader interests of the region.

In practice, this means that strategic decisions whether related to transport investment, housing development, or skills funding are not made unilaterally. Instead, they emerge from dialogue, negotiation, and shared ambition. This approach not only strengthens democratic legitimacy but also improves the quality of decision-making by incorporating local knowledge and expertise.

Spencer’s comments reflect a broader understanding that devolution must be rooted in partnership, not hierarchy. The goal is not to replace one form of centralisation with another, but to build a governance model that is genuinely responsive to local needs. “We shouldn’t see an extreme centralisation of power,” he said.

“What we should see is the different local authority leaders coming together with that mayor to take strategic decisions across that geography.”

This principle of distributed leadership is particularly important in regions with diverse populations and economic profiles. In such areas, a one-size-fits-all approach is unlikely to succeed. Instead, tailored solutions developed through local collaboration are far more effective in addressing challenges and unlocking opportunities. Furthermore, the combined authority model encourages long-term strategic thinking. By bringing together leaders from across a region, it enables the development of shared visions and integrated plans that transcend individual council boundaries. This is vital for tackling issues such as regional transport connectivity, economic development, and climate resilience, which require coordinated action across multiple jurisdictions.

In summary, while concerns about regional centralisation are valid, the current structure of combined authorities provides robust safeguards against the concentration of power. Through collective decision-making, shared leadership, and institutional checks, metro mayors are held accountable and supported by a network of local leaders. This ensures that devolution remains true to its core purpose: empowering communities, not consolidating control. As highlighted in Labour Together’s Nation Rebalanced report, the success of devolution depends not only on structural safeguards but also on a clear commitment to local empowerment, strategic investment, and collaborative governance.