Mayors won't solve regional inequality in England

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/03/mayors-wont-solve-regional-inequality-england

Version 0 of 1.

Much is expected from a new breed of elected mayors for England's larger cities. David Cameron thinks they will prove to be inspirational leaders. Nick Clegg says they will herald an unprecedented transfer of power from Whitehall to town halls by unleashing a wave of "city deals" with the government. And cities minister Greg Clark talks boldly of powerful mayors attracting the necessary private investment to rebalance the economy away from London and south-east England.

Idle boasts? Not if you are running Liverpool city council, whose Labour leadership recently decided to take the government at its word. It became the first city to sign a "city deal" after agreeing to pre-empt government-enforced referendums on 3 May, seeking approval for an elected mayor, and go straight for a mayoral election on that day. Leicester took the same course last year. Now referendums will be held in 10 cities, from Birmingham to Bradford, Leeds to Manchester, Newcastle upon Tyne to Sheffield.

What is intriguing about these contests is the way they have divided local government, fearful that old municipal power structures will be swept away. This is why some leading figures will be campaigning for a "no" vote next month.

More pragmatic voices see benefits. In its "city deal", Liverpool has been promised an inner-city enterprise zone, with the potential for extra business rate income, while a public-private sector mayoral investment board will pool municipal assets with a government regeneration quango. Of course, much needs to follow to meet the claim of an unprecedented power transfer. But it's a start.

Last week, the prime minister went one step further by promising a new national "cabinet" of mayors, giving them a voice at the heart of government. The PM explained: "These elected leaders can meet regularly with me … tackle concerns, share ideas, highlight innovation."

Who knows? In time, such a group could wield the clout of the Washington-based US Conference of Mayors, a powerful lobbying organisation.

Both Cameron, and Blair before him, have enthused about the US model. But one problem with US and mainland European comparisons is that they raise expectations. Across the Channel and the Atlantic, mayors, and city-regions, enjoy considerably more power than any model envisaged in England – except, of course, Greater London.

Another problem is that England has an economy that is over-dependent on one corner of the nation – London, and the south-east – which gobbles up the lion's share of national spending on transport and university-based funding on research and development, leaving the rest of England trailing in its wake.

Last week, just as Cameron was lauding city mayors at a Downing Street reception, his deputy Nick Clegg should have been attending a high-powered conference on promoting regional growth organised by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in Newcastle upon Tyne. Clegg pulled out, which is a shame. He would have heard evidence from 23 international case studies that the most successful countries operate far more equitably than England, with broad-based growth strategies bringing greater benefits across nations.

The OECD argues that less-developed regions, rather than being a drag on national performance, should be seen instead as potential assets to be exploited, making a vital contribution to growth.

England needs more equitable distribution of resources. Elected mayors can play their part. But they are no substitute for active government.