Will the Council of the Nations and Regions improve central-local relations?

The first meeting of the Council of Nations and Regions has come and gone. Is this the start of a new era for communication between central government, the devolved nations and local governments? In this article, LGIU’s Dr Greg Stride explores this very question, looking at the evidence so far and highlighting what else might be missing from this step forward.

The evidence suggests that although this new institution is a positive step for central-local relations, it will require more work to radically change the relationship between the different levels of government. In order to facilitate the kind of collaboration that will be necessary to meet the challenges facing the UK, an ideal central-local forum should be on statutory footing, meet more frequently, and include representatives from across local government in all the UK nations.

What is the state of central-local relations across the UK?

Last year, before the UK general election, LGIU called for a new institution, a standing forum that would allow for communication between central and local government. Our idea was based on two observations: the relationship between central and local government needed to improve, and many other countries have found a way to ensure constructive conversations between the two.

First, the relationship between central and local government was in a critically poor state. In our English local government finance survey in February this year we asked senior leadership figures in councils of every political persuasion whether they were happy with the government’s performance in considering local government in wider policy decisions. Only 8% said they were. Considering that these two layers of government in England share equal democratic mandates, and their cooperation is necessary for the provision of essential services for every citizen, this needs serious effort to resolve. We found much the same was true in Scotland between local government and Scottish Government. There is a systemic issue at the heart of governance in the UK: the different layers of government do not have a guaranteed means to communicate.

But what could improve this situation? Our second observation, that many other countries have well-developed, often constitutionally mandated, forums for central and local government to communicate, was based on our international research. We found that many countries have guaranteed representation for local governments in forums that are embedded, respected and well-resourced. These are designed to be forums for consultation on government proposals, a place to raise issues, mediate conflict and agree on finances. In the UK as a whole, there is no equivalent. In Scotland, where there has recently been an attempt to improve relationships between central and local through the Verity House Agreement, we have seen confidence in the non-statutory approach plummet following a surprise council tax freeze last year. The lesson from international examples is that a formalised, structured approach to overcoming shared problems and disputes is the best way forward, and that local government representation is key to making progress on shared policy goals.

When the Council of Nations and Regions was announced in the Labour manifesto, and later confirmed once the new government was in power, it represented an excellent opportunity for a reset between central and local governments. A new forum, bringing together the central/national governments, and representatives of local governments across the nations of the UK, embedding cooperation and ensuring the difficult conversations are had in the open, is exactly what we were calling for.

Will the Council of the Nations and Regions help?

The obvious question now is, will the Council of the Nations and Regions fulfil this role? After the first meeting and the publication of its terms of reference, it is not clear that the Council as it is currently organised will be enough on its own to radically improve central-local relations or facilitate collaboration towards shared goals.

To start with the membership of the council: the heads of government of the UK, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, alongside the mayors of every combined authority in England will attend. This means the nations of the UK are well-represented, but in terms of local government representation English councils will have to make do with mayors, who as of yet do not cover every region, and local government outside of England is not represented at all.

We also know a little about the schedule of meetings. After the first meeting on 11th October in Edinburgh, the next meeting is scheduled for spring 2025. Biannually is not particularly frequent. Equally, it is not clear how the agenda will be set each time. The inaugural meeting was about investment and growth, and the terms of reference leave it quite open.

“The Council will focus on shared missions, delivery of public services, and shared values. It will provide a forum to share best practice, to collaborate on shared issues, and agree how to work together to drive delivery on areas of mutual priority.”

This is a difficult one to interpret from a local government perspective. Because the challenges faced by local governments are shared (delivering housing or social care spring to mind) but work in very different ways across the UK. It is possible that these terms of reference essentially block the raising of any issues about local government. Because English local government finance will be seen as an English problem, and Scottish local government finance as a Scottish problem etc. The frame of reference for conversation seems to be UK-wide rather than local.

Equally, we know that the Council has no legal footing, and it is therefore not possible to raise any issues about the running of the Council in the courts. As the history of UK intergovernmental relations shows us, this means that the operation of the Council is liable to change. The Brown Commission report, where the idea that became the Council was first mooted, specified that the Council should be ‘based in statute.’ In essence this means that we will have to keep watching the Council to see how it evolves, and how disputes will be resolved. This is no bad thing at this stage, given that it means there is a chance for the Council to evolve to become a more effective tool for enhancing central-local communication.

When opening the Council the Prime Minister described it as a ‘statement of intent’ on how they intend to work together with the nations and regions. Sitting around the table “as equal voices contributing to one conversation.” This is a worthy statement of intent, and it is our sincere hope that the same principles will be applied to central government’s relationship with local governments.

Where does this leave Central-Local relations going forward?

The problem of weak intergovernmental communication has been recognised in the case of the nations, and the Council designed to tackle that, but it is equally true for local government and central government, in a way that the new Council as it is currently organised is unlikely to solve. To return to the Brown Commission, the Council was designed to run alongside a new assembly of nations and regions “ensure that the powers of the devolved administrations are always respected by central government, and cannot be overridden simply by a government using its majority in the House of Commons.”

We are still some way away from that. As it is, it is difficult to see how this Council, without significant effort from regional mayors to drive its direction, ensure the voice of local government in England, and widen membership to include local representation from the devolved nations, can ensure a stronger relationship between central and local government, or guarantee that the different levels of government work as effectively as possible towards their shared goals. Central and local governments will have to work together to meet the challenges the UK faces, from housing to the net zero transition, the delivery of care, the meeting of the government’s five missions, and the embedding of new institutions that facilitate cross-government working is an important step towards making that happen.

Looking for more expert analysis and commentary about local government issues? Subscribe to LGIU to never miss out.