The main councils in Sussex could, in effect, merge and be run by an elected mayor under a proposal to be discussed by the cabinet in Brighton and Hove in the coming week.
The proposal has been drawn up in response to a “white paper” on devolution which is intended to hand power for more decisions from the government to bigger “strategic” local authorities and elected mayors.
Brighton and Hove City Council looks likely to apply for the government’s “priority programme” which could bring funding to create a “mayoral strategic authority” by May next year.
East Sussex County Council and West Sussex County Council are both holding cabinet meetings on the same day – Thursday 9 January – to agree a joint bid with Brighton and Hove.
Brighton and Hove City Council said: “(The) cabinet will decide whether to submit a joint proposal with West Sussex and East Sussex for devolution on Thursday 9 January.
“The move could bring funding and transformative reforms to local government across Sussex.
“The cabinet papers recommend a joint proposal with the two neighbouring authorities to be included in the government’s priority devolution programme which aims to bring capacity funding for devolution and local government reform to Sussex.”
Brighton and Hove City Council leader Bella Sankey said: “Devolution is a key plank of the government’s aim to redistribute political, social and economic power across England and presents a significant opportunity to improve the lives of residents in Brighton and Hove and across Sussex.
“A new strategic authority for Sussex could unlock new powers and resources to drive economic growth, cheaper integrated transport, skills and jobs, affordable housing and to accelerate our net zero ambitions.
“I want to work with our new government and local authorities across Sussex to take advantage of the opportunities being presented to us.”
In the coming months, the government will also require proposals for local government reorganisation to be considered locally across Sussex to unlock the benefits of devolution.
The detailed criteria for local government reorganisation will be sent to all councils across Sussex early in 2025, followed by a government-led consultation on reorganisation proposals.
Councillor Sankey added: “The council remains committed to continue listening and working in partnership and always in the best interests of residents, businesses and communities across Sussex.”
“The main councils in Sussex could merge and be run by an elected mayor under a proposal to be discussed by the cabinet in Brighton and Hove in the coming week”
This is an incorrect reading of the proposals
A combined authority does not mean the 2 county councils and B&HCC will be merged into one.
Link to the meeting papers
https://democracy.brighton-hove.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=1110&MId=11897
Hi Chris, I’ve modified the sentence slightly because it would “in effect” be a merger when it comes to key areas of policy and administration such as transport and transport infrastructure, strategic planning, regeneration, health and wellbeing and public health. It’s still early days, with a lot of detail to be decided, and I’ve tried to use easily understood broad-brush terms to try to convey what’s happening. This approach is, of course, not without its shortcomings so thanks for giving me pause for thought so promptly.
There are several issues here:
1) The first question is: Should local councils be merged into one? – with the presumed advantage being a shared cost of administration, and what economists often call ‘economies of scale’. The down side to that idea is that a big organisation becomes bureaucratic, and often heads off in one direction – and, where that’s the wrong direction, it’s expensive for everybody.
2) The idea of an elected mayor is not new for our area, and has resulted in successes elsewhere, so Brighton and Hove as a progressive city would like to catch up.
3) Both these ideas maybe about redirecting budget money at a time when there isn’t any. They may also be seen as being about change for change’s sake.
4) I’m thinking that the electorate might be dead against these ideas, especially at a time when trust in politicians – and trust in new ideas – is at an all time low. Your typical resident will still say: ‘We want our bins emptied, and we want the potholes in the roads repaired. We want the roof fixed on our kids’ school.’ Everything else seems like a distraction.
Just touching on your fourth point, the local issues, the ones that are clearly seen and affect residents directly are always going to be prioritised in their minds. Anything that is more indirect, or doesn’t have an immediate impact is less likely to be cared about by residents. I understand this.
I agree with you. Thinking about the importance of broader challenges and benefits always appears to be points of debate, particularly when there is not a clear articulated answer to how it will help with those core issues, such as bins and potholes.
Perhaps that leads back to the importance of clear, comprehensive, demistifyed, communication?
Manchester – one of the most successful regional mayoralties has retained all of its borough councils ensuring regional identity, and local control – why isn’t this an option?
There should be a case for keeping local authorities within a pan-Sussex combined authority and this needs to be considered carefully.
Greater Manchester is presented as an exemplar in local government collaboration and capacity building, enabling it to seize opportunities as the Treasury began taking its first tentative steps towards English devolution under George Osborne
In contrast, the complex history of the North East Mayoral Combined Authority, established in May 2024, reflects a more uneven process towards its current settlement, the product of its unique political culture and regional context. It has taken time to settle on a deal that makes sense to local actors in economic and geographical terms.
Lots of people will be watching this development with great interest, KatyGPT.
The extent to which metro mayors can ‘harness the power of place’ and draw on their local support bases to challenge national politicians and respective political parties has been underestimated
This could point to a new flashpoint in the fraught world of UK territorial politics. Mayors operate amidst a ‘complex web of relationships, which can enable and constrain’
They are subject to asymmetrical relationships with government departments that are rarely joined up, impeding their ability to promote a strategic, integrated approach to policymaking at the sub-regional level. Mayors must navigate complex relationships in their own cabinets and local power dynamics between local authorities which inevitably reflect the particularities of place. And they must constantly tend to relationships with political parties, interest groups, and the electorate. As these roles are complex and evolving, they remain subject to a great deal of uncertainty.
Whatever the political colour of any Mayor, it will not be a comfortable ride.
All the more reason to listen to the local electorate through consultations and assemblies.
If they become Whitehall by proxy, then the UK political system is in for a bumpy journey.