Under Andy Burnham and his new cabinet, British governance is being redesigned. Their Rewiring the State policy paper proposes a significant shift in power, resources and responsibility. In theory, strategic authorities will gain new responsibilities, mayors will become more influential, and local institutions will be asked to deliver everything from economic growth to skills, housing, public service reform, and more.
The ambition is to devolve decision-making, strengthen local leadership, and create the conditions for growth in all regions and neighbourhoods.
While this is bold, recognition that this change is needed isn’t new. For decades, governments of all parties have acknowledged that Britain is one of the most centralised democracies in the developed world. The case for devolution has been clear, if not delivered. We know that local leaders are often better placed to understand the needs of their communities, coordinate services, identify specific opportunities and threats in their communities, reflect local business and industry, and respond more quickly to change.
However, institutional reform alone will not drive democratic renewal. We can create new authorities, elect new mayors, redraw organisational charts and transfer budgets across tiers of government. None of this will rebuild trust in politics or create the resilient local communities that Labour hopes to deliver.
The challenge is not just where power sits but also how power is exercised.
Too often, British governments have treated communities as audiences to be consulted rather than partners in shaping change. Public participation has frequently been reduced to surveys, consultations, and carefully managed engagement exercises that (often) occur after key decisions have been made. The result is communities feeling ignored, people feeling that their time and energy isn’t valued, those in positions of power and influence becoming defensive – and, ultimately, policies that struggle to take root in the places they are meant to improve.
The language of participation has become fashionable in political circles, and while the government’s commitment to “new and modern forms of public participation” is welcome, it must be bold. Citizens’ assemblies, deliberative forums and other democratic innovations are increasingly regularly proposed as ways to reconnect politics with the public. These approaches have value. But participation is not a single method; it is a different way of governing.
In local authorities, community organisations and public institutions across England, the most transformative forms of participation are often the least visible from Westminster. Community-led research, participatory design, neighbourhood organising, and investment in community leadership do much more than generate better ideas. They build relationships between institutions and residents, strengthen local confidence, and create the social foundations that make difficult reforms possible.
Another question is whether local institutions are ready for the responsibilities they are about to inherit. Are they being encouraged and supported to collaborate across sectors? Are they being judged on short-term delivery metrics over long-term relationship building? Do they have the budget, culture and confidence to involve communities before policies are fixed, rather than after they are announced?
These questions may sound abstract, but they are profoundly practical. The success of devolution will depend less on constitutional design than on whether mayors, councils, civil servants and community organisations learn to work differently together. Thriving places are found most often where institutions have learned to share power, where officials are willing to experiment, and where local knowledge is treated as a source of expertise rather than anecdote.
The sociologist and politician Michael Young – who founded The Young Foundation, the Open University, Which?, and many other organisations – understood that social innovation emerges when people closest to problems are supported to organise and act. He believed that the state functions better when it recognises the capabilities that already exist within communities.
That belief feels incredibly relevant today. Britain is entering a period of transition: demographic change, technological disruption, climate crisis, and widening regional inequalities are reshaping the country simultaneously. No government, however ambitious, can navigate these challenges without the participation of institutions capable of learning, adapting and collaborating across boundaries.
This requires a different political imagination. Participation should not be treated as a democratic nicety or a communications exercise. It is a form of civic infrastructure. It is the mechanism through which governments discover what is happening in real places, build legitimacy for difficult decisions, and create the local ownership that drives meaningful, relevant and lasting change. Societies are built and rebuilt through relationships: between citizens and institutions, between local and national government, and between communities and the people who govern them.
Burnham has an opportunity to create a genuinely participatory model of local power, and if Rewiring the State goes beyond administrative redesign, it could mark the beginning of a more resilient and democratic future. This requires more than moving power closer to communities, it’s about being willing, bold and brave enough to let communities shape what that power is used for.
Content from our partners
Related
