8


IN VIEW


By Ged Henderson


Group, fears time is running out for the county to get on that devolution train and it risks being left behind as the only part of the north of England without a mayoral authority and the benefits that brings.


There is an even greater sense of urgency building, with the arrival of former Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham in Number 10 on a mission to deliver even more devolution.


At the end of July, the prime minister announced plans to give all mayors of city regions in England a share of income tax revenue for the first time as part of his drive to transfer power from Westminster to local leaders.


He said he would also allow English strategic authorities to keep some cash from business rates collected in their areas and gain greater control over services such as housing, transport and skills.


In association with:


And he declared that the move would ‘make good’ on his pledge to ‘bring power home’ to ‘every postcode in the country’.


ENTER NOW DEADLINE:


Midnight, Friday 4 December 2026 Judging partner:


Energy partner: Runway sponsor: Frankly Speaking Sponsored by:


THERE’S MORE AT STAKE THAN HEADED PAPER By Frank McKenna,


Downtown Lancashire in Business


Local government reorganisation in Lancashire is no longer a question of if, but how.


Supported by:


The county council is set to disappear, with its responsibilities transferred to four new unitary authorities created from the existing 14 councils. Above them will sit a combined authority intended to provide strategic leadership across Lancashire.


ENTER HERE


redroseawards.co.uk @redroseawards


#RRA27


Unfortunately, what is emerging looks less like a bold programme of reform and more like an exercise in administrative rearrangement.


Lancashire remains resistant to an elected mayor - the model that has secured greater powers, investment and influence for Greater Manchester, the Liverpool City Region and other ambitious areas. Without


one, Lancashire risks settling for devolution lite: additional responsibilities, perhaps, but without the political clout or financial firepower enjoyed elsewhere.


Then there is the question of scale.


The proposed unitary councils may not be large enough to develop the capacity, expertise and resilience needed to deliver an increasingly complex range of services. Social care, housing, transport, economic development, children’s services and regeneration cannot be managed successfully simply by changing the headed paper.


Size matters - not because bigger is automatically better, but because councils need sufficient resources, talent and strategic reach to perform effectively.


There is also precious little evidence of genuine community fit within some of the proposed boundaries. West Lancashire has limited economic or cultural connection with Chorley and South Ribble. Preston has even less in common with its proposed partners, Lancaster and Ribble Valley.


These are not natural communities of interest. They look like lines drawn on a map to make the numbers work. This combination – weak strategic leadership, insufficient scale and artificial geography – is a recipe for failure.


Yet astonishingly, the greatest concern among some of Lancashire’s more parochial politicians appears not to be whether the county will remain stuck in the devolution slow lane. Nor whether the new authorities will possess the capacity to deliver essential services.


No, their burning issue is what the new councils should be called.


Lancashire is confronting the biggest transformation of local government in half a century, and some politicians are arguing about the names on the letterhead.


I should be surprised. That I’m not says a lot about my lack of faith in Lancashire’s political leadership.


THE DEVO TRAIN IS SET TO LEAVE: WILL WE BE ON IT?


The frustration in Mo Isap’s voice is palpable. He likens Lancashire’s tortuous devolution journey to someone ‘standing on a railway platform with a ticket, debating whether to get on the train while it is about to depart’.


Condemning the fact the county does not have an elected mayor as ‘catastrophic’, the


chair of the Lancashire Business Board, part of the Combined County Authority, has done the maths and believes the county is losing an estimated £1.4m a day in devolution funding as a result.


Blackburn entrepreneur Mo, the founder of highly successful technology company IN4


However there are fears without a mayor at the helm Lancashire is set to miss out on the new revenue streams planned for city regions, which, as the second largest economy in the north west, could be substantial.


Mo has a 30-year career as a tech entrepreneur and has launched and scaled several successful startups. The business board he chairs is made up of leaders from some of Lancashire’s foremost regional, national and international firms.


Its role is to provide a private sector perspective and business voice in local policy development, support efforts to win inward investment and act as the voice of business in the development of devolution for the county.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76