Andy Burnham has pledged to back fresh devolution of powers to London, arguing that the capital must be strengthened if it is indeed to retain its status as the “world’s greatest capital.” In comments that signal a new era of cooperation between regional leaders and City Hall, the Greater Manchester mayor indicated he would support giving London greater control over key areas such as transport, housing, and economic policy. His intervention comes amid renewed debate over how England’s major cities should be governed, as London contends with post-pandemic recovery, mounting cost-of-living pressures, and fierce global competition for investment and talent.
Burnham outlines vision for devolved powers to secure Londons global standing
Positioning himself as a champion of metropolitan self-determination, Burnham set out a blueprint that would see London handed greater control over the levers that shape its future – from transport and skills to housing and climate policy. He argued that the capital’s ability to compete with cities such as New York,Paris and Singapore depends on ministers at Westminster loosening their grip and allowing locally elected leaders to design long-term strategies free from “stop-start” central funding. Under his plan, City Hall and boroughs would gain enhanced fiscal freedoms and a stronger say over infrastructure investment, with decisions taken closer to the communities affected.
The proposals center on a series of targeted reforms aimed at safeguarding London’s economic dynamism while tackling deep-rooted inequalities between its neighbourhoods.Burnham’s team has floated a model of “trailblazer devolution deals” that would hardwire accountability into City Hall, including:
- Multi-year transport settlements to stabilise TfL finances and expand clean, reliable services.
- Locally controlled skills budgets aligned with growth sectors such as tech, green industries and life sciences.
- Strategic housing powers to accelerate affordable building and unlock brownfield land.
- Shared tax retention on business rates to reinvest directly in high streets and innovation hubs.
| Area | Current Issue | Devolution Aim |
|---|---|---|
| Transport | Short-term funding gaps | Stable, multi-year deals |
| Skills | Mismatched training and jobs | Local control of programmes |
| Housing | High rents, slow delivery | Faster, targeted building |
| Business | Uneven investment | Retain and reinvest rates |
Impact of proposed governance changes on transport housing and public services
Under Burnham’s vision, the capital’s transport network would be reshaped by a deeper devolution of funding and decision-making, allowing City Hall to lock in long-term investment rather than firefight annual budget gaps. This could mean integrated fares across rail, Tube, buses and new orbital routes, with local leaders able to prioritise cleaner buses, step-free access and late-night services that reflect London’s 24-hour economy. Proponents argue that giving London more fiscal autonomy would accelerate green infrastructure, expansion of cycling corridors, and targeted improvements in outer-borough connectivity, making it easier for key workers and lower-income residents to move around the city without relying on cars.
Housing and frontline services would also sit at the centre of any new settlement. Greater control over taxes and planning levers could enable the Mayor to ring‑fence funds for social and key-worker housing, while rewriting rules that currently slow delivery of genuinely affordable homes. In practice,that would push local authorities to coordinate housing,schools,GP surgeries and community facilities from the outset,rather than bolting them on years later.Advocates say this would safeguard public services from the volatility of central grants and help respond faster to pressures on the NHS, adult social care and youth services.
- Stable funding for buses, Tube and local rail to protect routes at risk of cuts.
- Locally-set housing priorities to increase supply where demand is highest.
- Joined-up planning so new homes arrive with clinics, schools and green space.
- Stronger accountability through City Hall and borough-level scrutiny.
| Area | Current Constraint | Proposed Shift |
|---|---|---|
| Transport | Short-term, central grants | Multi-year, locally controlled budgets |
| Housing | Limited say over funding rules | Greater power to define “affordable” locally |
| Public Services | Fragmented commissioning | Integrated local service planning |
Balancing regional devolution with national cohesion and fiscal responsibility
Burnham’s pitch for a more empowered capital lands in the middle of a delicate policy equation: how to give London the agility of a global city-region without undermining the UK’s sense of shared purpose or shredding the Treasury rulebook. Greater control over transport, housing and skills is framed as a way to keep the capital competitive with New York and Paris, but it also raises questions about whether a turbocharged London leaves other regions further behind. The answer, he suggests, lies not in reining the city in, but in hardwiring clear safeguards and mutual obligations into any new settlement, making sure that what is good for London also delivers for Leeds, Liverpool and Llandudno.
Under this model, power would flow outwards while responsibility for the public purse and the wider union remains firmly in view. That means:
- Transparent fiscal rules to ensure new funding freedoms don’t trigger unsustainable borrowing.
- Shared investment frameworks so London and the regions co‑design big infrastructure pipelines.
- Equity tests for major policies to check they narrow, not widen, regional gaps.
| Policy Area | London Flexibility | National Safeguard |
|---|---|---|
| Transport | Local control of fares | Caps tied to inflation |
| Housing | Tailored planning powers | Minimum affordable targets |
| Skills | City-led training funds | UK‑wide standards |
Policy recommendations for UK leaders to empower London while supporting other cities
To translate rhetoric into reality, national decision-makers must design a settlement that lets the capital lead without pulling the ladder up behind it. That means a clearer, statutory framework for fiscal devolution, allowing London government to retain a greater share of business rates and targeted property taxes while tying a portion of the uplift to a redistribution fund for regional transport, skills and green infrastructure. Westminster could also pilot multi‑year funding deals for London and combined authorities outside the M25, replacing the competitive, stop‑start bidding culture with predictable budgets that reward long‑term planning rather than short‑term photo opportunities.
- Shared prosperity funds linked to London’s growth dividends
- Joint infrastructure boards bringing mayors and ministers together
- Common standards for housing, clean air and digital access
- Data‑driven accountability on spending and outcomes across regions
| Policy Tool | London Impact | UK‑Wide Benefit |
|---|---|---|
| Fiscal devolution | Faster transport & housing delivery | New funding for regional projects |
| Skills compacts | Stable workforce for key sectors | Pathways for talent from other cities |
| Innovation zones | Boost to tech & creative clusters | Networked R&D across city‑regions |
Crucially, reforms must hard‑wire collaboration rather than competition into the constitutional fabric. A national Council of City Mayors, with formal powers to scrutinise major legislation and co‑design urban policy, would give London and its peers a shared platform to argue for better housing standards, cleaner transport and fairer migration rules. By pairing London’s expanded authority with transparent governance, regional investment guarantees and mechanisms for cross‑city learning, UK leaders can turn the capital’s success into a flywheel for renewal in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and beyond, rather than a magnet that drains them of opportunity.
Key Takeaways
As Burnham’s appeal for greater devolution lands in a capital already grappling with inequality, strained services and a shifting post-Brexit role, the question now passes to Westminster: how far is the Government prepared to go in loosening its grip on London’s levers of power?
For City Hall, business leaders and Londoners alike, the answer will shape not only the future of the Square Mile and its surrounding boroughs, but also whether the city can credibly hold on to the mantle Burnham invoked – that of the world’s greatest capital.
