A new deal for transport? - Transport Policy and Planning in Great Britain - page 124

8.4 Changes to local and regional government
A period of frenetic activity followed publication of the New Deal , characterised by a
blizzard of daughter documents, consultation papers, guidance notes and so forth. In
particular the DETR moved quickly to establish the new system of Local Transport Plans
in 1999, albeit in 'provisional' one-year form. But as far as legislation was concerned
the Government's priorities lay elsewhere. One was constitutional reform embracing
devolution from central government, the strengthening of regional decision-making
and the 'modernisation' of local government. Changes in each of these affected the
context for decision-making in transport and spatial planning thereafter.
The proposals for devolution were the product of manifesto commitments in 1997.
Scotland was offered its own Parliament with separately elected Members, legislative
and administrative powers in defined fields and a limited tax-raising capability.
More significant for transport in day-to-day terms was the transfer of administrative
responsibilities from the Scottish Office (previously a department of Central
Government) to an Executive answerable to a Minister within the Scottish cabinet.
Wales was offered an elected Assembly, with a similar transfer of administrative
responsibilities (from the Welsh Office), but without legislative and tax-raising powers
(Cole 2003). These proposals were adopted following referenda in the two countries,
albeit with only a tiny majority backing devolution in Wales.
The devolution proposals for London were different in that they consisted
essentially of the restoration of local authority powers lost when the GLC was abolished
in 1986. However rather than replicate the traditional council format the Government
opted for a new model based on a directly elected Mayor with executive powers - a
model again ratified through a local referendum.
In England outside London new bodies (later known as regional assemblies)
were created in each of the administrative regions. Their members consisted of
elected representatives from each of the region's local authorities plus a minority of
representatives from social, economic and environmental interest groups appointed by
the Secretary of State. These bodies replaced the previous ad hoc regional planning
conferences and were given a strengthened role in the preparation of regional planning
guidance. In the field of economic development 'devolution' was achieved, not by
transfer of Government office functions to the regional assemblies, but to new Regional
Development Agencies (RDAs) run by a Board of appointed members.
The activities of the English Regional Assemblies were constrained by the fact that
(unlike the Welsh Assembly) their members were not directly elected and that they had
no executive powers. Prescott in particular was keen to remedy this and to bring about
more genuine devolution to the English regions. After the 2001 election, working from
the Cabinet Office, he published a consultation paper setting out the Government's
proposals (Cabinet Office 2001). However the principle of regionalisation within
England did not enjoy wide support even amongst Labour Ministers, and there were
always going to be practical difficulties in parts of the country where cultural and
geographical identities were weak.
In the event the first referendum for a directly elected regional assembly (in North-
East England) suffered an overwhelming defeat. This represented a humiliating
outcome for Prescott personally and by common consent a sinking of the prospect of
English regional government for a generation. One of the reasons was Prescott's failure
to negotiate with other Ministers for sufficient powers to be delegated to the putative
Assembly, thereby leading to accusations that it would be merely an expensive talking