Commons Sense

House of Commons · Westminster Hall

Devolution: Lancashire

27 November 2024 · 4 other contributors · 4,200 words

Opened by Cat Smith Lab Lancaster and Wyre

Responding minister: Jim McMahon

ScotlandLocal Government

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Cat Smith raised concerns about devolution: lancashire in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key points

  • Concerns raised about the complexity of local government in Lancashire, with over 245 elected representatives causing confusion among constituents.
  • The Member asks for clarity on decision-making processes for local government reorganisation and whether community wishes will significantly influence outcomes.
  • The Member seeks reassurance that a future devolution model will maintain representation reflecting Lancashire's diverse communities and advance gender balance.

Key requests to Government

The hon. Member asks for clarity on how decisions will be made in the upcoming local government reorganisation. She seeks to know whether politicians or civil servants will have final say, and if community wishes will significantly influence outcomes. The Member also questions the Minister about the preservation of current district boundaries and the importance placed on ceremonial county lines versus functional economic areas. Additionally, she requests reassurance that a future devolution model would maintain representation reflecting Lancashire's diverse communities and advance gender balance.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Cat Smith Lab Lancaster and Wyre

The hon. Member for Lancaster and Wyre is concerned about the complexity of local government in Lancashire, with multiple tiers and overlapping responsibilities causing confusion among constituents. She notes that there are over 245 elected representatives in her constituency alone, including parish councillors who volunteer their time to serve their communities. The Member also highlights the historical significance of Lancashire and its current diverse makeup, expressing worries about a potential one-size-fits-all model of devolution that may not suit rural areas like Lancashire.

Other contributors (4)
  • Adnan Hussain Ind Blackburn

    He congratulated the hon. Member for securing the debate on Lancashire Day, supporting devolution to Lancashire and highlighting Blackburn as an example of a well-managed unitary authority with extensive experience in social care services.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    He thanked the hon. Lady for bringing forward the debate on Lancashire Day and expressed his support for the celebration, emphasizing the importance of Lancashire in the UK.

  • Mark Jenkinson Con Lancaster and Fleetwood

    The hon. Member for Lancaster and Fleetwood supports the idea that devolution should be a collaborative process with Lancashire, not imposed upon it. He acknowledges successful local governance examples in the county while expressing caution against sweeping changes that might disrupt existing structures.

  • Tim Farron Lib Dem Westmorland and Lonsdale

    He acknowledged his connection to Lancashire and discussed local government reorganisation in Cumbria. He expressed concern that businesses and residents oppose the idea of another mayor being imposed barely five minutes after the last reorganisation.

Government Response

Jim McMahon

As a fellow Lancastrian from Oldham, I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster and Wyre on securing this debate on Lancashire Day. The Government aims to widen and deepen devolution across England by moving power out of Westminster into local hands. We agreed to a Lancashire devolution deal in September, establishing a county combined authority with constituent members including Lancashire County Council, Blackpool Council, and Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council. This body will take control over adult skills funds, integrate the Lancashire Local Enterprise Partnership, manage transport issues as a local transport authority, and gain new land assembly powers for housing and economic development. A statutory instrument was laid to enable these combined county authorities. £20 million of capital funding is released to support local growth projects such as the National Cyber Force headquarters and innovative low-carbon data centres. The role of district councils in the combined county authority remains under discussion, but we expect effective collaboration between upper-tier, unitary, and district councils. This agreement marks a step towards establishing a mayoral combined authority, enabling Lancashire to realise its economic potential and contributing to regional growth across England.

Get updates like this by email
▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy