-
- guardian.co.uk, Friday May 12 2000 16.54 BST
That seemed to be the government's initial theory. Ministers even hailed a new administration for the capital as another step along the road of wider constitutional reform. First Scotland and Wales, then London and finally the prospect of referendums in the big English cities to test the mayoral concept.
As the road turned out to be far rockier than expected, through Labour's ham-fisted selection process, the idea cooled in some quarters and big hitters, like John Prescott, warned that provincial mayors, let alone Red Ken, could create more trouble than they were worth.
But Downing Street, backed by the local government minister (and Prescott deputy) Hilary Armstrong, pushed ahead with a new local government bill, which should be approved this summer. Among other things, it will force reluctant councils to hold referendums if they are petitioned by 5% of the electorate.
Several are already planning a coordinated series of local polls, with the backing of ministers, to gauge popular support on a "democracy day". This "big bang" exercise, which will probably be held next spring, is designed to excite a largely apathetic electorate.
Until now, provincial mayors have been seen as the poor relation of Greater London's. In truth, unless the government further erodes town hall functions - and the Whitehall centralising tendency cannot be underestimated - they will wield considerably more powers than Ken Livingstone and the new Greater London Assembly. This is because big cities, unlike the capital, are generally run by all-purpose councils providing most local services, from education to social care, housing, planning and road maintenance as well as weightier economic matters.
Just like 19th-century municipal corporations, which civilised Britain long before national government developed any social agenda, they could become alternative political power bases again - campaigning, innovating, questioning and challenging ministers.
Yet the government has been slow in thinking through the consequences of this much-vaunted big city shake-up. After creating a national inspection regime, policed by a 500-strong army of bureaucrats to enforce new performance indicators for town halls, ministers clearly hoped that the creation of new civic leaders would be the end of the reform process. It should mark the beginning.
They also seemed intent on bypassing local politicians in favour of personalities (the Manchester United manager, Sir Alex Ferguson, has been mentioned) or New Labourish businessmen. That was until the agenda changed again and No 10 started talking about "neighbourhoods" - community forums well away from town halls - serviced and funded by Government Regional Offices and Whitehall.
Confused? So are some key players who have detected a coolness for London-style elections (but not necessarily referendums) this side of a general election. This has ominous undertones for our great cities and the regions they serve. While the capital, served by a mayor and assembly desperate to reinforce its global city status, continues to grow (and overheat), the rest of the country seems destined to languish even further behind.
Initiatives designed to pull our poorly performing cities up the Euro wealth league have been put on hold. Lord Rogers, who chaired a government urban taskforce which reported last year, is becoming increasingly frustrated. He fears that northern cities, particularly, will "continue to suffer migration and the blight of decline" unless the government grasps a main recommendation of his report - tax breaks, and other fiscal measures, to regenerate urban priority areas.
The report did not mince words. Councils, it said, should be "strengthened in powers, resources and democratic legitimacy" to lead an urban renaissance. The government - "disappointingly negative," according to Rogers - has yet to respond, although an urban white paper is promised later this year.
England's great cities - London apart - continue as the poor relations of Europe. On an EU wealth average of 100, the city region of Antwerp stands at 137%, while Stuttgart is only two points behind. Compare that with our city regions - Greater Manchester (91%), the West Midlands around Birmingham (93%) or West Yorkshire, around Leeds (92%).
Unless ministers are careful, London's new system of government will further widen divisions in a two-speed economy already far more unbalanced than elsewhere in Europe. Since the early 1990s, migration from the north has doubled. The capital is heaving. Even a metropolitan like Lord Rogers recognises it can't take the strain much longer. Our great cities, and regions, need a leg-up - and mayors with real clout - before it's too late. For all our sakes.
