English Mayors Slam Super-Force Police Plans as Threat to Devolution 2026

English mayors have sharply criticised proposals to slash the number of police forces in England and Wales, warning that the creation of “super-forces” poses a real threat to local policing and undermines the government’s devolution agenda. The plans, backed by Britain’s top police officer, would see the current 43 forces reduced to between eight and 10 larger regional units.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mark Rowley called for the radical restructure on Friday, arguing that bigger forces could better tackle complex crimes. However, the move has sparked a fierce backlash from mayors and police and crime commissioners who fear a loss of local accountability.

Why Mayors Oppose the Super-Force Plans

Steve Rotheram, mayor of the Liverpool city region and a close ally of the prime minister, described the proposals as “the wolf of centralisation dressed up in sheep’s clothing.” He argued that swallowing local forces into enormous regional super-forces would run counter to the devolution agenda.

Other mayors and commissioners privately expressed anger, seeing the plans as an attempt to bounce the prime minister into the biggest policing shake-up in a generation. They believe local accountability would be diluted if decision-making moves further away from communities.

The criticism comes as Andy Burnham’s own devolution plan seeks to free mayors from Treasury grip. Our analysis of Burnham’s devolution plan highlights how greater local control is central to the agenda.

The Case for Larger Police Forces

Rowley and several chief constables, including Greater Manchester Police, argue that consolidating forces would improve efficiency and allow better coordination against organised crime, cybercrime, and terrorism. They point to economies of scale and the need for specialised capabilities that smaller forces struggle to maintain.

However, there is disagreement even within senior policing about how radical the reduction should be. Some favour a more gradual approach, while others worry that merging forces could disrupt local relationships and response times.

Devolution at Risk

The row exposes a deeper tension between centralised efficiency and local democratic control. Devolution deals have given mayors powers over policing, transport, and skills, with the expectation that decisions are made closer to the people they affect.

Critics argue that super-forces would reverse this trend, concentrating power in regional bodies that are less accountable to local voters. As our article on English devolution plans needing strong scrutiny notes, transparency and local oversight are essential for public trust.

What Happens Next?

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans in January to radically reduce the number of police forces and commissioned an official review by Bernard Hogan-Howe. The review’s findings will likely shape the final proposals, but the political battle is already underway. The background to this story is set out in Andy Burnham's Devolution Plan: Unbundling England's Centralised. A related thread runs through UK Devolution Spending Powers and Mayoral Accountability.

Mayors are expected to lobby fiercely against the changes, framing them as a test of the government’s commitment to devolution. The outcome will signal whether Whitehall is willing to cede control or whether centralisation will prevail. Earlier coverage in Police Investigate Reform UK Payments After Guardian Report shows how the argument developed. A closer look at the same subject appears in Met Police Investigate Reform UK Payments After Guardian.

Key Takeaways

• Mark Rowley proposes cutting 43 police forces to 8-10 super-forces.
• Mayors like Steve Rotheram call the plans a threat to local policing and devolution.
• The move has support from some chief constables but faces political resistance.
• A review by Bernard Hogan-Howe will inform the final decision.
• The row tests the government’s commitment to local accountability.

Comparing Police Force Structures

FAQ

What are super-forces in policing?

Super-forces refer to proposals to merge the 43 police forces of England and Wales into 8-10 larger regional units. Supporters argue this would improve efficiency and specialist capabilities, while critics fear it would reduce local accountability.

Why do mayors oppose the plans?

Mayors argue that super-forces would centralise power and undermine devolution, which aims to bring decision-making closer to local communities. They believe local policing would suffer and accountability would be diluted.

Who supports the super-force plans?

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mark Rowley and several chief constables, including Greater Manchester Police, support the plans. They argue that larger forces can better tackle complex crimes and achieve economies of scale.

What is the next step for the proposals?

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has commissioned an official review by Bernard Hogan-Howe. The review’s findings will inform the final decision, but political lobbying from mayors is expected to continue.

ADVERTISEMENT

The debate over super-forces is a litmus test for devolution. If mayors succeed in blocking the plans, it will strengthen the case for local control. If not, it could set a precedent for further centralisation. As our analysis of why English devolution is fraught with difficulty explains, such tensions are inherent in the process.

Ultimately, the government must balance the need for efficient policing with the democratic mandate of local leaders. The outcome will shape not only policing but also the future of devolution across England. For devolution to succeed, strong local governance is essential, and mayors are determined to defend it.