Andy Burnham's Devolution Plan: Unbundling England's Centralised 2026

Andy Burnham's critique of England's centralised state highlights how the past 40 years have left regions without the power to rebuild after deindustrialisation. His radical devolution plan aims to unbundle English government and give mayors greater economic control. This article examines the three pillars of his proposal and what they mean for regional equality.

The Problem: England's Over-Centralisation

England is among the rich world's most centralised countries, a fact that underpins Burnham's economic critique. Only post-communist Europe deindustrialised as rapidly as Yorkshire and the Midlands did in the 1980s. Centralisation did not close every factory or pit, but it left regions without the powers, finance, or institutions to cushion the shock or build a resilient replacement economy.

This has led to widening disparities between London and the rest of England. For instance, if mayors received 2.5% of the 20p basic rate of income tax, London would get £2.3bn in 2026-27 while Hull and East Yorkshire would get only £135m, according to a thinktank. Such imbalances underscore the need for structural reform.

Burnham's Three-Pillar Devolution Programme

1. Concrete Proposals for a Decentralised State

The first facet is a cabinet paper released by Burnham, which serves as a blueprint for a decentralised state organised around mayors as key regional economic actors. It proposes jointly governed pan-regional agencies for transport, energy, investment, and industrial systems that cross mayoral boundaries. Regions without mayors will get a chance to have one or limit themselves to weaker powers.

2. Retaining Tax Revenues

The second pillar, outlined in the Guardian and confirmed by No 10, allows mayors to keep income-tax and business-rate revenues. The forthcoming budget and spending review will decide how much. This would incentivise local growth, as a mayoral authority would receive a share of tax revenues and benefit when its economy and tax base grow.

3. Equalisation Duty

The third pillar, proposed before Burnham entered No 10, is a duty modelled on Germany's Basic Law, requiring English regions to pursue equivalent living conditions nationwide. The national government would continue redistributing resources so that poorer places can provide comparable services and possess meaningful investment capacity. Without such equalisation, disparities would widen.

Comparison: Centralisation vs Devolution

Key Takeaways

• England's centralisation has hindered regional economic recovery for decades.
• Burnham's plan includes concrete proposals for mayoral-led governance and pan-regional agencies.
• Allowing mayors to keep tax revenues can boost local growth but requires national redistribution to avoid widening gaps.
• An equalisation duty, inspired by Germany, is essential for fairness.
• The success of devolution depends on adequate funding and institutional support.

Challenges and Considerations

While the plan is welcome, challenges remain. The upcoming budget and spending review will determine how much revenue mayors can retain. Political opposition, as seen with Tory mayor Ben Houchen, may complicate implementation. Moreover, without robust equalisation, richer regions like London could benefit disproportionately, leaving poorer areas behind.

Burnham's proposal is a radical step toward rebalancing England's economy. It offers a path to greater local autonomy and resilience, but only if paired with strong redistributive mechanisms. The debate now shifts to how the government will shape the final policy.

FAQ