How Andy Burnham Can Make Devolution Work with Nista 2026

Andy Burnham's devolution agenda faces a structural paradox, but the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (Nista) offers a practical mechanism to resolve it. This article explores how Nista, combined with key political dynamics, can help Burnham's ambitions succeed.

The Structural Paradox of Devolution

Your editorial rightly identifies that giving power away requires a confident assertion of central power. This paradox is central to Burnham's agenda, but Nista—established in April 2025—bridges this gap operationally. Merging the National Infrastructure Commission and the Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Nista reports to both the Treasury and the Cabinet Office, creating a dual accountability that can balance central oversight with local empowerment.

Nista's Role in Streamlining Governance

With about 250 civil servants, Nista is designed to streamline infrastructure and service transformation. Under Keir Starmer, the Cabinet Office side of this dual accountability was relatively weak, but with Louise Haigh's new Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the balance may shift. This change is explicitly endorsed by the Institute for Government as implementing long-called-for structural reforms.

The Healey Factor: A Chancellor's Formation

John Healey, the new chancellor, is central to whether Burnham's ambitions survive Treasury orthodoxy. While framed as "not a big beast," Healey's pre-parliamentary background in disability rights and trade union work—at Mind and the TUC, where he helped design the national minimum wage—suggests a preventive state instinct that may align with devolution goals.

Comparing Healey to Predecessors

Key Takeaways for Making Devolution Work

• Nista provides a dual-reporting structure that balances central and local interests.
• Healey's background may foster a more collaborative Treasury approach.
• Strengthening the Cabinet Office side of Nista's accountability is crucial.
• Learning from historical precedents like 1976 can guide current reforms.

Potential Challenges and Opportunities

One challenge is ensuring Nista's operational effectiveness without becoming a bureaucratic hurdle. However, with the right leadership, it can serve as a conduit for resource allocation and project delivery that respects local autonomy. The relationship between Haigh and Healey will be pivotal in this regard.

Moreover, Burnham's agenda can benefit from Nista's ability to prioritize long-term infrastructure projects that align with regional needs. By leveraging data and cross-departmental coordination, Nista can help translate central funding into local outcomes, making devolution tangible for citizens.

Conclusion

Andy Burnham's devolution agenda can work if Nista is fully utilized and Healey's preventive state instincts are brought to bear. The structural reforms under Haigh's office provide a window of opportunity. By focusing on operational mechanisms and collaborative leadership, the paradox of devolution can be resolved in practice.

FAQ