MP demolishes devolution proposal

WARRINGTON North MP Helen Jones says she is ‘profoundly depressed’ by the government’s proposals for devolution which would put power in the hands of one person.

Her opposition came less than a week after Warrington Council’s controlling Labour group voted against a devolution deal which would see an elected Mayor for Cheshire East, Cheshire West and Chester and Warrington.

Speaking in a debate in Westminster Hall  the MP re-iterated her opposition to the proposed devolution deal for Cheshire and Warrington, saying:“ Government is not offering us real devolution.  Real devolution would give powers to identifiable local communities.  We were told that we must have a mayoral model. “

Pointing out that many of her constituents still consider themselves as “proud Lancastrians” she went on to say:“ They have little community of interest with some of the market towns across the border in Merseyside or greater Manchester, yet we are told that that is the only kind of authority open to us.  No one has asked the people of Warrington whether that is what they want.  They would be consulted only after a deal had been agreed.

*No one has asked them whether they want an elected mayor; I suspect that they certainly do not want one covering Cheshire and Warrington,  because that is not sufficient local democracy.

“ I am profoundly depressed by the idea that power is better in hands of one man – it usually is a man – than of many people.  That is a depressing view of democracy,  in my understanding of it.  Although it might work in urban areas,  it does not work in an area such as Cheshire and Warrington.  It is of no benefit to my constituents to be run from Congleton or Macclesfield rather than London.  Although a mayor would begin with only a few powers,  they would be bound to gather more as time went on.  Mission creep is built into the model. “

She pointed out that the deal which was on offer:

• contained much that was going to happen anyway;
• retains powers for the Secretary of State, and;
• diverts money away from Warrington.

She added:“ We are told that we will get free passage over the Mersey bridges instead of paying tolls,  but we were promised that in the general election.  Will the Government go back on that if we do not have a combined authority?”

Finally she pointed out that:

• a combined authority would have flexibility over only 15% of the housing programme which “could” include some rented property.  There are no powers for Warrington to build the kind of homes that it needs – social rented housing;
• under the employment and housing programme, 50% of new town land would be ring fenced for Warrington but 50% would go to the combined authority.

“ That is a transfer, to the rest of Cheshire,  of money that should remain in my local authority.  I do not see that as a good deal. “

• the government sets the target after which 100% growth in business rate can be kept.

The MP finished by saying that the deal was a way of transferring money from poorer communities to better-off communities and was not about devolution.

Meanwhile after Warrington council’s controlling Labour group voted against the proposed devolution deal for Cheshire, Chester and Warrington,  the following  joint statement from the leaders of Warrington, Cheshire West and Chester, and Cheshire East councils stated :“Following political discussions in Warrington a potential consultation with the public and businesses on a proposed devolution deal for Cheshire and Warrington has been put on hold.

“We remain strongly committed to collaborative working on a number of key initiatives and we will continue to explore how best to secure more power and resources for our area.”