4th July 2026
After decades of central control, could the balance of power finally shift away from Whitehall?
Every government promises to "empower local communities."
Almost every government then proceeds to do the opposite.
Councils are told what they must spend money on, what targets they must meet, what taxes they can raise and, increasingly, what they cannot do without first seeking permission from central government.
It has created one of the most centralised systems of local government in the developed world.
Now, however, there are signs that the debate may finally be changing.
If politicians such as Andy Burnham gain greater influence over the direction of government, Britain could be approaching its biggest rethink of local government since the reforms of the 1970s.
The question is simple
Should councils simply administer decisions made in London—or should they once again become genuine local governments?
Local Government—or Local Administration?
Few people realise how little financial freedom most British councils actually possess.
Unlike many countries in Europe, councils in England—and to a lesser extent Scotland and Wales—have relatively little control over raising revenue.
Most depend heavily on grants from central government.
Even council tax increases are frequently capped or politically discouraged.
Business rates have also become increasingly centralised, with redistribution determined by Whitehall.
The result is predictable.
Whenever demand rises for social care, schools, roads or housing, councils find themselves returning to Westminster asking for more money.
It is hardly surprising that local politicians often complain they are held responsible for decisions they never actually made.
Could Councils Gain Greater Tax Powers?
One possibility is allowing councils to retain far more of the taxes generated within their own areas.
Imagine if growing the local economy directly increased the council's income.
Suddenly attracting new businesses, supporting tourism and encouraging investment would not simply create jobs—it would strengthen the council's own finances.
Supporters argue this would reward successful councils.
Critics warn it could widen the gap between wealthy and poorer regions unless accompanied by a fair redistribution system.
Finding that balance would be essential.
Borrowing to Build
Perhaps the greatest frustration for many councils is borrowing.
Local authorities already borrow billions of pounds through the Public Works Loan Board.
But borrowing remains tightly controlled.
Many argue councils should have greater freedom to borrow for productive investment rather than simply maintaining existing services.
If borrowing finances new industrial estates, housing developments, flood defences or transport improvements that stimulate economic growth, future generations inherit valuable assets rather than simply debt.
Businesses borrow to invest.
Governments borrow to invest.
Why, many ask, should councils be treated differently?
Infrastructure Cannot Wait Forever
Britain has become remarkably slow at delivering infrastructure.
Road improvements.
Schools.
Health centres.
Flood prevention.
Renewable energy projects.
Large schemes can spend years waiting for funding approvals from multiple government departments.
Greater local decision-making could dramatically shorten that process.
Local leaders generally understand their area's priorities better than civil servants hundreds of miles away.
A road junction causing daily congestion in Inverness matters far more to Highland residents than it ever will inside Whitehall.
Planning: National Rules, Local Consequences
Planning may be the clearest example of tension between central and local government.
Governments of every political colour accuse councils of approving too few houses.
Councils reply that national planning rules are increasingly complicated while infrastructure funding often fails to keep pace with development.
Communities feel decisions are imposed upon them.
Developers complain approvals take years.
Governments blame councils.
Councils blame governments.
Meanwhile, the housing shortage grows.
A genuinely devolved planning system would inevitably require councils to accept greater responsibility—but also give them greater freedom.
Housing Delivery
Successive governments have announced ambitious housebuilding targets.
Few have achieved them.
One reason is simple.
National targets rarely reflect local realities.
Rural Scotland faces very different housing pressures from inner Manchester or suburban London.
Some communities desperately need affordable family housing.
Others require accommodation for key workers.
Tourist areas struggle with second homes and holiday lets.
Remote communities may simply need enough housing to retain teachers, nurses and tradespeople.
Allowing councils greater flexibility to shape housing policy around local conditions could produce better long-term outcomes than centrally imposed numerical targets.
Scotland Already Has Devolution But Does Local Government?
Scotland often presents itself as a highly devolved nation.
And constitutionally, it is.
Many powers that remain reserved to Westminster are exercised by the Scottish Parliament.
But an uncomfortable question remains.
Has Holyrood simply become Scotland's own version of Whitehall?
Many Scottish councils argue they face many of the same frustrations experienced by English local authorities.
Funding is heavily controlled.
National priorities increasingly shape local spending.
Council tax policy has frequently been influenced—or effectively constrained—by the Scottish Government.
Planning policy is directed nationally.
Education reforms are determined centrally.
In practice, Scottish councils often argue they have become delivery agents rather than independent local governments.
If Westminster genuinely embraces greater localism in England, pressure may quickly grow on Holyrood to offer Scotland's councils similar freedoms.
After all, devolution should not necessarily stop in Edinburgh.
What Could This Mean for the Highlands?
For Highland Council, greater local freedom could be transformative.
Instead of waiting for successive funding announcements from Edinburgh or London, local leaders could potentially make faster decisions on investment priorities.
Projects such as:
the Thurso Education Campus
the proposed Health Hubs in Wick and Thurso
road improvements across the North Highlands
affordable housing developments
harbour infrastructure
renewable energy projects supporting offshore wind
might progress according to local priorities rather than national political timetables.
That would not eliminate financial pressures.
But it could reduce one of local government's greatest frustrations: waiting for someone else to say "yes."
The Risks
Greater freedom also means greater responsibility.
Councils making more financial decisions would inevitably carry greater financial risk.
Poor investment choices could become expensive.
Tax differences between neighbouring authorities could widen.
Some councils may prosper while others struggle.
Devolution is never risk-free.
But neither is over-centralisation.
Britain's sluggish infrastructure delivery, persistent housing shortages and growing frustration with local public services suggest the current model is hardly perfect.
A New Political Settlement?
Andy Burnham has argued for years that Britain remains one of the most centralised countries in Europe.
Increasingly, voices from across the political spectrum appear to agree.
The real debate is no longer whether power should leave Westminster.
It is where it should go next.
Should more decisions rest with regional mayors?
Should county councils gain greater powers?
Should Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland devolve more authority to their own local authorities?
Or should Whitehall and perhaps Holyrood continue to believe they know best?
The answer may define how Britain governs itself for the next generation.
Because genuine devolution is not simply about moving power from London to Edinburgh, Manchester or Cardiff.
It is about trusting the people closest to local communities to make the decisions that affect those communities every day.
And that is a conversation whose time may finally have arrived.