How Andy Burnham has exposed the SNP as enemies of true devolution – Brian Wilson

Mayors in England will be able to keep a share of income tax generated in their areas. Under a new “local first” principle, Burnham will instruct ministers to justify why powers should remain in Whitehall rather than be devolved.

There will be far greater flexibility for local authorities to act according to their own priorities rather than be bound by the ring-fencing of funds by central government. They will be able to take out loans to fund major projects that previously needed Treasury approval. And so on.

READ MORE: Andy Burnham's stance on North Sea oil helps get new Prime Minister off to good start

‘Scotland is our localism’

The question raised in stark form for Scotland is whether all this will pass us by, while “devolution” continues to be defined as the accumulation of powers in Edinburgh. Will the idea of then devolving them within Scotland, to our cities, regions and communities, remain anathema in both theory and practice?

A former luminary of the SNP summed up their approach when he said, “Scotland is our localism” – and that is the basis on which they have proceeded. It is the antithesis of the local first principle, based on tight control from Edinburgh or through a sprawling network of house-trained quangos.

In many aspects of Scottish life, that is a discredited mentality which starves local government of powers and takes decision-making further away from communities. Money is sprinkled around from innumerable funds while the core resources that councils need, to maintain services and fabric, are eroded.

If town centres are falling apart before people’s eyes or hospitality businesses are shutting their doors because they can’t afford the business rates, why should there not be flexibility for councils to respond to local needs? Empowerment rather than restriction should be the watchword.

READ MORE: With the right leader there is still a chance to resurrect Scottish Labour

Ignored by Edinburgh

“By shifting power, funding and decision-making closer to people, the changes will give every part of the country the tools to create strong local economies, improve public services and shape its own future,” said Burnham. Why is it so difficult for these same sentiments to be heard in Scotland?

Burnham says he knows what it’s like to be ignored by Westminster, from his experience as mayor of Greater Manchester. Every part of Scotland knows what it’s like to be ignored by Edinburgh but there is no channel for change as long as the centralising mindset prevails.

How much longer will even the SNP’s own people in local government remain acquiescent when they see what is unfolding south of the Border? Already, it amazes me that Glasgow, which has much in common with Manchester, has not been embarrassed into revolt, when the contrast between directions of travel has been so extreme.

If there was any capacity for creative thinking in St Andrew’s House, they might consider getting ahead of the game with their own ideas about how to empower every part of Scotland. Instead, they are more likely to be strategising how to turn this into a conflict, if Burnham does anything to bypass them.

It’s about personalities as well as power. When Scotland had strong regional authorities and semi-autonomous public bodies, they were often led by serious political or business figures who were unafraid to challenge government and create their own headlines. Is there anybody in Scotland today who answers to that description? I hear the silence.

READ MORE: Get ready for 'a very rude awakening': Andy Burnham is about to shake things up

Millions in heating oil help not delivered

Let me offer one modest example of how instinctively hostile the Scottish Government is to local empowerment. At the start of the Iran War, the price of heating oil spiked and the UK government announced a fund to help alleviate costs for the affected consumers, who are disproportionately in rural areas.

Scotland’s share from Whitehall was £4.6 million which the Scottish government denounced as “insufficient” and announced that they would put in £5.4m to create a Scottish fund of £10m. Favourable headlines; job done. But what happened next?

The obvious agencies to get urgently needed money to the 32,000 Scottish households affected were local councils, who know their areas and people; a straightforward opportunity to apply the local first principle.

Instead, Edinburgh gave the job to an outfit called Advice Direct Scotland. The result is that four months on, barely £1m has been paid out and two-thirds of claims rejected. The pretence of concern for those affected has been subordinated to an inflexible, centralised bureaucracy which has failed them.

The list of examples is endless and we all see them through our local prism. For instance, contempt for the local first principle runs through the ongoing ferries debacle and denial of any role for local accountability. As far as I can trace, Scotland is the only country out of those with comparable ferry networks which runs it on that basis – and the outcome is catastrophic.

Redefining devolution

All of this was predictable when Holyrood was created and particularly once the SNP took over. It needed things to do in order to justify the vastly expanded army of ministers, special advisers, civil servants and assorted hangers-on.

While they might dream of having a full-blown state to run, the easiest interim option was to take powers away from elsewhere within Scotland – which is exactly what has continued to happen.

Andy Burnham says he wants to empower every postcode in the country. It’s far from obvious how he can achieve this in Scotland, in face of a contradictory philosophy in Edinburgh. Yet there’s no postcode in Scotland which could not do better if more powers were held closer to it.

If that was accepted as a first principle, then an awful lot of change for the better would flow towards places which need it most. But to get there, ‘devolution’ has to be re-defined. Repeat after me. Scotland is not a ‘localism’.