Devolution is often talked about in a national or urban context. But what might devolution mean for rural England? Jessica Sellick investigates.

When devolution began it was a process designed to decentralise government and give more powers to nations which make up the UK. Powers were transferred from the UK parliament in London to the Welsh Assembly Government in Cardiff, Northern Ireland Assembly in Belfast and the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh.

This process began in 1997 in Scotland and Wales and 1998 in Northern Ireland following public votes. While devolution has been applied in different ways in each nation – to recognise each country’s distinct history, geography, politics and administrative arrangements – what does this devolution process mean for rural England? Jessica Sellick investigates.

The UK government is responsible for national policy on all powers which have not been devolved (known as reserved and excepted powers) which includes areas such as defence and security, employment legislation and even the regulation of activities in outer space!

Over time some of the terminology used has changed from ‘assembly’ to ‘parliament’ and subsequent agreements have been reached leading individual countries to enact their own laws known as ‘measures’ particularly around public spending.

The Scottish Parliament, for example, abolished university tuition fees and prescription charges. While Scotland voted ‘no’ in the independence referendum in September 2014, the UK government is now looking to agree further devolution of powers to Holyrood.

This process has left some taxpayers in England concerned that they are paying for services in other countries that they do not directly benefit from and/or are being omitted from the overall devolution debate. What does this mean for rural England? I offer three points.

Firstly, the idea of devolution in England is not new. Devolution for England was first proposed in 1912 by Winston Churchill (then MP for Dundee) as part of a debate on Home Rule for Ireland. The Redcliffe-Maud Report of 1969 proposed devolving power from central government to eight provinces in England.

This was followed by the Royal Commission on the Constitution recommending the creation of eight English regional assemblies – to have an advisory rather than any legislative role. Following this, Government Office Regions were established (in 1994) and Regional Development Agencies (in 1998).

While much of this infrastructure and references to the word ‘regional’ have been dismantled by the Coalition Government since 2010, the Mckay Commission which reported in March 2013, considered how the House of Commons might deal with legislation which affects only part of the UK.

The report recognised how the governing arrangements for England in the post-devolution era appear to be emerging by default with little differentiation between England and UK wide matters. The report also highlighted the differences (and grievances) of public attitudes in England to devolution.

Secondly, what has happened in England as an alternative to the regional assemblies – and taking up some of the recommendations in the McKay Commission – is the concept of ‘city regions’. While the concept itself is not new and can be traced back to the work of geographers and planners in the 1950s, City regions are now lobbying the UK government for more powers in the form of ‘combined authorities’.

In his autumn statement, the Chancellor appears to have supported this call; confirming his support for a “northern powerhouse” and proposals for a ‘metro mayor’ for Greater Manchester - which became the first combined authority in 2011 – as well as giving them greater control over their finances around issues such as transport and housing.

While ‘rural’ and ‘urban’ are not standalone categories but linked – not least through the flows of people and things between places – recognising the importance of their interdependency has not always been explored in the context of city regions. While some cities and city regions recognise their rural hinterland and the vital contribution the countryside makes to jobs and growth; in other areas this ‘rural’ recognition is missing.

This opens up debates around what the beneficial effects of rural-urban linkages are and how these might be enhanced. All too often the focus urban areas leave a rural blind spot in devolution discussions.

Thirdly, taking account of this, moving away from the big ticket city devolution discussions to a rural context can be done. It is interesting to note how the devolution process has led rural residents to think about the places where they live in new ways that go beyond UK government policy being set in Westminster. Scotland, for example, has a ‘rural parliament’.

This is not a formal part of the Scottish Government or a parliament in the sense of having legislative powers, but it has been developed by the people of Scotland to provide policy makers with improved policy and action to address rural issues. It also informs the European Rural Parliament, which provides a forum for the exchange of ideas and experience between national rural movements and networks.

Going forward, then, how can we too ensure rural does not become a white space in the current dialogue about devolution for England? Watch this space...

Jessica is a researcher/project manager at Rose Regeneration; an economic development business working with communities, Government and business to help them achieve their full potential. She is currently undertaking a European project on ‘social value’ as well as carrying out research for the Lottery on community businesses. Jessica’s public services work includes research for Defra on alternative service delivery and local level rural proofing. She can be contacted by email [email protected] or telephone 01522 521211. Website: http://www.roseregeneration.co.uk/ Twitter: @RoseRegen