(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Burnham’s Radical Devolution Plan [1] ['Greg Dworkin', 'Citizen Earth'] Date: 2026-07-31 Britain just got a lot more federal. On 31 July 2026, Andy Burnham’s government published “Rewiring the State,” a devolution plan that would make even American federalism advocates jealous. In a single policy document, the UK is attempting to transfer vast amounts of power from Westminster to regional mayors, creating a governance model that looks far more like the United States than Britain currently does. For those following UK politics from across the Atlantic, here’s what you need to know: this is radical. And it reveals something important about what happens when governments stop listening to people. The Crisis That Created The Opportunity Burnham didn’t invent this out of nowhere. His devolution agenda is a response to years of regional inequality, sluggish economic growth, and public frustration with Westminster. Britain spent 40 years concentrating power in London. Local leaders had budgets but no real power. Schools, hospitals, police forces, transport systems, all answered to Westminster. A mayor in Manchester couldn’t make strategic decisions about their own region. Money flowed from London as grants, with Westminster calling the shots. The result: the North fell behind. London and the South East pulled further ahead. Public services operated in silos instead of coordinating. And people got angry. Burnham’s diagnosis: Westminster is the problem. His solution: get Westminster out of the way. What’s Actually Changing Education. Currently, Westminster controls curriculum, qualifications, and funding. Under devolution, regions design their own 16-19 education pathways. Manchester can train workers for manufacturing. The South West can focus on tourism. London can specialise in finance and tech. No more one-size-fits-all. Money. This is huge. Starting 2027, councils keep business rates locally. Starting 2028, regions retain a share of income tax raised in their area. No more sending money to Westminster and hoping for grants back. Mayors have direct incentive to grow their region, they benefit from success. Services. Health, policing, transport, housing, education, all coordinate under one mayor. A person struggling with unemployment, housing instability, and mental health gets coordinated support, not siloed bureaucracy. Strategic Authorities. Every region gets a directly elected mayor leading a strategic authority. These mayors have real power: they control funding, set priorities, and coordinate services. Why This Matters For Pgogressives Here’s what’s fascinating from a left-wing perspective: Burnham is proving that “devolution” and “localism” don’t have to mean right-wing decentralisation. They don’t have to mean austerity or privatisation. Burnham’s devolution is explicitly designed to: ✓ Reduce regional inequality ✓ Give local communities say in policy ✓ Empower democratic accountability ✓ Coordinate public services ✓ Invest long-term in local economies This is progressive federalism. It’s the kind of localism that the American left should be thinking about, not as a threat to national standards, but as a way to deliver better outcomes and democratic participation. The Risks But Burnham’s vision isn’t a sure thing. Capacity. Do local leaders have skills to manage this? The government admits it doesn’t. They’re planning secondments from Westminster. But building institutional capacity takes time. Inequality. Will devolution advantage already-prosperous regions while struggling areas fall further behind? The government hasn’t fully answered this. Coordination. Some issues (energy, rail, motorways) span mayoral boundaries. How does coordination happen when each mayor has maximum autonomy? Political Risk. If things go wrong locally, voters blame the mayor. But if the national economy is weak, is that really the mayor’s fault? The system could face backlash if implementation is imperfect. The Bigger Picture Burnham’s devolution plan reflects something the American left understands: when people feel unheard by distant government, they lose faith in democracy itself. Burnham is betting that bringing power closer to people will restore trust. The alternative, keeping everything centralised in Westminster while regional inequality grows and public services deteriorate, leads to Reform UK. To anti-establishment backlash. To erosion of democratic institutions. Burnham thinks the solution is more democracy, not less. More local power, not more Westminster control. More accountability, not more bureaucracy. Whether he’s right, we’ll know by 2029 when voters see whether devolved regions actually deliver better outcomes. For progressives in America watching Britain, there’s a lesson: federalism and localism aren’t inherently right-wing. They can be tools for progressivism too, if they’re designed to reduce inequality, empower communities, and improve democratic accountability. Burnham’s trying to prove it. Read the full analysis in my blog: politicsphere.co.uk under Westminster section [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2026/7/31/800077795/community/burnhams-radical-devolution-plan/ Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/