It would be a hard task for any minister – no matter how talented – to put out a white paper on local government that lives up to everyone’s expectations. And it is even harder when you’re asked to design a structure, without knowing what tools you’ll have to build it.

Yet despite its unassuming exterior, and accusations of ‘fudging’ from the press and the opposition, Kelly has managed to craft an important statement of intent. Provided that the other pieces of the jigsaw fall into place, the White Paper could serve as a road map for substantial devolution to local government, especially in our biggest city-regions.

So let us read between the lines of the White Paper and focus on the big ideas concealed beneath the Whitehall jargon. The document contains important proposals around four key themes: leadership, city-regions, performance management, and neighbourhoods. Ahead of next summer’s Comprehensive Spending Review, the key test is delivery – and noticeable moves to devolve real power from Government departments to councils across England.

First, the question of local leadership. Government has made no secret of its desire to see stronger executive leadership in councils. At the same time, there’s little consensus on how to make this happen: contrast the Prime Minister’s enthusiasm for elected mayors with the Treasury’s public doubts.

But the White Paper takes an important step forward, mandating four-year leadership terms and offering local authorities a choice between directly-elected mayors, directly-elected executives, or the current model of indirectly-elected leaders (but without the destabilising annual ritual of re-selection).

Second, the future of city-regions. The Government has come a long way in the past year – and now recognises that Britain’s biggest city-regions are the building blocks of the national economy. The white paper used this shift to argue in favour of greater cross-boundary working – while somehow steering clear of offending regional development agencies and their powerful Treasury backers.

Some proposed city-regional powers – such as transport, skills, and planning – are not exclusively in the Department for Communities and Local Government’s gift. And the money to pay for transport infrastructure, training programmes and other priorities depends on the outcomes of the Lyons Inquiry and the Treasury’s in-house review of sub-national economic development. So the White Paper indicated a direction of travel, and trailed important announcements over the next six months.

There is another hurdle for city-regions to overcome. In order to get greater powers, they need to show that their governance arrangements are up to the task. The indications are that none – save perhaps Greater Manchester – have met this crucial requirement. So different city-regions may well proceed at different speeds.

Third, performance management. The cull of nationally-set targets and indicators – slashed from 1,200 to 200 – will bring relief to local authority officers. If we take Ruth Kelly at her word, Whitehall is set to back off, and allow local government to get on with the job. But central government’s track record leaves room for doubt.

Finally, neighbourhoods and communities, the other half of David Miliband’s oft-repeated “double devolution” formula. The devolution of the power to make and enforce bye-laws leaves an important new management tool in the hands of councils. And the creation of neighbourhood charters, Community Calls for Action and other mechanisms is a real effort to re-engage the public in local decision-making. But how these work in practice still remains to be seen.

The White Paper is just the first step. Clarity on some of the biggest questions – including the thorny issue of local revenue-raising powers – will have to wait until after the Lyons Inquiry makes its final report in December. A lot will depend on the next Prime Minister. If he makes devolution a priority, then the ideas in the White Paper could well become reality.