The creation of a Greater London Authority (GLA) in 2000 was a governance revolution – placing a number of critical economic development levers in the hands of an elected, accountable mayor for the first time.

Five years on, Government seems minded to hand over more power to the Mayor. Many observers are convinced that significant new functions and funding streams will be passed to the GLA. So how much change should we realistically expect?

Whitehall officials close to the Review say the ‘Big Four’ issues are skills, housing, planning, and waste. Each is contentious, and each has important implications for the capital’s economy.

Let’s start with skills. England’s biggest city-regions need more control over skills funding – alongside regeneration and transport budgets – in order to promote economic growth.

London already has two out of three – with the London Development Agency and Transport for London both under direct Mayoral control. But the GLA has no say over employment and skills policy. London has five Learning and Skills Councils (LSCs), and eighty four branches of Job Centre Plus – each reporting to Whitehall, not the Mayor.

The key issue is whether Ken gets a brand-new skills agency, or more control over the existing LSCs. We think there is a strong case for devolving control of the adult skills budget, with real financial powers passed from the unelected LSCs to the Mayor and the GLA. This would help join up skills policy across London’s labour market. It would help bring more employers on board. And it would allow the GLA to combine skills and regeneration money to tackle London’s unique employment challenges.

Then there’s housing: a key issue in a city with a notoriously tight and expensive housing market. Ken wants – and looks likely to get – control of the affordable housing budget.

Why? The GLA is better equipped than any Housing Board to design and deliver London’s housing strategy. Housing Boards are good for regions, but lack the detailed knowledge required for city-regions. Giving the GLA control of affordable housing budgets would simplify the institutional landscape. It would also link housing budgets with other regeneration spending. This should help the GLA pull the right levers in the right order. Not surprisingly, planning is the most contentious issue of the lot. The Mayor has, in effect, asked to be both “judge and jury”: he wants to set London’s strategic plan, amend boroughs’ local plans, and to have the final say over individual developments.

The mayor argues that these changes will enable him to implement his London Plan – but at what cost?

We know that investors get put off by delays and uncertainty in the planning system. On the other hand, the planning system should be accountable, and avoid too many layers of approval.

We think that granting the Mayor sweeping new powers to override borough plans and development decisions could carry big risks for London. By pitching the Mayor against the Boroughs, it could make the planning system less efficient. It could also mean big reductions in local accountability. Decisions about Lambeth, Tower Hamlets and Newham need some connection to the people who live there.

However, there are ways to enhance the Mayor’s ability to implement the London Plan without creating a controversial Mayoral “call-in” power. For example, the GLA could become the development control authority for an extremely limited number of strategic sites with overwhelming economic importance – places like the 2012 Olympic Park and White City.

Planning issues are closely linked to the Mayor’s wish for a single, GLA-controlled waste authority. Yet the evidence for a single waste body is hazy – and boroughs are keen to retain their control over the ‘cleaner, safer, greener’ agenda. If there’s no clear gain, then there’s little case for change.

There are also a number of unanswered questions about the future of the London Assembly and the functional bodies that are members of the GLA family. For example, who should chair the Metropolitan Police Authority? And how far should the Assembly’s scrutiny role go?In the end, Whitehall caution may prevail: the capital is likely to get more power, though not much more. But Ministers also see London as the trailblazer for core cities like Manchester and Birmingham. There is already an empowerment gap between the capital and Britain’s other big city-regions. With a Local Government White Paper and the much-anticipated Lyons Inquiry on the horizon, we may soon see more powers in more places – and maybe more Mayors too.