Has London's recent election battle signalled the dawn of the city mayor?
When the recent local election results were announced, all eyes were on Boris and Ken in the capital. And I don't think that this was just a case of a London-centric news agenda. The London mayoral battle attracted 2.5m voters - nearly half of all Londoners (45 per cent) to the polling stations, up a third from 2004. Meanwhile, turnout in local elections outside the capital was a more disappointing 35 per cent.
The higher turnout in the capital was a clear endorsement of the mayoral system. It showed that strong leaders with magnetic personalities excite and engage people. It also showed that voters are more likely to engage in local contests where real, strategic powers are on the table for the winner - as was uniquely the case in London. If the main political parties want to tap into this local political engagement, transform the relationship between cities and Westminster, and give cities the power to grow their economies, they should back big city mayors outside London.
But it would be misleading to suggest that momentum behind elected mayors has been fuelled by the drama of the London mayoral play-off alone. It's been building for some time. Two years ago, the Centre for Cities called for directly-elected mayors with strategic powers across entire city-regions. At the time, the idea was met with resistance in places like Greater Manchester and Greater Birmingham. But the tide may now be shifting. Over the past few months there has been a new buzz around the idea of elected mayors. Government and opposition heavyweights alike have been flirting with the idea, recognising that a powerful elected chief could provide strategic vision, strong leadership and greater accountability.
Hazel Blears has been exploring what an elected mayor would look like - and likes the idea of a "single big player" in cities and towns outside the capital, although she has not yet set out which powers she thinks could be devolved from the centre. IPPR in a recent report called for an elected mayor for every English town and city. And Michael Heseltine is expected to call for "whole city" elected mayors in his upcoming Cities Task Force report for the Conservatives. David Cameron, too, has mentioned elected city mayors in a range of policy and campaign speeches.
But does all this talk of city mayors just amount to the latest political bandwagon, or is there substance behind the rhetoric?
There is real evidence that elected mayors work. Just look at the Mayor of London, who enjoys real devolved strategic economic powers and was able to play a key role, for example, in securing funding for Crossrail and winning the Olympic bid. Londoners engaged with the recent election because they knew the result was more than just a message to the main parties. Unlike other local elections, where voters often give a drubbing to the party in power nationally, there were real issues at stake in London - where the Mayor has the potential to use his devolved powers to make a significant impact on the capital's economy.
Alongside the economic gap between the capital and the regions, there's also a growing "power gap" between London and other cities. The unique powers of the London mayor - over areas like transport, housing, skills and regeneration - helped Ken Livingstone, and now Boris Johnson, to develop a specific London-focused approach to economic development.
No other city leader has anything like the clout of the London mayor. A new generation of directly elected big city mayors could help redress this. And in an increasingly shaky economic climate, mayors could help steer cities through choppy economic waters - by taking tough and strategic financial decisions.
It's important to think carefully about whether it's sensible to install mayors in every English town and city, as IPPR suggests. The Centre for Cities would rather see mayors charged with developing ‘real economies' - not just single local districts. There's a danger that single-authority mayors will be no more than rebranded local council leaders with ‘personality'. Future mayors need to focus on economic growth, not just on delivering services, and location as ever is vital. We think that in the long term, elected mayors would have the biggest impact across our largest city-regions like Greater Manchester, Tyneside and Greater Bristol.
The path to city mayors will not be smooth - there's resistance from many existing city leaders for a start, whose position would be threatened - and who currently have no incentive to risk their position. But there are real opportunities too, for all sides. We'd like to see Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg put these local power struggles aside by offering some real strategic powers to Greater Manchester and other city regions in their next general election manifestos. If all three political parties want to re-engage in a meaningful way with the British public, they need more mayors in big cities outside London - and they need to make the economic case for doing so.
A version of this article first appeared in Public Servant.
