Reflections on centralisation and the problems of the British state

The announcement by the government that various civil service departments are to move from London to various parts of the 'regions' appears to be an imporatnt shift in thinking regarding State intervention. Government departments can stimulate local economic activity, which may well be the rationale behind this policy. At the same time, however, under the aegis of Lord Frost, the government is contemplating deregulation initiatives. I say 'contemplating' because the government is unsure about its future direction. As I have remarked in previous blogposts, this is a time of ideological fluidity for the Conservative Party. Johnson, a consummate ideological shapeshifter, is needed by the Conservatives because he embodies these contradictions without overcoming them. The Conservatives are uneasily aware that their ideological predilections will upset voters in the so-called 'red wall' constituencies, and militate against their promises to 'level up' and 'build back better.'

However, this policy does not tackle two persistent problems of the British state, namely, its overcentralisation and the poor coordination of various parts of government. This problem has been particularly exposed durin g the pandemic, when central government issued edicts to metropolitan and local authorities without consultation or coordination. Gordon Brown's proposal to replace the House of Lords with a Senate of the Regions might be relevant here, as it would helped to institutionalise such coordination.