As the progress of the Local Government Reorganisation rumbles on, it seems timely to reflect on how the new combined authorities can learn from the experience of one of the UK’s oldest, London. As we approach what will be a very chaotic set of local elections in London, it remains a mixed success. On the one hand, the city has benefited from a mayoralty that allows clear, defined leadership with a wide array of devolved powers; on the other, over several key metrics, housing being a key one, the capital is still struggling to make a dent in some thorny policy areas. 

Despite delays to the LGR, the changes to local government in England are substantial. In short: 

Unitarisation 

• All two-tier areas to submit proposals for reorganisation by Autumn 2025 
• Smaller unitaries to develop proposals for reorganisation
• Unitary Authorities to have a minimum c.500,000 population 
• New unitary authorities to be delivered in April 2027 and 2028 

Strategic authorities 

• Partnerships that bring more than one local authority together over a large geography 
• Combined population of 1.5m or more 

Devolution priority programme 

• Plans for strategic authority and unitarisation should be complementary, with devolution as the overarching priority 
• Inaugural mayoral elections in May 2026 

To date, 23 local authorities have requested that the Secretary of State postpone local elections in May next year, with a view to releasing capacity that will facilitate reorganisation. It’s easy to get lost in the process, however, and whilst this is certainly an important story, there is more to be explored following the experience of already devolved authorities. 

What did London get right? 

Well, quite a lot actually. Firstly, having a clearly democratically accountable Mayor has given Londoners a clearer voice at a local level. Whether that is from transport, crime or strategic planning, even when Londoners have disagreed with Ken, Boris and Sadiq respectively, they always had someone to blame. 

Secondly, despite its financial challenges and sometimes monolithic approach, having an integrated transport system under the auspices of TfL remains an enviable and challenging goal for every budding strategic authority. 

Strategic planning remains a central part of what has made London an autonomous city. The London Plan creates stability and security at a city-wide level for developers and local authorities. Despite the present challenges in London’s housing market, it remains a core strength of the city. 

Devolution has helped build a political identity for London nationally and internationally. At a time when the reputation of London is frequently being questioned by a range of news sources, a target for further right-leaning media, the office of the Mayor and the status of the capital have created a unified political identity that has been dynamic to public opinion. Better yet, devolution has, if anything, uplifted, rather than diminished, London’s constituent boroughs. Local identity and local politics remain a hallmark of London; rather than having fallen away in importance, the London Boroughs remain a fundamental aspect of civic life. 

What can other authorities learn? 

This political identity has been beneficial to other regions that have followed in London’s example. The West Midlands Combined Authority and Manchester Combined Authority have benefited from the big political names that accompany a devolution deal. Both Andy Burnham and Andy Street (former mayor) have used their office to help represent regional needs at the national level. This isn’t something to be dismissed; political presence has helped raise the combined authorities’ needs up the political agenda in Whitehall.  

At a local level, it has facilitated the delivery of strategic spatial frameworks and the creation of integrated transport networks. Greater Manchester’s Bee Network provides the blueprint for combined authorities as they grow and develop. 

So what? 

The devolution journey for unitary authorities will be a long one, and whilst there are a range of hurdles many county and district authorities will have to contend with, the day-to-day drama of reorganisation can obscure the potential benefits that are lurking just over the horizon. London and the more established combined authorities have created institutionally strong local government partnerships with a history of substantial achievements. None of this is to say the journey will be easy, only that there are real positives to seize on the other side of reorganisation.