Regional Governance in England: A Changing Role for the Government’s Regional Offices? (original) (raw)

2008, Public Administration

Political devolution has transformed constitutional arrangements in the Celtic nations. By contrast, in the English regions a less radical approach has been adopted, but the outcome has been a strengthening of the institutions of regional governance. A key feature has been the enhanced responsibilities of the Government's Offices for the Regions, which have been encouraged to build on their traditional administrative functions and adopt a more strategic role. This article explores the Offices' contribution to regional and local governance. Our central argument is that although increasingly expected to act as a bridgehead between national and sub-national government and a focus for regional policy coordination, their potential role in filling the missing gap in English regional governance has not yet been fully grasped. democracy or some form of regional representation' (Cabinet Office and DTLR 2002, p. 36). Despite this outcome, 'the Government are committed to the development of fitfor-purpose regional institutions and to continue their clear policy to devolve and decentralize power to regions, where this adds value' (Cooper 2006). This is underpinned by the view that regional institutions bring a unique strategic perspective to policy development and investment decisions, that economic differences between regions demand different forms of policy intervention and that some issues, which cross local authority boundaries, require a coordinated response. Furthermore, regional institutions have demonstrated an increasing capacity for policymaking, which suggests that 'bottom-up' regionalism will continue to grow. While falling short of institutional reforms introduced elsewhere in the UK these developments can be viewed as evidence of a recalibration in the functions and relationships between and within territorial scales of government and the creation of a more protean, multi-tiered form of governance (Stirling 2005). Regional actors are increasingly expected to operate within flatter inter-organizational structures that cross public, private and community sector boundaries, opening the prospect of a more holistic approach to regional management (Rhodes et al 2003; Koppenjan and Klijn 2004; Rhodes 2000). Increasing weight is also being placed on boosting the vertical links between the centre and regional and local agencies and regional actors have been urged to develop and refine their governance capacity and cooperate to maximize their influence in Whitehall. Central departments, too, are increasingly expected to take account of the views of regional stakeholders in determining national policies and spending programmes (Flinders 2002). 'The Government believes that when decisions interdepartmental Regional Coordination Unit (RCU), initially attached to the Cabinet Office, but transferred to the new Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) in 2002, was also established. It would administer and monitor the GO network, provide a channel of communication between GOs and the centre, facilitate a more corporate approach to regional issues across departments and oversee and coordinate Area Based Initiatives (ABIs) (Regional Coordination Unit 2003). Furthermore, instead of being accountable to separate departments, GO Regional Directors would report corporately to the RCU's Director General. Despite these measures, regional and local officials continued to struggle to integrate separate government initiatives dealing with the same problem or the same client group (Regional Coordination Unit 2002). Moreover, although more spending departments were drawn into regional working, Whitehall's engagement in the GOs remains uneven. Apart from the small public health teams collocated in GOs, the Department of Health (DoH) has no regional operations. In 1998, a review of its executive agencies led the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) to establish 'Regional Cultural Consortiums' and increase its GO presence, but staff numbers remain small. Similarly, the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) and its predecessors largely bypassed the regional tier in favour of sub-regional Learning and Skills Council (LSC) offices and only in 2006 were the department's GO-based activities fully integrated. The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) also resisted establishing a GO presence until 2001, by which time MAFF had been merged in a ministerial reshuffle into a new department, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Although the Home Office had a presence in the GOs since 1994, this was limited to a Table 1: Expenditure (£million) managed or influenced by Government Offices,