Here at Leapwise, we draw on a network of experienced Associates to supplement the expertise of our in-house consultancy team.
In this associates blog, Nicola Hughes outlines what the government’s devolution agenda means for policing and crime. With 20 years’ experience working with both central and local government, Nicola argues that control of policing governance will give new mayors an unparalleled ability to join up public services in their regions. But careful design and preparation are needed to help them avoid the political pitfalls and costly risks that the transfer of policing and crime powers also entails.
A real devolution revolution? – Nicola’s view
Government is promising a ‘devolution revolution’ in England, shifting more power away from Westminster to democratically elected mayors, building on the examples of London, Greater Manchester and elsewhere.
It’s not the first time that government of any colour has attempted to decentralise.
Still, the approach set out in the recent devolution white paper is genuinely bold – doing away with backroom ‘devolution deals’ in favour of a set menu of powers for new mayors and tying devolution in with sweeping reforms to the shape of local government.
Much of the narrative around devolution has been about economic growth. Meanwhile, local government is preoccupied with how to bring disparate district councils together into cohesive unitaries.
Public safety has been less high profile, but a major shift is underway. Starting with five of the areas that have been shortlisted for the devolution priority programme, more existing Police and Crime Commissioners will see their powers and responsibilities moved over to new mayors, supported by newly created organisations, potentially as soon as May 2026. These are Essex, Sussex, Hampshire & IOW, Cumbria, where the proposed geographies overlap with corresponding Police Forces, and Norfolk & Suffolk, where one mayoralty will oversee two Forces.
More areas will undoubtedly follow. The government wants mayors to be responsible for PCC and Fire and Rescue functions by default. In the long term, this may mean harmonising messy public service boundaries and potentially reconfiguring constabularies.
The political stakes
I’ve led projects on collaboration in small, rural district councils, bigger county councils, London boroughs and many national government departments. They all strive for the same elusive goal of ‘joined-up public services’. How do you stop young people from disadvantaged backgrounds committing crime in the first place? How do you get different parts of the system – health, housing, economy – to work together instead of competing for budget?
Combining powers through one high-profile and accountable mayor could be a big part of the answer. Political oversight of policing will give mayors the levers to help join up strategy and build the safe communities that are a prerequisite for economic prosperity.
Public safety comes with big political risks too. Most politicians are up for cutting the ribbon at a fancy new infrastructure project. Dealing with the fallout of a hate crime in a divided community or holding a powerful Chief Constable to account when victims are increasingly unhappy with their service is different. Westminster politicians I’ve worked with would often describe jobs in the Home Office as a ‘poisoned chalice’ – when things go wrong, the stakes are high. A serious incident can happen at any time.
Andy Burnham was just days into his first mayoral term when the Manchester Arena bombing happened. So would-be mayors need to get to grips with policing and crime now: understand the historic and current issues in their forces, know what responsibilities they will be inheriting and have an outline plan.
4 lessons for devolution trailblazers
Our recent project for the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners (APCC) looked at how local areas can make a success of transferring police and crime governance responsibilities to new mayoral authorities. Four big lessons stood out.
Lesson 1: Learn from experience
Central government, in keeping with the localist spirit, will not tell mayors or the teams setting up new offices how to run things. But areas in the devolution priority programme can and should support each other as they navigate change. In Greater Manchester, York & North Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire and London, PCC powers are exercised by the mayor already. These areas, each with its different set-ups and regional dynamics, offer great insights into how to make it work and what pitfalls to avoid.
Transferring functions and staff from a PCC’s office into a mayoralty – especially one that doesn’t even exist yet – is not easy, but the people who have been part of such transitions can offer a wealth of insight on how to go about it.
Lesson 2: Prepare for the big decisions
Ultimately, it is new mayors, supported by their advisers and Chief Execs, who will decide on the shape and vision for the mayoral authority. Those involved in setting up mayoral offices need to get thinking and planning on important decisions now, so that mayors can hit the ground running. Decisions like whether there will be a deputy mayor for policing and crime, what the schemes of delegation will look like, where different support roles will sit and how far policing and crime teams should be integrated, structurally and culturally, into the organisation.
Leapwise’s work, developed in partnership with the APCC, Local Government Association and Association of Policing and Crime Chief Executives,sets out considerations for big decisions, including organisational design, HR, ICT, infrastructure and governance.
Lesson 3: Bring people with you
At Leapwise, we’ve seen time and again that even in the best-managed processes, change is hard on individuals. For the politically neutral officers currently supporting PCCs, transition to a mayoral model means uncertainty, anxiety about jobs and a massive culture change as they shift from being a small, established, independent team to one of many in a newly formed, large organisation that is still finding its sense of direction (not to mention hastily sorting out security passes and email logins).
Previous transitions have left some teams feeling like an afterthought or a bolt-on. Offices of PCCs need to be engaged in the transition process now so that their expertise can be heard, and they can play an active, constructive role in supporting the mayoral vision. As one of our interviewees reflected, good governance on paper is meaningless if leaders don’t win the hearts and minds of the people who will deliver their goals.
Lesson 4: Don’t forget the frontline
Among the busy work of drafting new constitutions and figuring out TUPE arrangements, there’s a risk of forgetting day-to-day policing services and their impact on the public.
Operational policing and fire and rescue services should continue as normally as possible while political and structural changes happen: Chiefs can’t be left with a decision-making vacuum during transitions. And police and fire services need a seat at the table as local governments engineer new authorities so that they can ensure their roles and needs are reflected, with minimal disruption to strong existing partnership arrangements.
Seizing the devolution opportunity
The ultimate goal of devolution must be to deliver better public services. That means high-performing police and crime teams supporting political leaders to make informed decisions, use their funding power and political leverage to deliver preventative, joined-up community safety, and hold the police to account robustly.
The devolution agenda presents a significant opportunity, but we have learned from past transitions that achieving it is often fraught and messy. Our work serves as a starting point for local areas to understand the decisions and considerations they will need to address and design, in collaboration with policing partners, effective systems.
To learn more about devolution and policing, get in touch with Leapwise below.
