Many commentators have dubbed the recent Local Elections in the UK as a watershed moment.

Reform UK and Liberal Democrats beat the two traditional main parties, the Labour Party and the Conservatives, to first and second place with both taking control of several county councils and unitary authorities. Meanwhile, of the 6 Mayoral elections, Reform UK took impressive victories in Greater Lincolnshire and Hull & East Yorkshire to defeat the Conservatives and Labour Party. 

Political commentators across the UK have been very quick to extrapolate implications for national politics from these local elections. Some have focused on the impact the success of Reform UK has on Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s policy platform and the future of the Labour Party. 

While such analysis is valid, the immediacy at which commentators are quick to analyse the local elections purely through the lens of national politics may demonstrate the issue at hand.

Specifically, might such analysis speak against the very point of a greater focus on devolution in UK politics? The steps towards devolution in the UK has not furthered any sense of localism but has instead reasserted the primacy of national politics.

The Devolution Era

The last few years and decades have seen the UK’s political system fragment further and further to gradually disseminate power away from Westminster. This has seen the devolution of power to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and the establishment of directly elected Mayors across England. 

The current Labour Government has looked to build upon this through their English Devolution White Paper, published in December 2024.  This plan will effectively mark the shift towards unitary councils and extend political devolution to the whole of England with the ambition of everyone in the country being covered by an elected mayor – much like those which already exist in large urban areas like London, Manchester and Liverpool and so on.

The logic for such devolution is quite clear. Its roots stem from the rationale often given in political philosophy for individual autonomy: that individuals know best about themselves and therefore, should be the authors of their own life. 

Applying this to devolution, ‘local decision makers are more likely to know what policies will be most appropriate for their area’, as referenced by the Institute for Government. This will allow for tailored policy-making to local areas, such policies might then boost economic growth and address regional inequalities – two of the many issues that currently riddles the UK’s economy.

Moreover, in the face of rising economic globalisation, some believe that we need to see greater political devolution to local communities to increase political accountability in an age where communities are increasingly subject to the whim of international economics – ala take back control arguments from the Brexit referendum.

A Missed Opportunity

However, as encapsulated by the myriad of ‘hot takes’ from political commentators seeking to derive storylines for national politics from local elections, the last few years of devolution may instead represent a missed opportunity to properly cement localism as a force in and of itself rather than simply a byproduct of national politics. 

While these reforms will shift some powers towards local areas, they won’t shift the dial towards the importance of localism in and of itself. 

Instead, the expansion of mayoral and local elections to every area in the UK only reasserts the primacy of many of the misguided assumptions of the Westminster Model – that democracy is best served by representative democracy and strong party politics. Thereby, such expansion devolution asserts many of the concerns of the Westminster Model rather than acting as an escape from national politics. 

This is encapsulated by concerns about the expertise of these democratically elected representatives. A recent investigation by The Guardian found that the 10 councils which Reform UK won do not have any ‘low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs)’ despite Reform Chair, Zia Yusuf, claiming that the party would immediately begin ‘large-scale reversal’ of LTN’s in all of the councils Reform UK won – this seems to contract the underlying rationale of political devolution: that local decision makers know best. 

This is coupled with concerns around general political engagement in local elections as voter turnout in local elections has not exceeded 40% in a non-General Election year in the 21^st Century. Meanwhile, turnout for a mayoral election has never exceeded 47%.

This begs the question of whether the next stage for devolution is a more radical rethink to pursue real localism rather than simply deepen the trajectory we are on. 

Rethinking Devolution

This could start with the removal of strong party politics from local elections – should all candidates be independent? Or might we rethink the value of representative democracy in local government? Simply foisting more and more elections on voters in the Westminster vein does not seem like a solution to increase engagement in local elections. Therefore, should we consider alternative systems like lottocracy to energise individuals and make citizens the local decision makers who know best?  

These solutions have their own drawbacks. If we pursue lottocracy, could local politics become more suspect to the feelings and prejudices of individuals – see the trial of Socrates for a neat encapsulation of this drawback.

Nonetheless, only with a radical rethink of devolution will localism become a force in and of itself and allow us to reap its benefits, rather than act as a simple byproduct of national politics.