The best 25th birthday present for the GLA would be more devolution
25 years since the GLA’s creation, London has made major strides in devolved policy areas, particularly in transport, but now urgently needs more fiscal powers and a formalised partnership between boroughs and central government, says Antonia Jennings
Trailblazing. The first of its kind. A UK leader in regional devolution settlements. All phrases which have been used to describe the GLA Act.
A brief history lesson – in 1998, Londoners had the opportunity to vote in a referendum. The question was “Are you in favour of the government’s proposals for a Greater London Authority, made up of an elected mayor and a separately elected assembly?” Almost three quarters of Londoners voted yes.
Ken Livingstone, leader of the Greater London Council the body that preceded the GLA, was elected as Mayor on 4 May 2000. Shortly after, on 3 July, was the date of his inauguration. Twenty-five years later – a lot has been achieved.
Transport is the sector in which London has the greatest amount of devolved power, and boasts the strongest devolution successes in the capital. We’ve seen innovations such as contactless payments pioneered through the Oyster Card. The development of the Elizabeth Line created an estimated 200,000 new office jobs, 75 per cent funded by London itself. The devolution of the North and East train services to Transport for London increased ridership by 80 per cent.
Successes lie outside of transport as well. In housing, we’ve seen the proportion of affordable housing per housing scheme rise from 25 per cent in 2011 to 37 per cent in 2022. Meanwhile, even though the Adult Education Budget is only partly devolved to the capital, since its delegation the GLA saw enrolments rise significantly more than in non-devolved areas.
Yet – London’s devolution should not be seen as a done deal. With 25 years of delivery under its belt, there remain significant areas of fragmentation.
Take the Metropolitan Police as an example. Decision making powers over the met are split between the Home Secretary and the Mayor of London – with the Home Office providing £3.4bn (75 per cent) of the budget, while the Mayoral share sits at £1.2bn (25 per cent) in 2025/26. Over the past 25 years, the dial has shifted ever more towards the Mayor ‘topping up’ the Met Police budget – and to many, the jurisdiction over the Met lies symbolically with the Mayor of London. Here, councils across the capital alongside the GLA are calling for greater powers to meaningfully tackle the mistrust within the police service – especially when it comes to violence against women and girls.
Health is another example. In 2017, we saw the NHS, the GLA and London Councils sign a memorandum of understanding with central Government, where certain aspects of health and social care were devolved to the capital. Yet, we’re still miles away from the level of devolved power Greater Manchester has received in healthcare, which includes decision-making, some budgetary control and additional investment. Health inequalities are best tackled at their root, through community engagement and understanding of local contexts. To replicate some of the successes in Greater Manchester, and deepen work already taking place in the capital, we need local councils fully resourced and equipped with powers to tackle their localised public health challenges.
Following the 2025 Spending Review, London has received confirmation that it will be ‘caught up’ with the funding structure provided to Greater Manchester and the West Midlands. In Autumn of 2024, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands received integrated funding settlements – allowing them to set their own internal budgets rather than being reliant on central government grants. It has now been confirmed that as of 2026, London will also receive this integrated settlement. While the news itself is welcome, it’s a small step towards the level of fiscal devolution required in the capital.
This is despite a clear case for fiscal devolution being pitched by the London Finance Commission ten years ago. They set out ideas for devolved property taxes, retention of business rates and the possibility of a proportion of income tax being devolved to the capital. London currently retains a mere seven per cent of its taxes, a sharp contrast to New York’s 50 per cent. To retain our status as a global competitor, we need fiscal devolution to the capital. Unlocking new funds for local government could push through vital projects across multiple sectors – from tackling worklessness, to retrofitting our housing. Without the financial backing or flexibility of budgets, these projects fall to the sidelines. Retaining the status quo here does not mean nothing changes for the capital; to the contrary, our current devolution arrangement almost ensures the necessary investment list for London grows.
Fiscal devolution
With fiscal devolution a necessary next step, the question is: how do we convince national government that we as a city can reliably, effectively and productively utilise the money we retain?
One option is through codifying the relationship between local and city government. London is the only English devolved power not held directly accountable by its local boroughs. To provide a framework for shared decision-making between some aspects of the Mayor’s remit and London’s borough councils could be the crucial next step to convincing national government of our fiscal devolution asks.
Londoners are on board with this plan – 62 per cent of Londoners stated, if London is given greater control over funding of public services, houses and jobs, they would support the Mayor and borough councils having to work together to make decisions, according to our polling with data partner Savanta. This sentiment in favour of local government persists throughout the polling.
When asked, Londoners stated they had most trust in local government to act in the interests of themselves and their communities (32 per cent), followed by city government and the mayor (21 per cent), with national government in last place (15 per cent). When asked about decisions over tax and spend, 42 per cent of Londoners were in favour of their local council or the Mayor having greater control, with only 25 per cent being opposed.
So – what does this mean for devolution to the capital? Firstly, the next steps of devolution in the capital must formalise the relationship between the boroughs and the GLA. This strengthened relationship will allow a strong basis from which to pitch ourselves to national government.
Secondly, fiscal devolution is a must. With local government finances on their knees, fiscal devolution done well could unlock substantial capital while being fiscally neutral on day one. London’s proved itself with the devolved powers it’s been given thus far – let us prove ourselves once more.
Antonia Jennings is CEO at Centre for London