Andy Burnham’s devolution plans are all talk and no action

Show summary Hide summary

• What Burnham proposes and why the rhetoric matters
• Why headline growth figures can be misleading
  • Demographic growth vs. economic transformation
• Student housing and the illusion of regeneration
• Comparing city-regions: Manchester isn’t unique
• The social costs hidden behind glossy messaging
• Why devolution alone won’t fix regional inequality
• What leaders should focus on instead
• Author background and perspective

Andy Burnham’s latest bid to national prominence arrives wrapped in a familiar storyline: promise more power to local leaders, seed cash into northern cities, and watch prosperity follow. As he promotes a plan to spread devolution across the UK and even open a so-called “No10 North” in Manchester, the idea is being packaged as a bold corrective to decades of regional neglect.

I want the north to thrive — I grew up and later served as mayor of Middlesbrough (2019–2023), and I’ve seen first-hand how Westminster’s decisions have shaped local lives. That experience makes me skeptical when political narratives simplify complex urban change into neat success stories and mayoral heroics.

What Burnham proposes and why the rhetoric matters

Burnham frames his approach, often called “Manchesterism,” as a blueprint: give metro mayors greater authority and funding, and they’ll deliver jobs, housing, and an economic turnaround for the North. The pitch is politically potent — it paints a picture of regional renewal led by visible, elected figures rather than distant ministers.

But rhetoric and political theater are not the same as durable policy outcomes. When national headlines celebrate single-point metrics or the personality of a mayor, deeper trends and unintended consequences can be overlooked.

Why headline growth figures can be misleading

Greater Manchester has recorded headline economic growth during Burnham’s time in office, and he will rightly point to those statistics on the stump. Yet the underlying drivers of that growth demand scrutiny.

• Population change: Since 2017, Greater Manchester’s population rose by roughly a quarter of a million people — a boost that inflates economic totals without necessarily improving per-person prosperity.
• Migration and demographics: Much of the increase comes from international migration and higher birth rates in migrant communities — positive developments in many respects, but not synonymous with mayoral policy success.
• Aggregate vs. per-capita: Growth measured as a raw percentage of GDP or total output can mask stagnating wages, local job quality, and rising poverty rates.

Demographic growth vs. economic transformation

Adding the equivalent of a mid-sized city — the population growth Greater Manchester has seen is comparable to absorbing another Southampton — will naturally push up headline economic figures even if living standards for long-term residents don’t improve. That distinction matters for voters evaluating whether a mayor’s policies are actually delivering better lives.

Student housing and the illusion of regeneration

Another big factor behind the city’s changing skyline is the surge in student accommodation. City-center towers marketed as part of an urban renaissance often house the expanding student body rather than new tech workers or families purchasing homes.

• Estimates put the student population in Manchester city center into the tens of thousands, creating demand for 20–35 story blocks designed primarily for short-term tenancy.
• Such development drives construction jobs and boosts some local spending, but it doesn’t always translate into long-term, high-paid employment for resident working-class communities.

The takeaway: visible construction and new residential towers are not, by themselves, evidence of broad-based economic renewal.

Comparing city-regions: Manchester isn’t unique

When you compare Greater Manchester with other UK metros, the narrative of mayoral-led exceptionalism weakens. Glasgow and the Bristol city region — neither flaunting a Burnham-style PR operation — post comparable outcomes on key metrics.

That suggests the forces behind modern urban growth are broader than local leadership. International urban renaissance, globalization of services, and long-term shifts in where young people choose to live all play powerful roles.

The social costs hidden behind glossy messaging

Economic snapshots can conceal human realities. In Greater Manchester, several worrying trends have intensified while the “growth” story has been foregrounded:

• Rising child poverty: Child poverty rates have climbed faster than the national average during the mayoralty, hitting the communities least able to weather economic strain.
• Stagnant wages: Local pay levels remain under the national mean, undercutting claims that growth has trickled down to ordinary workers.
• Homelessness and visible deprivation: The scale of rough sleeping and street begging continues to shock visitors and residents alike, with little sign of decisive improvement.

These are not small caveats. For many northern households, the lived experience of hardship flattens any narrative that equates skyline change with better lives.

Why devolution alone won’t fix regional inequality

Devolving powers and funding to metro mayors has intuitive appeal — local leaders can, in theory, tailor solutions. But handing authority to city-region executives is not a silver bullet. Policy design, fiscal levers, and structural national issues all matter:

1. Devolution must be matched with sustained investment that targets poverty reduction, affordable housing, and wage growth rather than purely signaling infrastructure projects.
2. Local growth strategies need to prioritize job quality and inclusion — not just population or GDP increases.
3. Transparent accountability is essential: voters should be able to see who benefits from urban change and who is left behind.

When popularity and PR outpace policy detail, the people who lose out are often the working-class communities these plans supposedly champion.

What leaders should focus on instead

For northern towns and cities to genuinely thrive, political attention must move from image to substance. That means prioritizing policies that address wage stagnation, child poverty, homelessness, and long-term housing affordability while supporting sustainable job creation.

City-region leadership has a role to play, but it should be complementary to national strategies that redistribute opportunities and invest in people rather than only in place-branding.

Author background and perspective

I served as mayor of Middlesbrough from 2019 to 2023 and remain committed to the success of the North. My critique of “Manchesterism” comes from a desire to see practical, equitable policies replace glossy narratives — and from seeing what effective local leadership looks like on everyday streets and in neighborhood communities.

Andy Preston was mayor of Middlesbrough from 2019 until 2023.

You might also like:

• Manchesterism myth: why the idea is a mirage
• Labour safe seats: no constituency is guaranteed
• Islamo-left alliance: are Gorton and Denton making one final push?
• U.S. death rate to overtake birth rate by 2030, report says
• Starmer vs Burnham: UK Labour Party clash over leadership and direction