Main image above courtesy of LDRS

Below are the presentations and opinions put forward by the panel of speakers, followed by a summary of the public discussion and questions that followed.   You can request a pdf copy by email HERE.

Or scan this code:

 

Introduction.

After the General Election, what does the future hold for Yorkshire? That was the question posed by The Yorkshire Society, in partnership with University of Hull, at an open forum on the options for the future governance of Yorkshire at the Yorkshire Museum on Friday 31 July.

The event, a prelude to the Yorkshire Day Civic Celebrations the following day, was planned to influence and provide insight for all political parties and especially the new government following the recent General Election.

The panel of both cross-party and nonpolitical experts each spoke on how they see the future of governance of Yorkshire. The public audience of about 50 people had an opportunity to have their voices heard, ask questions and discuss all the options presented in a lively session. The panel presentations and the subsequent questions and discussions are reproduced here.

By bringing all the options together for public scrutiny and debate, we hoped this would be a landmark event when it comes to the future governance of Yorkshire, one that allows a consensus to form which then influences political decisions in the years to come. The plan, therefore, is to build on this event in the coming months.

Phil Bell, Chief Executive, The Yorkshire Society

***** 

A message from the Mayor of York & North Yorkshire David Skaith.

While I am not able to attend today’s event, I would like to pass on my thanks to the organisers for hosting this debate to discuss devolution. For York and North Yorkshire, we are off to a positive start on our devolution journey. We have support from Government and there is great work taking place between Mayors. The York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority has been established and we’re working with partners across the Region as we deliver our Region’s devolution deal.

David Skaith

*****

Chairman’s Welcome and Introduction – Lord Timothy Kirkhope of Harrogate:

On behalf of the Yorkshire Society and the University of Hull may I offer a warm welcome to this special pre-Yorkshire Day Forum on the Future Governance of Yorkshire in these grand surroundings of the Temple Anderson Hall within the historic Yorkshire Museum. Thank you for joining us  on what is an extremely hot summer afternoon where enjoying the warm sunshine and outdoors is a tempting alternative to joining us today.

I would like to open our Forum by suggesting that that Yorkshire as a Region is a very special place, much due to its immense size, complexity and mixed economy. It has its our own distinctive and varied physical character, reflecting its remarkable geology and landscape. Our population to the present day shares many typically Yorkshire characteristics shaped by our long history and shared culture. We have our own accent and dialect, a distinctive form of the English language which has deep Anglo-Scandinavian roots, reflecting the Region’s rich history and heritage.

Yet it has a geographic unity, the land of Northern England between the Humber and the Tees, the Pennines and the North Sea. It was my privilege to serve as a Member of the European Parliament for Yorkshire & the Humber, recognised as a free-standing European Region within the United Kingdom. Sadly, that important status was lost soon after the Brexit Referendum of 2016.

Yorkshire is however a geographic entity that has been reimagined often, from its origins in pre-history to the convulsive changes of 1974 when the three historic Counties of Yorkshire, East, North and West Riding, were abolished, and replaced with what has proved an ever-changing mixture of Wapentakes, Counties, Metropolitan Counties, Districts, Unitary Authorities and now Unitary Authorities, Combined Authorities and Mayoralties,

But this is a process which has not ended. The new Government now has Devolution of the English Regions on its agenda. Only a few weeks ago, on 1^st April 2024, the 50^th anniversary of the abolition of the Three Ridings, a Yorkshire Declaration was made, signed by one hundred citizens of Yorkshire and proclaimed at the Eye of York, not far from here, in front of York Castle, requesting that Yorkshire should have, like Greater London, its own elected Assembly.

So how appropriate it is that we have this debate on the eve of Yorkshire Day 2024, to be celebrated this year in York, Yorkshire’s ancient provincial capital, dating back to Roman times, the former capital and focal point of the Anglo-Viking Kingdom of Jorvik.

This evening, we have a distinguished panel of speakers, not all of them politicians, who will give their own perspective of what the Future for Yorkshire might be, and how we as ordinary citizens and members of different groups and organisations within the Region might be able to influence and shape the process. But we are also here to listen to and share your views, in what we hope will be a fruitful and continuing Debate about the Future of Yorkshire.

*****

The Balancing Act of Preservation and Development: Dr Tiffany R Holloman, Same Skies.

Introduction

Straight out, you can already hear my accent and know that I am not originally from Yorkshire, let alone the UK. I am not. In fact, I grew up in a small rural town in the coastal plains of North Carolina. I grew up fishing, watching musicals and playing baseball and somewhere in between I found a love of history, specifically of the early modern period. This is how I arrived.

What I am now is a Black, queer, married historian, sociologist, and co-founder of Same Skies Think Tank. I have lived in the UK for eleven years—in Yorkshire, ten of those eleven years. I feel confident in speaking to you because of love. I have fallen in love. Falling in love requires me having a concern for where I live. In south Leeds where I spent most of my ten years, I became concerned. I witnessed the changes on High Street; the rise in discriminatory graffiti; countered with the much-needed boom in housing, however, it directly led to an increase in traffic. All of these concerns and more absolutely spurred me to be more involved in the region where I live.

Remember earlier when I mentioned my love for early modern history. Well, I am a historian of early modern Scottish history, particularly during the 16^th and 17^th centuries. What I can honestly state is that no matter the century and typically the society, the evolution of that society is formed in the interaction between two things: preservation and development. How does a community retain their values, yet allow space for transformation? It’s tricky, but this is where devolution comes in.

Devolution creates greater opportunity, not only for those values to be heard and understood but addressed. The reason being is due to localisation of diplomacy. Diplomacy is the science, although some say its an art, of engaging in meaningful relationships for the better. The term ‘diplomacy’ is typically relegated to the world of international business, but it is time to claim framework in localised governance.

When it comes to the future of the Yorkshires and the importance of devolution, as I understand it, it is not sustainable without localised diplomacy. For example, the concern of certain communities about migrant hotels in their cities will probably be better addressed if the region had an authority in the nation’s migration policies. Or the request for certain sporting events be held in one of our arenas—personally, I would love to host a baseball game up here, after all Sheffield does has a baseball team so why not explore the possibility of a Yorkshire baseball league—but I digress. The point is as Regional constituents we don’t have a direct diplomatic relationship with Sports England. Devolution creates this link.

Devolution, real devolution of transport, housing, sport, banking, healthcare, taxation should be a necessary component in the future of Yorkshire. The formulation of the localised diplomacy necessary to carry out sustainable Devolution is our next step. Should we bring back Citizen Assemblies? Do we create a more digital forum to allow more residents of the region to have a voice? Whatever the form takes, it is charged with capturing as much information as possible from the residents it represents and liaising with local government to hash out their agenda.

In England, this is easier said than done as our government isn’t formulated in decentralised blocks such as the German model. That is not to say that it can’t start with Yorkshire. At Same Skies we’ve published two books on, one in 2019 and the other in 2021, on various ways people, not only see the future of the Region, but discussed ways they have changed or plan to change it.

If anything needs centralisation, it is the various organisations and groups across the Region which work in pockets—if this can morph into a collated and collaborative representation for localised diplomacy, then I believe we are onto something evolutionary for Yorkshire and a truly decentralised framework for governance.

I will end with this. The polarisation of our planet is lethal yet again. We champion democracy as one the incubators of civility, yet we often sense that our modern examples have lost their way. Perhaps this is where Yorkshire takes democracy under its charge.

If we:

1. Define Yorkshire
2. Collate the efforts of organisations into a localised diplomacy councils (one or more of our universities can assist with this formulation)
3. Include as many people within our postcodes as possible to allow for more accurate data the area (in theory postcode sectioning may be the most efficient way to capture and relay collective voices)
4. Request/demand that our Metro governments be given more authority and autonomy, specifically of those workstreams I mentioned earlier
5. And implement a structure where the localised diplomacy councils are supported within the framework of regional devolution and democracy

Then it is not unrealistic to imagine that not only will Yorkshire have developed a practical pathway for advancement of the region, but act as a catalyst for bringing civility back within democracy.

*****

Sir Stephen Houghton, Leader Barnsley Council, Chair Yorkshire Leaders’ Board.

The Government current vision for Yorkshire Regional Devolution is for the four Combined Authorities – South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, York & North Yorkshire, Hull & East Riding each with their own elected Matro Mayor to work in partnership and to be given greater financial resources and powers.

Whilst this is clearly welcome, what is being offered at the moment is essentially only at sub-regional level. There is clearly a need for some form of Regional governance in terms of scale to cover the whole of the Yorkshire Region with its 5.4 million population.

However, the Government is setting up a Committee of the UK Regions, involving the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish governments and Combined Authority Mayors. However, there are questions about how the voices of Mayors of smaller areas would stand up to those representing larger areas. It would be interesting to see how the Mayor of South Yorkshire with four local authorities works against the Scottish Government with all the issues that it has got. Some people might argue that this would work better at a Yorkshire level rather than a sub-regional level.

This UK Committee of the Regions, the nine Regions of England, of which London is just one, must work together to ensure the voice of the Regions is heard in Westminster and Whitehall. The Regions of England – especially the three Northern Regions – have much in common and success will only come if we work together to secure the levels of Devolution and Regional Governance we wish to see emerge.

How we achieve sustainable economic growth and what kind of growth we wish to see is still an open book. The Mayoral model is one the Government accepts and is likely to give more powers and resources to, and this is to be welcomed. We need to convince Government however that Regional Devolution is a powerful and cost-effective mechanism to deliver its own economic goals and priorities for whole of the UK

Identity matters. Yorkshire has a powerful sense of a common, shared history and identity and this needs to be used to unite the Region. We need Regional Champions in a variety of guises to help deliver this vision.

But what powers should any future Regional authority have? Should it include tax-raising powers, precepting powers for key Regional infrastructure or institutional requirements not available from central sources?

We also need to understand what can be achieved by using and exploiting existing and established mechanisms. This may be evolution rather than revolution, but it vital not to alienate whatever government is in power. We need more research and study into making existing institutions work better for us, on a regional level. This may need to involve the Yorkshire Leaders Board, which because it consists of democratically elected representatives is as close an institution as we have to an elected Assembly. We also need to understand the relationship between the Leaders Board and the elected Metro Mayors. This relationship needs to be a supportive and as dynamic as possible, hopefully sharing common aims and objectives which whilst sharing a common political colour at the present time, to be effective in the longer term need to be cross-party.

The priority has to be to work with what is there – the existing bodies and organisations that attract support, working across local authority and Mayoral boundaries wherever and whenever it is to our mutual advantage so to so. This may be specially so in certain keys areas such as Tourism – the vital need for a common Yorkshire brand – Transport, Skills and the Arts. It is a creative process in which the Mayors need to work together for Yorkshire with other agencies to achieve progress for Yorkshire on both a Regional and a National agenda. There needs to be a clear communication strategy developed between all regional and local governance bodies and agencies within the Region, including the Metro Mayors and the Leaders Board. This needs to recognise that Region-wide there are economies of scale. Size matters in terms of capturing attention and imagination of both the public and central Government, for the delivery of shared objectives for the Region’s economy and for the well-being of our communities.

*****

Ben Crick Composer and Chief Conductor of the Yorkshire Symphony Orchestra.

Culture in all its different manifestations – including music, literature, theatre, cinema, dance – has the power to bring people together, to create a strong sense of shared identity and bring about social and political change.

This can be illustrated by looking at the critical role music has had throughout the 19^th and 20^th centuries, especially in Germany and Italy, which provide two fascinating case studies.

In the late 18^th century, much of the Austrian composer Mozart’s greatest music – for example opera The Magic Flute – contained strong elements of both the German and Italian traditions. But during the 19^th century, starting with Beethoven’s Fidelio of 1805, composers focused ever more strongly on their own country’s music and literary traditions to define a national musical identity. Weber with Freischütz (1821) used elements of German folk music and folklore to produce a more recognisably Germanic form of opera. This was continued through the work of Spohr with his Jessonda (1823) but even more so with the work of Wagner with Fliegender Hollander (1843) not to mention the later Ring saga based on powerful Germanic-Norse legends embedded deep into Germanic culture. Not without justification could Otto von Bismark suggest “Music was our vanguard” in describing the unification of Germany, achieved by combining several separate former rival nation states with his dominant Prussia in 1871. The Politics of the emerging nation state was shaped by its great composers.

Italy was another example through the work of Salieri with such operas as Falstaff (1800), followed by Rossini with Cenerentola (1819), Donizetti (Anna Bolena 1830) and above all with Verdi with Rigoletto (1850) and his later works, each composer defining and shaping their nation’s Italian identity, in ever more powerful ways. Italy too emerges as a single nation in 1870.

Whilst the excesses of nationalism, especially as evidenced by the followers of Wagner in Germany, might be negative, other nations have enjoyed a more beneficial sense of patriotic pride, such as in Dvorak’s Bohemia, Tchaikovsky’s Russia, Sibelius’s Finland and even Vaughan William’s England.

But can that benign power of music and a shared musical heritage also be applied to a Region of England such as Yorkshire?

The arts have the power to reach out to people in ways that formal politics can never do. It can also be a highly enjoyable social experience which can energise and activate communities. In can be directly inspired by Yorkshire’s landscape and culture, for example Soundscapes designed to be experienced in a specially constructed wooden sound-pod, combining the power of video photography of Dales landscapes and music. Or at another level, performing classic works such as the recent performance in Bradford of Rossini’s Barber of Seville translated from Italian into Broad Yorkshire – Yorkshire Dialect – can reach out to new audiences in meaningful ways. For example, a few weeks ago here in the Museum Gardens during an outdoor music event, several hundred people joined a spontaneous rendering of Yorkshire’ unofficial national anthem On Ilka’ Moor Baht ‘At. Where else in England could this happen?

Or it can be a more individual experience such as reading a novel or poetry, or even with music, using cutting edge technology to combine words and music in virtual reality through individual headsets.

But by bringing people together to share powerful emotional experiences, the arts can and should be seen as an important instrument of change. By harnessing this power, creative artists can reach out to people in ways that elected politicians cannot. This is especially true of young people, to help shape their pride in Yorkshire’s culture and heritage. This pride and passion are an essential pre-requirement for truly meaningful Devolution and grassroots involvement in the process of change.

*****

The importance of devolved powers for the environment and combating climate change in Yorkshire: Can Devolution help to solve the nature, climate and pollution crises?

Rachael Bice. CEO Yorkshire Wildlife Trust,  Member Yorkshire & Humber Climate Commission.

Good evening, In my day job CEO of Yorkshire Wildlife Trust and a Yorkshire and Humber Climate Commissioner. I have the privilege of Chairing the Great North Bog coalition and Humberhead Levels Partnership among other partnerships which span this glorious and large Region as well as witnessing the geographical expressions of what it means to be in and of Yorkshire.

The Limits of my Language mean the Limits of my World – Ludwig Wittgenstein

I will start with this quote as I believe only through deeper communication can we tackle the complexities of the problems we face. And we need to recognise, what we know now is unlikely to reflect the whole picture or the whole story. We must get curious about our similarities and differences with other people, other species and other regions.

I am curious to find myself in Yorkshire, thinking back to my involvement in the Devolution process in Cornwall, which had the first Rural Devolution Deal signed in 2015 by David Cameron. It included substantive cultural and environmental asks which I was involved with developing and delivering. A lot has changed since 2015. But not my deep-seated belief that the devolution agenda has exciting and essential opportunities for climate, nature and people.

Looking back, I worked on two aspects of the Deal – the first was more historically orientated – considering how Cornwall’s cultural distinctiveness was manifest; the second looked to the future of our coastline and catchments and how different risk management authorities could work much better together to manage risks to the coastline from sea level rise, from flooding and water supply and quality

I hope these themes sound relevant and somewhat familiar – according to the 2021 Yorkshire Society Survey –  what constituted ‘Yorkshireness’ was made up of landscape 34% and people 45% and their language 18%.

But what specifically  do we know? And do we know how to collectively steward those features effectively into the future when much of the stability our history has been built upon is going to be in flux. And it is within these unstable systems that water is going to become an issue we are going to talk about a lot – too much – too little – not clean enough! Are the authorities tasked to ‘manage’ our water from different perspectives actually empowered to be the collective stewards we need for the future? I think we know from the attention on water quality in the election – the current situation is not optimal – I am being diplomatic deliberately!

We know the sea levels are rising, rainfall is up and more unpredictable, wind has increased and more persistent, hotter temperatures are becoming more common. Leaving us exposed to increased risk of fire, floods, drought, storm damage, seasonal disruption. Have you notice how these changes are making life greyer – this does have an impact on our health and well- being too. We will also lose land space for human uses due to sea level rise, the coastal erosion, and the need to accommodate more fluctuating water levels across the seasons.

We know from State of Yorkshire Nature Report headlines that Yorkshire is very important for UK biodiversity hosting 2/3rds of all UK species. But our biodiversity is declining – 2000 species have been lost in the last 200 years – 3000 are currently vulnerable to extinction.

So, it is my contention that people’s relationships to their local place and how that particular places shapes them is critical to our sense of identity, our heritage, and how we should shape our future. It is also true that we are dependent on and at the mercy of global systems – such that to operate effectively at a regional level we must have global awareness. Systems awareness and self-awareness at all scales is critical if we are to tackle the crisis we now face. What does that mean in practice – whole lifecycle impact of a product or decision we are making – which enables us to understand the embodied carbon, chemical and biodiversity impacts. Does costing less here mean costing someone’s else their health or livelihood in another country? Is it ok for us to have cheaper biscuits while orangutangs lose their lives and homes?

I would like to offer a mantra for our approach to Devolution in Yorkshire:

Global Awareness

Regional Stewardship

Local Action

And for the next couple of minutes, I am going say more about Regional Stewardship as the critical bridge between our individual daily lives and our collective future prospects. I will consider aspects of devolution which come through the freedom and flexibility asks, as well as those which focus on the control of budgets.

Regional stewardship, is I believe is a combination of regional planning + regional care

1. 1. Regional planning – and by that I don’t mean take a national figure and cut it up into our political geographies – that has got us into the predicament we are in! I mean when we design our lives to fit into, to enhance and be enhanced by the living systems we are embedded in. Critically recognising the resulting opportunities, challenges, privileges and disadvantages of the differences in these systems create. Regional mechanisms can smooth those differences promoting equity and enabling the overall system to work effectively and fairly!
   2. Regional Care By Regional care  I mean not just understanding but embodying the care for our landscapes and communities in the way we work together. I want to be part of a place which is cooperative, based on co-existence and communication – rather than a competitive model based on polarisation and conflict.

Here are a few examples of Regional Level Stewardship which could fit into the devolution frame:

• Water Let’s start with Water – manging the risk from water is split across a series of ‘risk management’ authorities (water company, EA, Local Authority (multiple depts – planning, highways, coastal protection) and IDBs). If we created a duty for them to not just meet together but to plan, invest and deliver together on long term water stewardship plans at a regional level we would be likely to save money, see less disruption and get faster more holistic outcomes. If we added in a joint responsibility for quality too – then perhaps we might start to get somewhere in having the right amount of clean water in the right place when we need it and having the right space to store flood water.
• Carbon emission reductions and renewables – the YHCC Carbon Story published tomorrow will set out there is a way to play our part in reducing emissions rapidly – I won’t steal their thunder but do look out for that tomorrow. I will though pose the question about how we would like Great British Energy to operate in our region? Given the off & onshore wind and hydrogen potential as well as the network upgrades across our landscapes – how do we want this to land in Yorkshire as a whole. We also need to resolve the tensions with energy generated from biomass / biofuels which manifest in our region in different ways.
• Energy Considering the cumulative effects of these different national initiatives for energy plus all the other demands on land in our region, can and should be something we engage in constructively, so our communities can understand the part they play – sharing the burden and benefits of change – we believe at YHCC this can be done through a regional land and water framework (for want of a better title).
• Food production The production of food something else we need to consider more holistically. Agri-schemes are nationally designed and mostly applied at individual farm level, sometimes clusters – but what cumulative outcomes we want to achieve together with those investments in our region? How can we balance up the lucrative farm businesses in East Yorkshire, with the need to transform the fortunes of our uplands and hill farmers? We have a nationally significant volume of peatland in Yorkshire – will the national budget allocations recognise that?
• Access to land and recreational pressures – is it time to flex access ‘rights’ (established in the 1940’s/ 80’s/ 00’s) to be access responsibilities which may need to change through the seasons – to respect all species need for space on an island now with a lot more people? What role could National Parks & Landscapes play in fostering positive coexistence between wild, farmed and the human species?
• Hedge cutting – there are national rules and date restrictions – even though the seasons vary across the country and even more so with the seasonal disruption from climate change. Additionally East Yorkshire sees a huge number of migratory bird species passing through – but we do not have regional rules and practices which reflect that? We could!

To conclude. Devolution isn’t about revolution for me. It is about optimisation, not for efficiency to increase profits, or to ensure one group triumphs over another, it is to ensure r whole systems work for us as a Region. We must embody the notion of collective stewardship and begin to see our how our roles and resources of all kinds can be purposed to the common good. I leave you with this beautiful poem – which in a few words holds the wisdom we need for a sustainable future:

The streets are learning

the language of the plum blossom.

The trees have spoken

 Simon Armitage (from Blossomise)

*****

The importance of size and identity when it comes to Devolution in Yorkshire: Dr Stewart Arnold, Hull University Business School.

I’ll take Yorkshire’s distinct identity as a given, otherwise none of us would be here. As I’ll argue much of Yorkshire’s distinct identity is as a consequence of its size, which in turn provides a powerful argument for Yorkshire level devolution.

The Yorkshire Post magazine, which comes out with the Saturday edition of the paper, features, a piece called ‘My Yorkshire. In the now two pages interview, the same questions are put to different individuals each week.

The individuals, all of whom have their home in Yorkshire, range from sports men and women, chefs, artists, musicians, teachers, businesspeople, entrepreneurs, television presenters amongst others. The questions (usually 20 in all) range from favourite part of the county, favourite walk/restaurant/pub/shop to which celebrity they would most like to take to lunch. The most interesting question for me there is the one that asks, ‘what do you think gives Yorkshire its unique identity?’ I analysed the answer to this question, in 332 editions between May 2013 and February 2021. What do you think gives Yorkshire its unique identity is a leading question of course, but in nearly all cases the question is posed and answered. Looking at keywords in response, patterns of words did emerge.

So, the dimensions of Yorkshire identity, through the Yorkshire Post interviewees can be mapped as follows on a Word Cloud:

1. The people of the region (with shared characteristics, such as friendly, honest, humour, proud);
2. Landscape (as a powerful visual manifestation with mentions of the moors, Dales, Wolds, seaside and, importantly, the accessibility of the landscape for those in urban areas);
3. Variety and diversity (landscape, geology, people, economy, history and heritage – albeit less so) mostly as a consequence of size.

So, this variety or diversity, so important in terms of Yorkshire’s identity, stems from its size. Not surprising as with its 2.9 million acres it is the largest county in England.

Please bear in mind, I’m not advocating an independent Yorkshire state here attractive though that might be to some. I’m measuring what works when it comes to devolved units or territories within England. I would argue that there is an optimal population size.

The concept of optimal population size for a state is a complex one. It integrates economic, social, and environmental factors to determine what number of residents can best sustain growth, stability, and quality of life. An optimal population size balances the benefits of a large enough populace to support diverse industries and cultural activities while avoiding the strain on resources that can come with overpopulation.

How can we measure what makes for optimal population? One of the measures that might be used is the Happiness Index. The Happiness Index is an annual report to determine the worlds ‘happiest’ country. It does this by measuring:

• real GDP per capita
• social support
• healthy life expectancy
• freedom to make life choices
• generosity
• perceptions of corruption

The top two countries in the 2024 report are Finland, in first place with a population of 5.5 million people and Denmark, in second, population 5.9 million. In fact, in the top 10, the median size is around 7 million. So, Finland is a good measure when it comes to the optimal size of successful territories (it won’t have escaped your notice that the population of Finland and Yorkshire are pretty similar). It also advances the case for smaller is beautiful especially in contrast to states with huge populations such as India and China which have specific problems.

There is a story, possibly apocryphal, that a Financial Times journalist arranged to interview the Indian trade minister a few years ago. When he went to meet him, the minister looked a little depressed so the journalist asked what was bothering him. The Minister groaned and said that he had been visited by Finland trade minister. The journalist thought this alone did not seem like a reason for melancholy, so the journalist pressed him further. The minister said, ‘do you know what the population of Finland is?’ ‘it’s 5 million’, ‘we have 5 million blind people in India’.

Across a whole range of measures, separately or collectively such as in the Happiness Index, there is what the writer Kirkhope Sale calls ‘the virtue of smallness;’ where, in his assessment, nations measured in the range of 5-7 million people are most successful – where a critical mass meets sustainability.

And it’s not, as some economists would argue, that smaller states are more homogeneous and therefore easier to manage in terms of resource deployment. That’s certainly not the case with some of the most successful small nations such as Switzerland, Singapore and Belgium.

So, I firmly believe the configuration of combined authorities in Yorkshire currently (and proposed) are just too small to be effective (and that is aside from the question of identity). By way of recap, West Yorkshire is 2.3 million people, South Yorkshire 1.8 million, North Yorkshire 800,000 and the proposed East Yorkshire combined authority 600,000 and, even with the inclusion of the two northern Lincolnshire authorities as some are now proposing, this would leave the adjusted combined authority with less than 1 million inhabitants.

So, in my view, Yorkshire as a single area to which powers could be devolved, hits all the right buttons. Herein lies, the potential problem.

I would argue that Yorkshire has a strong sense of identity – that’s almost a given I would add. It is large in terms of area and population, so its size gives rise to a diversity of people, landscape and economy. It has a powerful brand image and, where it has been measured, there is popular support for a single or One Yorkshire Devolution settlement. But it just might be those very same things which, rather than establishing an unequivocal case, for regionwide devolution, are the very same things that might terrify the government and conceding to Yorkshire’s request. In short, then, a Yorkshire paradox. That is big enough to be successful but at the same time big enough to be a threat to Westminster and Whitehall.

However, I don’t wish to end my intervention on an entirely negative note. Despite the existence of this Yorkshire Paradox, there are many in Government and many advising Government departments who believe that the current structures of combined authorities with elected mayors will be hard pressed to deliver the economic growth which Kier Starmer and Rachel Reeves have set out to be key in the coming years. There is a realisation that serious economic growth will not come on the back of relatively small, devolved units with limited powers and very modest budgets. Of course, there are those already who are arguing ‘give us the powers and the money and we will deliver’ but this does not solve the issue of what I set out earlier when I talked about ‘optimal size.’ So, my suggestion to those seeking to bolster the One Yorkshire argument is this: concentrate less on issues of identity and more on issues of an economic ‘critical mass.’ Yorkshire identity as I said at the outset is pretty much a given. I don’t think there is more traction to be made here. However, there is a compelling argument that says if you want to raise Yorkshire’s GDP capita to something like the national average, if you want infrastructure projects which have a meaningful impact in the region and if you want to attract visitors, students, workers and investment from across the globe, you can only do this at a Yorkshire wide level.

Yorkshire’s local authority leaders (or at least the vast majority of them) got this in 2018 when they made the case to the Government for Yorkshire as a single devolved area. The report that they commissioned (which sadly fell on deaf ears), ‘The economic rationale for devolving to Yorkshire,’ makes the point on Page 1 in the Executive Summary:

‘There is strong evidence that Yorkshire is a coherent and interconnected area. The overall geography includes several functional economic areas, which have strong interconnection and similar/shared issues, priorities and networks.’

That is as true now as it was then.

*****

A Summary of the key issues raised in the Questions and Discussion – Colin Speakman.

Serious rebuffs were suffered by the Yorkshire Devolution campaign in 2018 when Coalition Government rejected the concept developed by the Yorkshire Leaders Board of a single Devolution Deal for the whole of Yorkshire in favour of the “divide and rule”  of initial two Metropolitan Combined Authority urban sub regions of South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire now joined by a third York & North Yorkshire, with Hull & East Riding to follow.  Was this because Westminster saw a powerful, united Yorkshire as a threat to its hegemony?

There is therefore perhaps no need therefore to reinvent ideas if they are now just as relevant to a more pro-Devolution Government in Westminster in the mid-2020s. We need to maybe revisit what was asked for in 2018 and present it again to a hopefully more sympathetic administration.

But to succeed it is essential that Yorkshire works closely with other English Regions, to ensure it is a deal for England they can also be part of, albeit not with a one size fits all formula. Yorkshire might however also position itself as a model or prototype other Regions can choose to follow.

Fundamentally it is essential that any devolution deal involves and appeals to ordinary people, including the most marginalised, to also avoid the accusation that this is just about creating another layer of bureaucracy or talk-shop. As in Wales and Scotland with their Synod/Parliament, responsibilities must seem not just to be duplicating Westminster but offer distinct transference of powers, responsibilities and budgets, and where possible sharing facilities to reduce costs and duplication.

Crucial that rural areas not just the cities and larger towns benefit – e.g. issues such as transport with people living close to boundaries such as West Yorkshire/North Yorkshire suffering from lack of cross boundary bus/rail tickets systems, late buses home etc.

There has actually over the last decade, especially since Brexit, been ever greater UK centralisation, taking powers and crucially financial resources away from Yorkshire’s towns and cities, and rural areas. Yet Yorkshire until recently was recognised by the EU as a distinct Region with its own MEP as one of 12 Regions of UK within Europe. Regional organisations and quangos have also been deliberately run down. The Federation of Small Business in Yorkshire, organised on a Regional basis, notes the loss of Regional Development Agencies and other Regional bodies, which has damaged the Regional economy, and also a lack of effective Regional Land Use Planning. Perhaps a priority is simply to restore what has been taken away by recent London-based Governments.

One Yorkshire, supported by the Yorkshire Leaders Board, was a great concept – what has happened to it? Surely the new Government should be supporting it. Why is greater use of the Yorkshire flag not actively encouraged on too many empty flagpoles? This gives a sense of pride and identity among local communities throughout the Region which needs to be supported and encouraged. The powers currently offered to the Metro Mayors are insufficient, yet London as a Region has long enjoyed these resources and powers – and a democratically elected Assembly.

There are lots of disparate pots of money available for worthwhile projects in the Region but controlled outside the Region by civil servants who often have little local understanding or knowledge, and no coherent policies that accurately reflect the needs of communities within the Region. Too often there are smoke screens behind which civil servants operate. There is a need for a “democracy network” to clarify and maybe control what is happening, and not have to rely on seemingly arbitrary patronage from afar.

Devolution needs to be implemented both at Regional level but also at Local level. There is a need to build alliances with civic society leaders, if necessary, developing a culture of “achieving self-interest though mutual co-operation.”

There is also huge potential for the creative arts at grass roots level to engage with young creative people and their audiences. Resources – even for pump priming – are too often London-controlled. Support including local sponsorship given to local projects through a Regional mechanism (Yorkshire Arts?) could release huge potential which would have an economic benefit but would also engage with the young.

Yorkshire identity and sense of place crosses current frequently changing local Government boundaries so what is “Yorkshire”? Emotionally and historically the thousand-year-old Yorkshire Ridings and their provincial capital of York can be regarded as the Cultural Province of Yorkshire.

Using cultural heritage to drive economic success works brilliantly in the Federal Republic of Germany, a hugely economically successful nation state that balances a strong central Federal Government with semi-autonomous Länder or Regions with enviable success. This structure was created post war in part by British administrators. Bavaria, once a poor part of Germany, is now hugely successful both within its urban and its rural communities. This Land (Region) with its own distinctive highly visible flag, powerful sense of identity yet modern IT led economy – “Lederhosen and Laptops” could be a model for the Yorkshire Region – a rich history and heritage powering pride and economic innovation.

But dealing with political and economic realities, since 1974 what is now (still) Yorkshire & The Humber Region, one of nine English Regions, and which contains the thirteen current Yorkshire local authorities, is by far the most rational and effective future structure for devolution for Yorkshire.

A huge threat to the UK is lack of political engagement, especially among working class communities and young people. Low General and Local Election turnout is stark evidence of alienation which could have dire consequences for the future. There is a real danger of exploitation by simplistic populists and xenophobic politicians if Government fails to deliver prosperity for these communities especially in the North, who feel they have been forgotten and left behind. This means Devolution has to prove to be an effective economic force for good not an additional cost on communities, in order to be accepted by central Government.

But culture in all its different manifestations – from popular to high is not only vital for wellbeing but can generate pride, engagement and self-worth especially among the young. Likewise, the natural world in all its variety again offers huge physical and mental health benefit for urban and rural communities. Yorkshire contains examples of two thirds of the species of existing plants and animals of the UK albeit many under current threat. The natural world, Yorkshire’s distinctive flora and fauna, and the distinctive geology and landscape that supports it, is also a crucial part of the identity of the Region. Awareness and participation in nature can help change the quality of lives, again especially for young people. But pressure on the natural landscape including from urban visitors and their cars, tyres and feet needs careful management.

Devolution could be key part of the solution, working on a Regional basis for example in the management of National Parks and National Landscapes for the Nation but also for the Region on a Regional Basis. It is worth noting the statutory body for protecting the natural world, Natural England, is actually organised on an English Regional basis (albeit chronically underfunded by central Government), so key regional structures,  are actually already there. Much more could be achieved in this and other fields by de-centralisation and local engagement even within national frameworks.

We should also recognise the major contribution made by Yorkshire’s national daily newspaper – the Yorkshire Post – in in helping to establish the Region’s unique identity and doing so much to develop the concept of Regional Devolution and local decision-making. The Yorkshire Post deserves all our support.

We need an audit of Regional bodies including Regional agencies and NGOs who currently work and network together or who could do so far  more, sometimes crossing disciplines and sharing interest – for example access to the countryside, transport and health. In some cases, sharing of data and co-operation on key projects could produce significant cost savings.

Crucially however Devolution must not be presented as a challenge to central government and indeed to existing Metro Mayors. To succeed and gain support for Regional Devolution it is necessary to “take away the threat” and present Devolution as a means of delivering the Government’s wider economic and social agenda, and indeed working closely with the three soon to be four Yorkshire Metro Mayors to deliver a common Region-wide agenda.

E  N  D  S

  You can request a pdf copy by email HERE.