A mayor for Greater Manchester would boost the region's economy and could have brought in the ill-fated congestion charge, two leading think tanks have claimed.
The Centre for Cities and Institute for Government have published a joint report backing the government's plans for elected mayors in leading English cities.
But it adds that a mayor for the whole of Greater Manchester – taking in all 10 existing councils – would better suit the local economy, and the preferences of local people.
The report, entitled 'Big Shot or Long Shot?', claims that a single politician with the power to shape the entire city region could have triggered a different outcome to the 2008 congestion-charging debate.
The idea of a toll zone went to a referendum - and was rejected by the public – after the ten councils could not agree whether to press ahead.
The report claims: 'The unwillingness of political leaders to commit to potentially unpopular decisions was a crucial element of this failure.'
Referenda will take place in 11 English cities – including Manchester - next May, asking people whether they want a mayoral figure like London's Boris Johnson.
The Centre for Cities is urging ministers to devolve even greater powers to city mayors than those currently proposed in its Localism Bill.
They say the London model has been a huge success and would help grow local economies.
But they also called for places like Manchester to be able to bid for more powerful 'metro mayors' to cover all of Greater Manchester.
Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, Nottingham and Sheffield are among other cities due to vote next year.
Alexandra Jones, chief executive of Centre for Cities, said: "Mayors have the potential to improve how cities are governed but to realise their full promise they need additional powers and influence to those currently proposed.
“Centre for Cities research shows that skills, transport and planning remain the most significant and urgent barriers to growth; mayors will need to be able to tackle these through formal and informal powers.
“Citizens in every city and city region should be able to make their own decisions about the right governance for their place and their economy.
“So we are also urging the government to amend legislation to give cities the option to have either a local authority or metro mayor.”
Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
Sounds like a way of side-stepping democracy to me. Why don't we not bother with elections at all if politcians are going to bulldoze ahead with the schemes they think up for all of us to live by. Even Stalin said that in democracy you vote for the politician, and not what he does. I really don't like the sound of this.
Not biased at all this lot are they?
Of the Congestion charge it says:
"The report claims: 'The unwillingness of political leaders to commit to potentially unpopular decisions was a crucial element of this failure.'"
Funny, the voters of Manchester didn't consider it to be a failure, they thought it was democracy. Democracy succeeded. It was only a failure for those who had already decided that we all deserved to be charged a fortune for driving to work etc.
"The report claims: 'The unwillingness of political leaders to commit to potentially unpopular decisions was a crucial element of this failure.'"
I thought that was called democracy?
There was no referendum to create the Greater Manchester Council back in the 1970s, nor one to then abolish it in the 1980s.
All ten local councils would now campaign against a mayor for Greater Manchester - and the "small c" conservative public round here will always vote no to change anyway. So unless central government has the "imagination & bottle" to impose a GLA type directly elected mayor & assembly, then sadly it just won't happen.
funiliy enough if a mayor had forced through such an idea it would have paved the way for the biggest mas exodus of the city centre since the blitz.
since the introduction of the con charge in london, many many businesses who are reliant on private transport and deliverys to their businesses relocated out of the capital because of the increased costs to the running of their businesses.
the difference with london compared to manchester is that london already had a fully integrated public transport network. manchester hadnt.
manchester has too many adjacent cities near by like leeds, liverpool and birmingham that would have provided alternative locations for businesses to move too.
democracy prevailed! which begs the question? who's instigated these investigations with these think tanks. yet more money wasted for nothing.
"The report claims: 'The unwillingness of political leaders to commit to potentially unpopular decisions was a crucial element of this failure.'"
When you see statements such as that you do have to wonder if NATO are bombing the right city.
this report is just propaganda against the idea of elected mayors.Any mayoral candidate would need to have the congestion chargeproposal in his or her manifesto.i would suggest that even a labour candidate wouldnt win manchester if they were in favour of a congestion charge.
Manchester would benefit from having an inspirational independent mayor who had some real life experience and who had the skills to manage such a large budget.
"A mayor for Greater Manchester ... could have brought in the ill-fated congestion charge, two leading think tanks have claimed."
Good reason not to have one, then.