Growth is delivered in places
For years, one of the central frustrations of economic growth policy has been the gap between national ambition and local delivery.
Successive governments have produced growth strategies, industrial policies, infrastructure plans and housing targets. Yet despite the rhetoric, many of the decisions that determine whether growth happens in practice have remained concentrated in Whitehall.
Recent announcements from Government suggest that may be beginning to change.
The proposal to move responsibility for local economic growth policy from the Treasury to No. 10 North and the decision to provide metro mayors with greater influence over strategic planning decisions are, on the surface, separate policy announcements. Together, however, they point to something more significant: a growing recognition that growth is not created in Whitehall, it is delivered in places.
For those working across the built environment, this will feel like common sense.
Growth happens through investment in infrastructure. It is delivered through regeneration projects, employment space, housing development and transport improvements. It requires local leadership, local knowledge and an understanding of how places function economically. In short, it is achieved on the ground, not through policy papers alone.
The case for devolution
The North of England provides a compelling case study.
The region contains some of the UK's fastest-growing city economies, globally significant universities, major development opportunities and ambitious infrastructure projects. Yet for many years there has been a perception that decisions affecting the region's future have been made too far from the communities and businesses they impact.
The continued evolution of devolution seeks to address that challenge.
The proposal to create No. 10 North signals an acknowledgement that regional economic priorities deserve greater prominence within Government. Meanwhile, enhanced planning powers for metro mayors reflect an understanding that decisions affecting regional growth often extend beyond the boundaries of individual local authorities.
This matters because some planning decisions have consequences far beyond a single ward, town or council area. Decisions relating to employment land, strategic infrastructure and major development opportunities can influence investment, productivity and job creation across an entire region for decades.
The role of metro mayors
Having previously served in local government, I understand the pressures councillors face when making planning decisions. Elected members are tasked with balancing community views, political priorities and long-term economic needs, often under intense public scrutiny.
However, planning debates can sometimes become dominated by a relatively small number of highly engaged voices. Particularly where political control is finely balanced, there is a risk that decision-making becomes driven by immediate political considerations rather than longer-term strategic objectives.
That is one reason why the Government's decision to provide mayors with greater powers over strategic planning applications is significant.
The argument is not that local democratic accountability matters less. Far from it. Local authorities will continue to determine the vast majority of planning applications and remain at the heart of the planning system.
The question is whether there should also be a stronger strategic layer of decision-making for developments with regional implications.
Metro mayors are increasingly expected to lead economic growth strategies, co-ordinate infrastructure investment and attract inward investment. If they are to be held accountable for delivering growth, there is a logical case for ensuring they have the tools required to support that ambition.
Turning reform into delivery
Of course, structures alone will not deliver growth.
The success of these reforms will depend on whether they are accompanied by genuine powers, funding certainty and a commitment to faster decision-making. There are legitimate questions about how mayoral intervention should operate, how local and regional priorities should be balanced and whether additional powers will accelerate delivery rather than create new layers of bureaucracy.
Those debates are important and should be welcomed.
Delivering long-term growth
What is increasingly clear, however, is that Government appears to be moving towards a model that places greater trust in local leaders, metro mayors and regional partnerships to shape economic outcomes.
For the built environment sector, that shift could prove significant.
If growth policy, investment decisions and strategic planning powers become more closely aligned at a regional level, there is an opportunity to create a more coherent framework for delivering housing, infrastructure, regeneration and employment growth.
The real test will not be whether powers are transferred or institutions are reorganised. It will be whether these changes help unlock investment, accelerate delivery and create sustainable economic growth in the places that need it most.
For many regions, that is not simply a question of governance. It is a question of economic opportunity.
As more decisions are made at a regional level, it will be important to see whether these reforms help unlock investment and speed up delivery. To discuss devolution, strategic planning and regional growth, please get in touch with Chris Peacock.
14 September 2026
