THE M.E.N.’S AWARD-WINNING POLITICAL AND INVESTIGATIONS EDITOR
endanger the north’s collective line – which was that both schemes must be built.
Those close to Burnham view the intervention as successful, however. They believe it helped soften Boris Johnson’s language around the review-but-not-a-review of the northern legs, resulting in a more positive outcome – including explicit talk of an ‘integrated’ network – than had been briefed before the weekend.
Meanwhile, one Manchester figure suggests this is ‘the nature of mayors’.
“It’s the perennial question of who speaks for the north and how does the north build consensus,” they say, pointing out that there is no expectation for individual mayors to run their narratives past the entire northern collective.
“Do you expect him to do what’s right for Greater Manchester, or do you expect him to build consensus with other places?
“I’m not sure any of us know.”
This gets to the heart of the political problem the north now faces, believes a senior insider elsewhere, who points out government is ‘telling anyone who will listen’ how keen it is for places to have elected mayors. This, they muse, could ultimately help with any tactic to divide and rule in a region that has put on a pretty united front in recent years. “Once you get to the position where everyone has mayors, it’s a small step to competition, isn’t it?” they pose.
“If you were mendacious in the Treasury, the way to ameliorate devolution is to give everyone devolution, so you have a lot of mayors fighting over money. Nobody knows if that’s going to happen, but it all goes together to feel like we’re at a bit of a crossroads.
“Are we really moving in a direction where this generates more accountability and autonomy in the north, or actually – in a way – the more mayors there are, the more bodies there are with ‘north’ in the title, are we in danger of circling back to a bunch of mayors fighting over money coming out of the Treasury?”
That, they concede, is only one possible outcome. But where a project like Northern Powerhouse Rail is concerned, ‘it’s easier to be on board when it’s just an idea’.
“You’re going to be drawing lines on maps in the not-too-distant future,” they point out of NPR.
“That’s when it gets real and, suddenly, it’s not controversy free.”
NPR, which is itself not as far down the line as the northern part of HS2, could also face tough choices in the months ahead.
As yet it is only at the stage of an outline business case and the meat of the proposal has not yet been laid bare.
Yorkshire leaders in particular want to see the initial Manchester to Leeds stretch dug directly through Bradford, creating a central station for a city that has fragmented rail connections. This is the most expensive option and one that has been periodically dangled over the heads of northern leaders by government – if you want this, they have suggested, then Manchester cannot have the station it wants at Piccadilly.
The approach from northern politicians so far has simply been to demand both.
But as the Yorkshire Post has reported last weekend, the government had been poised to go out to consultation on a version of the Manchester to Leeds stretch that included options without central Bradford.
One insider blamed Transport for the North for itself drawing up a proposed wording that failed to mark Bradford as the preferred option, while government has blamed the north for failing to agree, not the first time ministers have taken that line.
Grant Shapps noted this week there would need to be trade-offs.
“Different cities will want different things,” he told the M.E.N., when asked about the underground station at Piccadilly, which was not explicitly mentioned by the Prime Minister in his statement.
“We need to work with northern leaders to priorities what’s wanted and what is practical to deliver.”
While leaders may eventually win that particular argument with government – and get not only an underground at Piccadilly but the Bradford station they so want – they may ultimately have to make a choice. And if they don’t face a choice on that, there will be others.
As one transport insider says: “There is a danger this turns into a bun fight. I do worry that without that lead voice in it, you get these disparate voices about what’s important.”
There also remains speculation across the north about the function of Transport for the North, the regional body set up to lobby for and coordinate major infrastructure projects.
One senior insider describes it currently as ‘a post box for the Department for Transport’, although opinion is divided about whether it will remain a problem or become the solution.
While some feel its purpose may come into doubt as more and more mayors get money, public platforms and strategic powers, others – including the Northern Powerhouse Partnership – feel that a beefed-up version could form the basis for delivering the entire project.
That will, again, require some serious collaborative working if the north is to avoid the DfT effectively running the show from London.
The risk going forward will be that the killer political instinct of political advisers hundreds of miles away will pick off parts of the region, pitting them against each other, while the bureaucratic instincts of civil servants will be to stifle northern proposals in unflattering cost benefit analyses.
Cummings may have lost the first round, but HS2 North is a multidimensional chess tournament that looks set to span this Parliament and beyond.
The risk will be that the killer political instinct of advisers hundreds of miles away will pick off parts of the region