IPM members join roundtable to discuss local governance changes in the UK
On 28 March 2025, a group of Institute of Place Management members convened an online closed-door discussion to explore the evolving landscape of devolution in England. Chaired by IPM Fellow Graham Galpin, the session brought together senior voices from across academia, regeneration, local government, civic society and consultancy to engage in a candid conversation on the future of place-based governance.
Framed not as a technical consultation but as an open exploration of what works in practice, the roundtable reflected IPM’s commitment to convening cross-sector debate that connects worldclass research from Manchester Metropolitan University with the IPM professional network across the world.
Participants agreed that England is entering a decisive phase in its devolution journey. While the Government’s current framework has extended powers to metro mayors and combined authorities, there was widespread concern that this model risks producing a patchwork of asymmetric settlements with unclear responsibilities. Where responsibilities are defined, they appear quite demanding for a Neighbourhood Board,
There was strong agreement that the next phase of devolution must go beyond administrative reform to address deeper questions of legitimacy, delivery and local accountability.
The group reflected on the need for governance structures that are both strategic and locally grounded. There was a clear appetite for more place-sensitive decision-making, but also a warning: that without a strong democratic mandate, even well-intentioned systems may lack legitimacy and local buy-in. Several participants highlighted the risk of creating governance architecture faster than the supporting culture, capacity and trust can keep pace. Others pointed to the importance of balancing regional scale with grassroots agency. The discussion also raised important questions about the interaction between governance reform and national priorities such as housing. Some contributors questioned whether a renewed focus on reorganisation - especially amid ongoing pressures on council budgets and capacity- might delay much-needed delivery on housing and regeneration. With government keen to increase housing starts, participants asked whether local government reorganisation could inadvertently slow momentum at a moment when delivery is critical.
“In the middle of a housing crisis, the last thing we need is for delivery to grind to a halt while governance is restructured,” one participant said. Others pointed to the risk of “policy distraction”- with administrative re-mapping taking precedence over enabling real-world outcomes like new housing, infrastructure, and local services.
The roundtable addressed delivery capacity head-on. While capital pots such as the Levelling Up Fund and the UK Shared Prosperity Fund have brought new resources into local areas, these are often fragmented, competitive, and not matched by investment in the long-term skills or systems needed for implementation.
“We’ve been good at bidding - but less good at stitching these bids into a wider plan,” one person commented.
Participants agreed on the need to focus on function over form: to design governance and investment models around real-world outcomes - economic resilience, health equity, climate action - rather than fixed political geographies or tiers.
The discussion highlighted the need to reconnect with the hyper-local tier of governance. Several participants warned against bypassing or marginalising town and parish councils, which are often closest to the everyday experience of place, but too often under-resourced and excluded from strategic conversations. There was strong interest in exploring how these local councils can become more effective delivery and engagement partners, especially in rural or semi-urban areas. That being said, some people questioned whether town and parish councils are up to the challenge and wondered if Place Partnerships and BIDs had a role. Small Neighbourhood Councils (or a Combined Neighbourhood Council) or local Town/Parish Council or partnership to administer local accountability. Iwill require an injection of financial resource from central Government, and training for those involved in these control roles to fulfil their corporate duties.
Rather than choosing one model over another, participants pointed to the need for flexible frameworks that enable different actors - councils, civic groups, businesses - to collaborate based on local context and capacity.
Attendees shared real-life examples of local partnerships - such as town boards, community-owned assets and civic forums- that show the potential for communities to act not just as consultees but as co-producers of place.
“The energy is there in places,” one attendee said. “The question is whether the system can shift to match that energy- rather than always expecting communities to bend to the system.”
Many spoke about the need for a stronger social contract between state and citizen, with participation embedded not only in planning and engagement but also in ownership, delivery and stewardship. As England continues to experiment with devolution models and place governance, the roundtable made clear that effective reform must be grounded in people, powered by partnerships, and focused on the long-term resilience of places.
The Institute of Place Management will build on this conversation through further roundtables and its upcoming national event on 8 May. Rather than set out a prescriptive agenda, IPM’s aim is to act as a convener stimulating ideas, connecting practice, and supporting those working to make local governance more accountable, collaborative and effective.
Several key issues were surfaced for future exploration:
- What does ‘place’ mean in practice? Too often, definitions are narrow—framed in economic or administrative terms- missing the civic, cultural, and social layers that define lived experience.
- Where is the democratic voice? As regional structures grow, there’s a risk of smaller towns and communities being sidelined. Should empowering town and parish councils be part of the conversation.
- Will reorganisation pause delivery? Reforms aimed at improving governance may unintentionally delay urgent housing and regeneration efforts.
- How do we connect strategy and delivery? There is often a disconnect between regional ambitions and the mechanisms required to implement them locally.
- How do we grow capacity at all levels? Many places lack the technical skills and collaborative frameworks to deliver on new responsibilities.
This was not the end of the conversation. It has continued by email and has raised many vital issues. It is clear that we need to explore these in more detail as they address on of the 5 bullet points highlighted above. There is much left to discuss and members and interested parties do not hesitate to email you views.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
This roundtable forms the latest stage in the Institute of Place Management’s ongoing exploration of devolution and local governance. Building on earlier conversations, it offered a timely opportunity to deepen our collective understanding of the challenges and opportunities facing place-based leadership. The dialogue will continue with a follow-up roundtable on 11th April, where participants will further develop the themes raised, and culminate in an open national meeting on 8th May. These events are part of IPM’s commitment to fostering inclusive, cross-sector dialogue that supports more accountable, collaborative, and effective local governance.
This roundtable was not about producing a set of conclusions but sparking honest and constructive dialogue. Anyone wishing to join future discussions or share insights from their own practice is encouraged to contact Graham Galpin (graham.galpin@placechanger.co.uk) and the Institute on the Challenges and Questions Raised
About the author
Graham Galpin
Graham Galpin is a civic and community leader with a strong track record in local government and town centre regeneration. He is particularly well known for his work in Ashford, Kent, where he served as a Cabinet Member for Town Centres & Business at Ashford Borough Council
He has also been involved in wider regional and national conversations about economic development, planning, and place leadership. In several forums, including those connected to the High Streets Task Force and Timpson Review, he has been cited as someone with practical experience of making things happen on the ground.
Now still passionate about towns and urbanism, Graham is also a Trustee of Ashford Museum.