Meeting Report: Making Devolution work for Climate and Nature in Brighton and Hove
Making Devolution work for Climate and Nature in Brighton and Hove
A public meeting on the subject of Making Devolution Work for Climate and Nature in Brighton and Hove, hosted by Climate:Change, was held at the Friends Meeting House in Brighton on 3 April 2025,. The meeting was chaired by Cat Fisher. The speakers were: Cllr Tim Rowkins, Cabinet Lead for Net Zero and Environmental Services, Brighton and Hove City Council; Dr Matthew Fright, Senior Researcher, Institute for Government; and Chris Holloway, Chair of Hampshire Climate Action Network, and member of the South East Climate Alliance (SECA).
The meeting was recorded. Audio of the speakers can be found at the end. Photographs are also there.
Cat Fisher opened the meeting. Her PowerPoint is here. She explained the background to the discussion - the Government’s proposals for both devolution and local government reorganisation. From the point of view of Brighton and Hove, the key change was the creation of a Sussex and Brighton Mayoral Combined County Authority, covering East and West Sussex and Brighton and Hove. This strategic authority would be led by an elected mayor and would have greater responsibility for economic development, transport and local infrastructure, skills and employment, housing and strategic planning, environment and climate change, health wellbeing and public services, and public safety. Local government reorganisation happening at the same time as devolution might require the Brighton and Hove Unitary Authority to join with other areas, so as to raise its population from the present figure of 280,000 to as much as 500,000.
Cat asked if participants felt that devolution would be positive for climate and nature – a show of hands indicated the audience was split: approximately 25% felt it would, an equal number felt it would not, the majority were ‘don’t knows’.
Matthew Fright said that the Government’s intention was to build on the success of the current 12 mayors, and well-known devolution examples, such as in Manchester, Birmingham, and Tees Valley. He described the Government’s intention to strengthen place-based leadership, through the establishment of a strategic authority and a directly elected metro-mayor, but also by making resources available, for example via a 30-year investment fund. There was also the option of a mayoral precept to provide additional resources. If early steps were successful, legislation would enable a ‘devolution ratchet’, with greater powers and resources handed to the new authorities. Matthew stressed the opportunity for a new kind of more consensual politics. He argued that bipartisanship was key to all current devolution examples. Citizen assemblies and town hall meetings could also provide the opportunity for greater citizen participation.
With respect to climate and nature, the new strategic authorities offered the potential to give new impetus to key programmes such as housing retrofit, green skill development, and multi-year settlements for integrated transport strategies. Matthew highlighted that mayors across the political spectrum had used their convening power to accelerate progress toward Net Zero.
Tim Rowkins said that Brighton and Hove Council was enthusiastic about the opportunities of devolution. He welcomed both the increased power and resources that would be available to the strategic authority. He saw particular potential in the area of integrated transport strategies, but also in the field of integrated health and social care, planning for more social and affordable housing and such areas important to the climate as heat networks, a better energy mix, green jobs and skills and retrofitting buildings. He was also enthusiastic about nature recovery planning at a landscape scale. He welcomed the possibility of environment being a mandated area under a new strategic authority.
Chris Holloway, drawing particularly on her experience in Hampshire, was also enthusiastic about the potential of devolution. She emphasised, though, that declarations of intent about climate and nature commitments needed to be backed up with legal and structural mechanisms. At national level, the South East Climate Alliance had advocated with the Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government for legal duties on climate action and nature to be built into devolution legislation: there should be a statutory duty for climate and nature, along with formal reporting requirements. Locally, Chris emphasised the need to engage early so that mayors would commit to a climate strategy and frameworks across the new regional structure. Accountability was also important, secured by community engagement. Finally, Chris stressed the importance of coordinated voice across the diverse range of groups and organisations working for climate and nature, so that they could shape the priorities of the new bodies. A copy of SECA’s submission can be found here.
A discussion followed. There were points of clarification, but also many on the substance of the proposals. There were both proponents and sceptics.
Clarification of the proposals. It was explained that mayoral elections would be held in 2026, probably using first-past-the-post (though mayors had advocated for single transferable vote).
In favour of devolution, it was argued that a new grouping would have greater ‘heft’ in national policymaking, for example in negotiations with Ministers or outside investors. The new Sussex and Brighton and Hove authority would have a voice in the Council of Nations and Regions. There were real opportunities to solve local problems, for example by using planning powers to manage the desperate need for more housing in the region. It was also the case that a regional authority would have greater convening power and could improve current institutional rigidities, for example in energy. A regional perspective could really make a difference to tackling regional issues like managing the Sussex coastline, integrating transport, or coordinating energy policy through Sussex Energy
On the other hand, sceptics worried about loss of local control (the Government’s decision to over-rule local objections to the expansion of Luton airport was cited): heavy-handed, top-down planning had many risks. There was concern about powers and resources going upwards to the new authority as well as down from Government, which could weaken authorities like Brighton and Hove. There was a potential problem in integrating many existing regional groupings, including Greater Brighton, the South Downs National Park, Sussex Energy, and Sussex Bay – and perhaps a particular problem with public or private entities that had different borders, like Southern Water. There was some scepticism about the so-called ‘new politics’, and the ability of elected officials in a strategic authority to work in a consensual way.
Accountability, participation and voice were key themes, raised both in relation to shaping the devolution process and in the devolved structures that were created as a result. Contributors stressed the importance of convening across different sectors and groups in tackling climate challenges, and the importance of bottom-up community driven action. Tim Rowkins highlighted the aspiration that devolution would build on and scale what was working well in relation to climate and nature.
Other issues raised included the importance of including adaptation in the policy mix. It was proposed that there should be a Future Generations Commissioner in the new arrangement.
At the end of the session, the audience was again asked whether they felt that devolution would be positive for climate and nature. This time those who felt it would be positive outnumbered those who felt it would be negative, but there were still a great number of people who did not know.
Summarising the discussion, Cat Fisher observed that ‘the devil was in the detail’. There was a great deal still to clarify, as well as potential to influence outcomes. She encouraged participants to contribute to the Council’s ongoing consultation. Chris Holloway made a more general point about the importance of engagement on the issue: she encouraged organisations in Brighton and Hove to work together to make the case for climate and nature considerations in devolution
Concluding the meeting, Cat Fisher thanked both the speakers and the audience for an important and wide-ranging debate.
___________
Cat Fisher
Matthew Fright
Tim Rowkins
Chris Holloway