What good devolution looks like

Above: Runshaw College hosts the Lancashire Economic Breakfast, bringing together employers, partners and sector leaders to reflect on the latest Lancashire Quarterly Economic Survey.

As Chair of The Lancashire Colleges and Principal of Runshaw College, I regularly work with employers, local authorities, fellow college leaders and regional partners. Over the past year, we have moved from observing theoretical discussions about devolution to asking what devolution could mean for our communities and the learners we serve in practice.

Overall, I am positive about the direction of travel: there is a compelling case for decisions about skills, economic growth and public services being made closer to the communities they affect. Colleges understand their local economies, employers and learners deeply. Devolution therefore has the potential to strengthen partnerships, improve responsiveness and create better alignment between education, skills and economic priorities.

However, as more powers move to strategic authorities and combined county authorities, an important question remains:

What does good devolution actually look like?

The more I have reflected on that question, the more I find myself returning to five simple tests.

For me, this is where everything starts.

A young person's opportunities should not depend on their postcode. While local areas should have flexibility to respond to their own priorities and challenges, we must avoid creating a system where access to opportunity varies significantly between different parts of the country.

There should remain a clear national expectation that every young person, wherever they live, can access high-quality education and meaningful progression opportunities.

Local responsiveness matters, but so does fairness.

The challenge for policymakers is to strike the right balance between local discretion and national entitlement.

Colleges work closely with employers, understand their communities and often spot emerging needs long before they appear in strategies, plans or forecasts.

As strategic authorities assume a greater role, I hope we preserve that flexibility.

Successful devolution should empower local partnerships, encourage innovation and trust institutions to exercise professional judgement. It should create the space for colleges and other partners to respond quickly to emerging needs rather than requiring permission for every adjustment.

Colleges should not simply be consulted once decisions have already been made. They should be active partners in shaping local priorities from the outset. Successful devolution will depend on genuine collaboration between strategic authorities, employers, schools, colleges and universities, drawing on the expertise each brings.

Much of the debate around devolution understandably focuses on skills and workforce development. These are critical issues and colleges have a major role to play in supporting economic growth.

However, education is about more than labour market planning.

As the leader of a tertiary college, I see every day the importance of maintaining a broad range of opportunities and pathways. Some students progress into apprenticeships and employment. Others move on to university and professional careers. Many will contribute directly to their local communities, while others may take opportunities further afield.

All of these routes are valuable and all deserve equal respect.

A successful devolved system must recognise that there is no single route to success. Academic, vocational and technical pathways all have an important role, and learners should be able to choose the pathway that is right for them.

Economic growth is important, but education must continue to serve wider social, cultural and personal ambitions as well.

If I have one concern about devolution, it is not devolution itself.

It is complexity.

Colleges already operate within extensive accountability, regulatory and funding frameworks. The risk is that devolution adds new layers rather than simplifying existing ones, leaving institutions accountable to both national and local systems simultaneously.

That would be a missed opportunity.

Good devolution should devolve power, not paperwork.

If reform results in more plans, more reporting or more duplication, we will have made the system more complicated without necessarily making it better.

The objective should be clear: fewer burdens, clearer accountabilities and greater freedom to focus on what matters most, improving outcomes for learners.

This is the fundamental test.  Ultimately, learners are not interested in governance structures and constitutional arrangements. Employers care more about outcomes than organisational charts.

What matters is whether people's lives improve.

• Does participation increase?
• Do more learners achieve and progress?
• Are employers better able to access the skills they need?
• Are opportunities expanding for individuals, communities and local economies?

Those are the questions that matter.

It is easy for reform programmes to become focused on structures and systems. Yet the purpose of any reform should be to improve outcomes. Devolution should not be judged by who controls the budget, but by whether it creates better opportunities and better lives.

That is why I remain optimistic.

The opportunity is significant. Greater collaboration, stronger local leadership and more responsive decision-making all have the potential to benefit learners, employers and communities.

But success is not inevitable.

For me, good devolution comes back to five principles: fairness, flexibility, breadth, bureaucracy and impact.

If devolution can improve fairness, preserve flexibility, protect breadth, reduce bureaucracy and increase impact, it has the potential to strengthen both our education system and our economy.

That is the real test of devolution. Not where decisions are made, but whether those decisions improve people's lives.

Clare Russell is principal and CEO of Runshaw College in Lancashire and chair of The Lancashire Colleges.