An inquiry chaired by Lord Bob Kerslake has called for primary legislation to be introduced to protect local government.

A report, which was published by the inquiry, also said more must be done to encourage government departments to support devolution.

The inquiry into Better Devolution was established by the All-Party parliamentary Group on Reform, Decentralisation and Devolution. It looked at how to achieve greater devolution across the country.

Some of the issues brought up by the inquiry included the scope of devolution deals to date and said all levels of the government must “establish a new understanding of accountability, with citizens looking to local leadership first, and central government second”.

The report added: “At a political level, devolution can only succeed if the electorate perceive a shift in accountability from national politicians to local.

“The temptation for central government to step in when something goes wrong at a local level must be resisted if we are to see this shift occur.

“There needs to be a new legal basis for the independence of local government, made through primary legislation.”

One of the main issues to be brought up during the inquiry was not all parts of the government are backing the drive to devolve powers to regions. Instead, the focus on growth is limiting the scope of devolution deals.

“It was put to us that despite the apparent open door attitude of the government, in practice there has been greater engagement from some government departments than others; a notion of so-called ‘no go’ areas was raised,” the report stated.

“There was also consensus that far from bespoke negotiations, the deals done to date are somewhat template arrangements with little room for variability, the overriding focus being on growth.”

The inquiry said to incorporate devolution successfully across the nation, “all of the UK civil service” will need reforming. There needs to be a more equal partnership between central and local government, as well as change within Whitehall to allow more services to be delivered locally.

Lord Kerslake said: “Greater devolution has the potential to deliver a stronger economy, better services and a stronger Union. But what we are doing now is piecemeal and incoherent.

“As we lead up to the EU referendum and consider our identity within Europe, the need for a wider debate on how we better empower our local areas and govern is greater than ever.

“The time has come for a bigger conversation – one involving all citizens – if we want to reduce the gap between those that govern and those that are governed, and ensure devolution has a strong and lasting legacy whatever the result in June.”

The Chancellor confirmed last week that a deal had been agreed for Greater Lincolnshire, with a collaborative agreement in place stretching from the Humber to the Wash.

It’s already been greeted with accusations of bribery and blackmail from Caistor and Market Rasen MP Sir Edward Leigh.

But the Government was keen to push its credentials this week, with the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) more than obliging when the Grimsby Telegraph asked for a chat on the topic.

Getting hold of press officers, never mind a Secretary of State, can be a problem normally, but not so when it came to the big D-word.

And I didn’t even have to call the Communities Secretary – he called me, from his mobile and everything.

Secretary Greg Clark stressed that there were “no downsides” to this devolution deal with no erosion of the current set-up – only more powers on top of it all.

The man in charge of George Osborne’s “devolution revolution” said he had been so impressed with Lincolnshire’s offer that he decided to bump the announcement up the waiting list.

But even he recognised the deal had a “uniqueness”, with the industrial engine of the Humber combined with what is principally a rural county – a combination not everyone believes sits naturally.

‘Huge moment’

The likes of Grimsby MP Melanie Onn and Scunthorpe MP Nic Dakin had pushed for a Humber Estuary devolution deal instead, linking the South Bank with Hull and the East Riding, but North East and North Lincolnshire leaders turned their attention south.

What is interesting about this yellowbelly formation, uniting a population of one million people, is what a vast area it combines.

Stamford in south Lincolnshire is almost as close to London as it is Grimsby, but yet now the two will be tied economically after Westminster handed the county control over a number of functions, including transport, infrastructure investment, health care and even prison services.

“This is a huge moment for Lincolnshire,” said Mr Clark, an advocate for devolution for more than a decade.

“It is the first deal we have done with a predominately rural area. It has got the important local authorities along the South Bank of the Humber and that is what makes it unique – that large rural area combined with an important industrial area.

“It deserves huge congratulations on beating many other areas who had prepared bids, as it managed to get to the head of the queue.”

The bumper £450 million devolution investment – a cash pot of £15 million annually for the next 30 years – will come on the proviso that all ten councils agree to the terms which includes an elected metro mayor for the region. Think Boris Johnson but with less panache.

Advocates for the deal say it could boost the area’s economy by £8 billion, provide 29,000 jobs and see 100,000 homes built.

Will it be enough money?

But the deal was not without its critics.

Ms Onn said, when broken down, the money equated to £15 per person every year and questioned whether it was enough to deliver the growth promised.

Infrastructure projects cost a great deal of money.

The transformation of the A160 at South Killingholme into a dual carriage superhighway comes with a £90 million price tag, and even the Immingham bypass, costing nearly £8 million, would have wiped out half the county’s new devolution budget for the year.

But yet, if the heavy infrastructure spending does have to come out of the devolution fund, that same cash pot would have to still stretch to pay for healthcare improvements, the upkeep of courts and the upgrading of flood defences, however.

The question is, will it manage to finance it all?

Mr Clark argued that the pot of cash allowed the “super authority” to be more inventive with the money.

“It allows them (the Lincolnshire councils) to leverage other money from investors,” he explained as he cut in and out of phone signal while he rode a train to his next meeting.

“This is money that wouldn’t have been available to the area. Without the deal, it simply wouldn’t be there. It can be used intelligently to encourage more investment in the area.”

Lincolnshire acted ‘shrewdly’

When the deal was announced, Conservative Cleethorpes MP Martin Vickers said it had been imperative North East Lincolnshire got in on the act sooner rather than later as the devolution packages on offer were getting “less generous” by the month. …”

Durham County Council’s cabinet on Wednesday decided to defer making a decision, following Gateshead Council’s decision on Tuesday to reject it.

The two authorities had previously signed up to the programme, which could unlock £3.4bn in job creation and skills training cash.

Both authorities have said they support “genuine devolution for the North East” – but councillors have argued that they don’t believe what is being offered matches up to that.

Durham County Council leader Simon Henig told councillors that fair funding for the region needed to be in place to make the deal work, adding that more time was needed to get the deal right.

Gateshead leader Mick Henry blamed the politicians in Westminster for the lack of a breakthrough.

He said: “Government needs to think again about how to address the issues of the North East and how they are going to be seriously and properly fair to us.

“I think it’s a real shame that they seem to want devolution to take place but aren’t prepared to be open minded.”

On Thursday, the leaders of the seven councils which make up the North East Combined Authority will meet to discuss the proposals.

They will in effect have four options – turn down the deal, agree the deal, agree the deal with conditions attached, or delay the deal.

The North East Liberal Democrats have called for the decision to be deferred to allow for further negotiations.

A spokesman said: “We recognise many of the concerns expressed about the current deal, including the requirement for an elected mayor, and the lack of say afforded to the public on this decision.

“We believe a decision should be deferred to allow for further negotiations with Government and we encourage NECA to explore this with a view to establishing whether a better deal with wider support is possible.

“We call for urgent cross-party discussions on how the devolution deal process can be taken forward with greater consensus.”

There was an almost unanimous vote of approval at Shire Hall yesterday for a motion that said the devolution proposal for Cambridgeshire, Norfolk and Suffolk “is not acceptable to this council” in its current form.

Councillors stopped short of killing the deal dead altogether, with an amendment by Cllr John Hipkin ensuring Cambridgeshire remains at the negotiating table with Whitehall.

But the bulk of councillors who spoke on the issue in more than two hours of debate left their fellow councillors in no uncertain terms that they were against the deal.

There was a general consensus across the chamber that devolution should be welcomed in principle – but the subject of a directly elected mayor across all three counties and 23 councils gained no support.

And this looks like being the key issue in the devolution debate, with UKIP leader Cllr Paul Bullen telling councillors yesterday that council leader Cllr Steve Count had informed group leaders the mayor aspect of the deal was non-negotiable.

Labour, Lib Dem and UKIP councillors in particular all suggested a devolution deal covering Cambridgeshire and Peterborough made more sense – with Cambridge City Council willing to share its considerable lump of business rates if a deal can be agreed across this geography, Labour leader Cllr Ashley Walsh said.

“This is a shotgun wedding and George Osborne hasn’t even had the decency to take us out to dinner beforehand,” Cllr Walsh added.

“You would have more chance of finding the Fenland tiger than someone who supports a regional mayor across East Anglia.”

Lib Dem councillor Lucy Nethsingha said the deal looked as if it had been “drawn up on the back of a cigar packet in the Treasury” and had “very little to offer Cambridgeshire”; Cllr John Williams said it was an “idiotic suggestion that you can have one person running the infrastructure for this area”, while Cllr David Jenkins said the council “should be selfish and look after the interests of Cambridgeshire” rather than partnering with Norfolk and Suffolk. …”