Rewiring the State: the underappreciated policy shift that’s getting too little attention

Why organisations that want to work in and for government need to look beyond Westminster and Whitehall 

Every so often, a policy document lands that says more than its page count suggests. Rewiring the State is one of those documents. It is short, direct and easy to miss, but for anyone who works with government, advises businesses, invests in places, delivers public services or seeks to influence policy, it may prove to be one of the most important statements of this Parliament. 

The less said about Keir Starmer’s now largely forgotten missions, the better. But there is a clear contrast between an approach that put missions first, with less thought given to the structures needed to deliver them, and one focused on building a state that can deliver from the bottom up. Burnham’s approach as Prime Minister places far greater emphasis on changing how the country is governed. 

The central message of Rewiring the State is simple. Power, funding and accountability should move away from Whitehall and closer to the places where people live, work and invest. The Government describes No 10 North as the “engine room” for this approach, working with local leaders to put place at the heart of policy. 

That should make everyone involved in public affairs sit up. This is more than a technical note about administrative reform. It challenges the way influence has traditionally worked in Britain. For decades, government’s gravitational pull has been towards Westminster and Whitehall. If you wanted to understand public policy, you looked first to departments, ministers, special advisers, select committees and the SW1 ecosystem. All of that will still matter. But it may no longer be enough. 

Part of the reason Rewiring the State has not yet cut through is that devolution sounds familiar. We have had city deals, growth deals, combined authorities, metro mayors, trailblazer settlements and piecemeal local government reorganisation. Each has mattered, but each has also faced a centre reluctant to relinquish control over money, policy and accountability. 

What is different here is the stated intention to change that default position. Rewiring the State promises more than additional powers for a few more places. It sets out a different model for the state: central government should become smaller and more strategic, while functions that can be delivered locally should move closer to delivery. Ministers will be expected to justify retaining powers at the centre. 

That would change where decisions are made and how they are made. A state organised around places would put greater weight on local growth plans, mayoral mandates, transport strategies, housing needs, skills, regeneration priorities and public service outcomes. The case for a project, proposal or reform would need to make sense locally as well as nationally. 

The document should also be read alongside what Andy Burnham has said about devolution, Whitehall and No 10 North. He has described No 10 North as the “nerve centre for a rewired Britain”. The phrase speaks to a wider frustration: decisions too often feel remote, slow and detached from the places affected by them. 

The Cabinet statement and Burnham’s argument share a diagnosis. The British state is too centralised and too distant from delivery. Growth and public service reform will require stronger local institutions, better partnerships and a centre prepared to let go. 

The symbolism of No 10 North matters. The Government has described it as a new situation room for growth, with the Prime Minister working from Manchester and the revived National Economic Council bringing ministers and regional mayors together. It is intended to signal a different relationship between the centre and the rest of the country. 

For businesses, charities, investors, developers, infrastructure providers and public service partners, the implication is clear: engagement strategies need to give local and regional government greater weight. Westminster and Whitehall will remain important, but they should no longer be treated as the only routes to influence. 

That means understanding strategic authorities, councils, universities, colleges, NHS leaders, police and fire partners, local business groups and the wider civic networks that shape decisions in each place. It also means knowing how those organisations work together, where their priorities align and where delivery is constrained. 

The established public affairs model often began with identifying the right department, meeting the minister, briefing advisers, supporting the parliamentary argument and building the evidence base. Those steps will still have value. But an effective approach will also ask different questions. Which places share our objectives? Which mayors have the mandate and appetite to lead? Who is responsible for delivery? Which local partners could turn a policy proposal into a credible plan? Where could a national ambition be shown to work in practice? 

This is why Cratus has always believed local insight matters. We have worked on this basis for years. Good public affairs is about more than access. It requires an understanding of political context, institutional pressures, local ambition and the realities of delivery. A proposal that sounds compelling in Westminster can falter if it does not work for a council leader balancing a budget, a mayor seeking growth or a community looking for tangible benefits. 

The organisations that adapt fastest will be those that build practical partnerships. Local and regional government will be looking for capacity, investment, delivery capability and partners who can help places solve real problems. 

That requires a clear offer. Organisations will need to show how their work supports local growth, improves services, creates jobs, strengthens skills, unlocks housing, supports town centres, improves transport or contributes to net zero. They will need to demonstrate community benefit and deliverability, while being honest about constraints such as finance, planning, procurement, public trust and political risk. 

For private capital, the message is particularly important. Strategic authorities are set to play a greater role in shaping investment priorities across transport, housing, regeneration, energy and skills. Investors who begin building relationships only when a procurement starts or a planning decision is imminent may be too late. The serious work begins earlier: understanding local growth plans, aligning with regional priorities and building trust with the institutions that can help make investment deliverable. 

Nor will it be enough to know that a policy area is being devolved. Organisations will need to understand each place’s capacity, leadership and political geography; the relationship between strategic and local authorities; and the roles of MPs, officers and other local partners. They will need to understand places as political systems, not simply administrative boundaries. 

Rewiring the State deserves more attention because it signals a potentially significant change in how Britain is governed. If delivered, it will alter the balance between national policy and local delivery, and between Whitehall control and regional leadership. 

For public affairs, the conclusion is straightforward. Westminster and Whitehall will still matter. But organisations that want to work effectively with government will need to spend more time with local leaders, understand regional priorities and build partnerships that help places deliver. 

The state may be rewired slowly and unevenly. The Government’s intended direction, however, is clear: more power should sit closer to places. Those who recognise that early will be better placed to shape what comes next.