Recent discussions about devolution have gathered fresh momentum.
The Government’s Rewiring the State agenda argues that more power, funding and accountability should move away from Whitehall and towards local and regional leaders. Alongside this, proposals to devolve 16–19 funding to mayoral authorities have reignited debate about how much decision-making should sit locally.
Having reflected on similar questions raised during a London Assembly session on the impact of delegating the Adult Skills Budget (previously the Adult Education Budget) to London, and having spent several years helping oversee one of the largest delegated skills budgets in England, I have been thinking about what devolution has actually achieved in practice.
What makes this debate particularly interesting is that London’s Adult Education Budget, and subsequently the Adult Skills Fund, has not historically operated under a model of full devolution. London has had a delegated responsibility rather than complete local control.
Yet despite those limitations, significant progress has been possible.
My conclusion is simple. The greatest benefit of devolution is not local control. It is local responsiveness.
Local leaders hear different things
One of the strengths of devolution is that it creates more opportunities to listen.
Across London, many of the developments introduced over recent years have emerged through continuous engagement with:
- Further Education colleges
- Borough adult education services
- Independent training providers
- Employers
- Community organisations
- Learners themselves
Importantly, listening happens at multiple levels.
Providers shape policy and delivery through regular engagement. Equally important are the visits made by the Mayor of London and his Deputy Mayor to colleges, employers and local projects across London. Those conversations provide real-world insight that is often difficult to capture through national systems alone.
The closer decision-makers are to delivery, the easier it becomes to identify emerging needs and respond accordingly.
This is not simply my observation. Recent independent evaluation of London’s Adult Skills Fund highlighted the value providers place on the GLA’s ongoing engagement with providers and its efforts to understand on-the-ground delivery challenges. The evaluation identified these relationships as an important factor in helping London respond to funding reforms while maintaining support for London’s wider skills priorities.
Innovation is not always about new programmes
When people think about innovation, they often think about launching something entirely new.
My experience has been different.
Sometimes innovation is about creating better feedback loops.
A good example is London’s Learner Survey, one of the first exercises of its kind developed at city level.
Alongside traditional evaluation approaches, it helps us understand both the economic and social impact of adult skills investment in a much more timely way.
It is not perfect and there is still a lag. However, it provides significantly faster insight into learner outcomes than might otherwise be possible and helps inform future investment decisions. The survey has also become a valuable tool for providers, supporting curriculum planning, conversations with Ofsted, impact reporting and future programme design.
Devolution helps scale what works
Another benefit of devolution is the ability to build on learning rather than repeatedly starting again.
Over the years, London has tested many approaches through programmes including the Adult Skills Fund, Skills Bootcamps and the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF).
Some worked better than others.
The important point is that successful approaches can be integrated into the wider system.
A good recent example is London Talent Pathways, which started delivery at the start of the 2026–27 academic year, with up to £100 million available over the coming years.
Many aspects of its design have been informed by lessons from previous programmes, pilots and partnerships. Rather than starting from scratch, successful ideas have been brought together and scaled through a larger and more sustainable funding model.
To me, this is one of the strongest arguments for devolution.
Learning should not be temporary. It should become part of the system.
Devolution can also unlock additional non-government investment
One of the less discussed advantages of devolution is its ability to attract additional resources.
Following delegation of the Adult Skills Fund, London was able to use that funding strategically alongside European Social Fund (ESF) investment.
This supported activity across a range of priorities, including:
- ESOL
- Careers support
- Continuing participation
- Support for those at risk of becoming NEET
- Community outreach and specialist provision
The flexibility created through delegated authority ultimately helped secure over £10m of additional ESF investment into London’s wider skills ecosystem.
Although ESF has now ended, the principle remains relevant.
As public finances become increasingly constrained, conversations have intensified with philanthropic organisations, employers and other non-public sector partners about how they can complement public investment and help stretch every pound further.
Partnership will only become more important in the years ahead.
Final reflection
The current debate is often framed around powers, governance and structures.
Those discussions matter.
But after several years working within a semi-devolved (delegated) funding system, I believe the bigger question is this: how quickly can places learn, adapt and improve outcomes for their residents?
For me, the greatest achievement of delegation has been creating the conditions for better listening, faster learning and more joined-up action.
London’s system is still not perfect.
But I believe it has become a better listener.
And in public service, that is often where better outcomes begin.
An earlier version of this essay was first published on LinkedIn on 8 August 2026.
