Burnham says Britain needs a written constitution after devolution push
Andy Burnham has said Britain may need a written constitution, arguing that his push for greater devolution across England would fundamentally reshape how the country is governed. The Independent article, though somewhat unusually worded, presents comments from Burnham (referred to in places as Prime Minister, which appears to be an error given his known role as Greater Manchester mayor) in which he links plans for expanded regional powers to a broader case for formal constitutional reform.
Burnham said his proposals, including giving all areas the right to become "strategic authorities" and retain more of their own income tax and business rates, should form the "cornerstone" of a new constitutional settlement built around equivalent living standards across the country. He and Liverpool City Region mayor Steve Rotheram previously argued for a written constitution in their 2024 book, Head North: A Rallying Cry for a More Equal Britain. The UK currently has no single written constitution, instead relying on a mix of common law, statutes and conventions built up over time.
In short
- Burnham links devolution plans to case for written UK constitution
- Wants minimum "essentials" guaranteed equally across all regions
- UK currently has no single written constitution, unlike most countries
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Advocates of Burnham's position argue that England is unusually centralised compared with other developed democracies, leaving too many decisions about local economies, transport and public services in Westminster's hands rather than with those who understand their areas best. They see devolving tax-raising powers and creating strategic authorities as a practical route to reducing regional inequality, and argue that codifying the constitution would protect these gains and clarify the relationship between central and local government, rather than leaving them vulnerable to reversal by a future government or subject to ad hoc conventions that can be reinterpreted at will.
The case against
Sceptics of this approach value the flexibility that Britain's uncodified constitution has provided for centuries, allowing gradual adaptation without the rigidity, legal disputes and difficult amendment processes that written constitutions can bring. They may worry that devolving tax and revenue powers unevenly could deepen regional disparities if wealthier areas retain more of their own income while poorer regions lose out on redistribution, and that a formal constitutional overhaul is a disproportionate response to devolution questions, better addressed through incremental legislation than a wholesale rewriting of how the country is governed. Some may also view the timing and framing of the proposal as reflecting the political ambitions of its authors as much as constitutional necessity.
Explained simply
Andy Burnham is the elected mayor of Greater Manchester, one of a number of regional mayors in England who have gained increasing powers over transport, housing and economic development since devolution deals began under recent governments. He has been a prominent advocate for shifting more decision-making and funding away from Westminster and into England's regions and cities, arguing this would help reduce inequality between different parts of the country.
Britain does not have a single written constitution. Unlike most countries, its system of government instead rests on a patchwork of laws, court rulings and long-standing conventions built up over centuries, and there have long been debates about whether this should change. Calls for a written constitution are not new, but they usually surface alongside wider arguments about how power is distributed between central government, the nations of the UK, and local or regional authorities.
Burnham's comments link these two issues together: he suggests that expanding devolution, including giving more areas greater control over local taxation and decision-making, is significant enough that it should go hand in hand with formal constitutional reform. This matters because any change to how the UK is governed, or to how power and money are shared between London and the regions, has implications for public services, local accountability and the balance of political power across the country.