Number 10 North?

Andy Burnham is right that Britain is too London centric. Devolution can work when it gives places control over skills, housing, transport and investment. But a “Number 10 North” risks becoming a political headline: an argument about geography while the country avoids hard realities.

People are not worried whether power sits in London or Manchester. They are worried about growth, borrowing costs, weak business confidence, stretched public services and whether their children will have a better standard of living. They are asking why the Government cannot speak honestly about weak productivity, high borrowing costs and the pressure rising taxes are placing on households and employers.

Moving desks north does not fix that. The test is whether policy delivers growth, homes, skilled jobs and lower costs in every part of the country. Britain does not need a new postcode for power. It needs a government prepared to confront real problems.

Andy Burnham probably has a fair point in identifying Britain's over centralisation as a barrier to growth. Decisions on transport, planning and skills are often better made where local knowledge and accountability actually sit. However, relocating part of Number 10 to Manchester is, in itself, the easy part, and risks looking like political theatre if it isn't backed by genuine devolution of power. The real test is whether it leads to faster decision making, better infrastructure, and stronger productivity. Markets won't judge where government is based; they'll judge whether reforms improve the UK's long term growth potential while maintaining fiscal discipline. Ultimately, this will be measured by outcomes rather than symbolism.