There is a sensible piece of political delivery analysis by Sir David Lidington in the Institute of Government (03 July 2026) Monday Briefing examining whether a new Number 10 North will or not, work? He has appropriate experience so his views carry weight. Lidington makes the political point that Burnham will need to show results quickly to deliver his commitment to effective regional policy. . And then sets out three challenges To deliver economic regeneration and growth, ie. urban rebuilding in towns and land use change in the open countryside. The N10N new office must have the necessary remit. Is it to be based on decentralisation or devolution? As Lidington says an objective is the biggest council house building programme since the 1950’s. He is right. Building on this scale will be noticed and enduring by passers-by and will be overwhelming for residents living nearby. In addition he says the N10N must act for the country as a whole. Quite right too, but the myopic south easters in and around the Home Counties will struggle with this geography mind-set! And finally Lidington stresses the need to get the politics right.By this he means many of the political relationships to be managed by N10N will involve opposition parties leaders, councillors and MP’s who pride themselves on their electoral mandates. He warns that Burnham will need a trusted deputy able to handle the political load, able to handle broker compromises and able to exercise delegated power on Burnham’s behalf.
In much of his analysis Lidington is, in my opinion spot on. Unless Burnham or his appointed deputy can win the acceptance, or at the very least the alignment of all political parties at Westminster on the need for long term, generational measured housing and infrastructure delivery windows amongst fellow MP’s, those MP’s will never subscribe to the arguments they need as the electoral ammunition to say to their local councillors and activists the truth. That the time for spatial policy making which ignores the needs of future generations and unthinkingly exploits the inheritance received from past generations is now over. In its place must be introduced new long term spatial policies based on delivering the local community’s long term civic priorities, in place of the short term, divisive spatial policies of the last fifty years, which have caused the homes crisis.
In high demand, prosperous but myopic areas like the Thames Valley and other dormitories around London, mind- sets must be changed if we care about the nation’s future.The hearts and minds of local councillors, activists and fearful residents must be changed by presenting an appealing cross-party vision for their local community in the 2050’s and the 2080’s, one or two generations ahead. And this is where Lidington’s analysis goes wrong. At this point of time the focus on tenure issues, for example council housing or market housing is dangerously premature. What causes local fears, local divisions, local anger is not whether the new homes are or are not social or market, but simply where will they go? This is, in local terms, the nuclear decision. . And it must be addressed up front, head-on and without ambiguity. This process of community soul-searching. means, after vigorous and probably painful and contentious local debate about where and where not new homes will go, once it is agreed then, but only then a major step forward will be completed. This matters. And can no longer be avoided. Fix this tough spatial decision and the rest of the homes supply debate will fall into place even if the tenure mix will sometimes reflect differing social preferences.
Reflect on the importance of the spatial Look at the realities as they are today. Most opposition to new home building is sincere but ignorant. Like public agitation for lower taxes accompanied by more spending on welfare or health needs. Except local residents live with the spatial results for ever, which is a long time. So Prime Minister Burnham’s spokesman at N10N has a tough task: winning cross-party support to abandon short term political advantage and abandon short term point scoring in favour of a more collegiate, consensual approach to the future, civic needs of their areas. Facing this tough decision is unavoidable if we want future generations to have the start we did. But can this difficult and altruistic message be communicated? I hope Sir David Livingston or someone else with his experience can see a way in the limited time available?
Ian Campbell
6 July 2026
