Think tank: Glasgow should have directly-elected mayor
The Centre for Cities said Glasgow could be missing out on billions in funding without the changes.
A report, The Missing Piece In The Big Cities' Jigsaw, claimed Scotland's GDP would be 4.6% larger than it is now if Glasgow's economy performed in line with the average for cities of its size.
In England, there are 10 combined local authorities which have a metro mayor. The process of local devolution began a decade ago with Greater Manchester.
READ MORE: Major tenement refurbishment completed in Glasgow's West End
READ MORE: 'Cutting-edge' technology doubles Glasgow's mobile network speeds
Andrew Carter, chief executive of Centre for Cities, said: 'The UK is taking a city-region led approach to economic growth because cities are at the frontier of innovation and economic growth.
'Glasgow has an important role in this, with the potential to make an added economic contribution the size of Scotland's oil and gas sector if it harnesses its size to generate more cutting-edge activity.
'English cities with metro mayors have, in the last week, been allocated billions to invest in local public transport networks and R&D.
'Scotland, too, needs its big cities to make a greater contribution to the economy.
'A directly-elected mayor for the Glasgow city region would bring much-needed leadership, accountability and the ability to shape growth around the city's needs.'
READ MORE: Glasgow's rank on UK city wellness list revealed
Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes said: 'Glasgow is key to driving the Scottish economy, which is why the Scottish Government is partly funding the city-region's £1.13 billion growth deal.
'We have also supported Glasgow city region's £160 million investment zone, with additional funding for electric vehicle infrastructure and skills development.
'We are working with partners to explore ways of devolving further powers to regional economic partnerships, including Glasgow city region, with the aim of presenting options to Ministers by the end of this Parliament.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Orwellian new banking surveillance powers offer huge potential for abuse
To what extent do you trust this, or any previous, government? It's a relevant question, given the sweeping new powers that parliament is seemingly being asked to hand over to our elected – and unelected – masters on a weekly basis. The point of the question, however, is in the fact of its being asked at all: while there has always been a healthy degree of suspicion between the governed and the government, it is hard to imagine a time when that disconnect has been greater than it is today. A civil service obsessed with identity politics of all varieties, which threatens strike action if its members are not allowed to remain at home most of the week while suffering no loss in pay, which reserves the right to complain publicly about policies being pursued by the elected government, cannot hope to retain the good will and support of the public. Yet now the government has chosen to give middle-ranking civil servants with unprecedented powers to spy on ordinary citizens' financial affairs. As revealed by The Telegraph today, a new fraud Bill will allow civil servants to demand that banks provide personal information about an individual's account without a court order, and extract funds if they 'reasonably believe' that money is owed to the taxpayer. They will also be given the power to ask for a search and entry warrant and to freeze bank accounts. We may assume the new measures can be filed under 'seemed a good idea at the time', since they were initially proposed under the previous Conservative government in response to the eye-watering levels of fraud that took place during that weird period of history defined by the Covid pandemic and lockdown. So much public money disappeared under relatively little public scrutiny or oversight that the new government feels emboldened to clamp down on potential ongoing fraud, secure in the knowledge that the public would tolerate never-before-seen investigative powers wielded by relatively junior civil servants on behalf of the public purse. And if those powers could be guaranteed to be used only against the fraudsters, there would be very little opposition to the new measures. The question is whether those powers, once granted, will not be used more and more against ordinary citizens who are merely suspected, perhaps with little evidence, of not paying enough tax or claiming too many benefits without justification. Do we really want to live in a country where citizens' bank accounts can be examined, frozen or have cash withdrawn – all without the account holder being told what is happening or why? As the legislation currently stands, sign-off by a minister, which would offer at least the appearance of some democratic accountability, would not be required before an individual's bank account is accessed and further action proposed. The powers could be wielded by any anti-fraud official with a civil service rank above 'higher executive officer' – a Whitehall middle manager – and will apply to members of the Public Sector Fraud Authority, a new government body designed to crack down on criminal fraud against public bodies. Naturally, civil liberties groups have raised concerns about the legislation. Big Brother Watch, the civil liberties campaign group, told The Telegraph that the 'dangerous new bank spying powers' would 'effectively turn banks into agents of the state, tasked with spying on everyone's bank accounts and reporting back to the Government'. There's an ugly element of arrogance in all of this, a touch of 'We are the masters now' sort of philosophy from a party that won a 170-seat Commons majority on barely a third of the popular vote. The question posed earlier as to whether you trust this or previous governments can be reframed and put to current ministers: would you trust these powers to be used fairly by ministers of another party, after the next election? In the event of a Reform-led coalition government, are you content for such unprecedented executive power over individuals' livelihoods to be in the hands of your political opponents? Fraud must be challenged and detected and its perpetrators held to account. But in doing so, the government needs to take citizens with them. At the start of this century, the Proceeds of Crime Act was opposed by many in the legal establishment who felt it would result in miscarriages of justice in the legitimate fight against organised crime. Those concerns were proved groundless thanks to the legal safeguards in the legislation. Unless similarly robust safeguards are inserted into this new legislation, ministers risk damaging further, perhaps irretrievably, the delicate and essential political contract that exists between them and their voters.
Glasgow Times
42 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Starmer says France needs to co-operate more over migration
The Prime Minister said he wants 'more co-operation' over migration and will raise the issue with the country's president as the number of people making the journey climbed again over the weekend, taking this year's provisional total to 16,317. On the way to the G7 conference in Canada, where leaders from the world's wealthiest countries will meet for talks on global security, Sir Keir said he was determined to 'absolutely bear down' on the crossings. Data from the Home Office indicated 919 people made the journey in 14 boats on Friday and 134 crossed the Channel on Saturday. The highest daily number so far this year was on May 31, when 1,195 people arrived. Sir Keir said the Government had worked hard to improve relations with the French over migration (Stefan Rousseau/PA) Asked whether he was satisfied with the response from French border authorities, Sir Keir told reporters: 'One of the things we've worked hard at is improving the relations with the French in relation to the work we both need to do to stop these boat crossings, which I'm determined we will absolutely bear down on. 'Nobody should be making that journey. 'As a result of that we are seeing a much greater co-operation in northern France – I want to see more co-operation in northern France, and it's an issue that I have raised and will raise again with President Macron. 'We have good relations between the Home Secretary and the interior minister now that we're working on jointly. 'It's one of the issues I'll be discussing – not just with Macron, actually, but discussing it with Giorgia Meloni, Freidrich Merz, and others.' Downing Street said the Prime Minister had 'lengthy discussions' about migration with his Italian counterpart during his first bilateral meeting at the summit in the Canadian Rockies on Sunday. 'The Prime Minister raised the UK's world-leading work on people smuggling sanctions, adding that he looked forward to working with other European countries on this approach,' Number 10 said. Sir Keir's Government has pledged to 'smash the gangs' behind people-smuggling operations but has so far struggled to bring down crossings in the Channel, which is one of the busiest and most dangerous shipping lanes in the world. Chancellor Rachel Reeves last week committed £200 million to overhauling the asylum system and said the Government will end the use of hotels to house asylum seekers in this Parliament. The 'reset' deal struck between the UK and EU in May this year included commitments to co-operate more on migration, including greater intelligence-sharing. It did not include an EU-wide returns agreement, which the Prime Minister said in 2023 he would seek to secure. Sir Keir's agenda for the G7 summit has not been confirmed but he is expected to hold talks with Mr Macron as well as US President Donald Trump and German Chancellor Mr Merz over the course of the conference.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
With this calibre of MP, it's no wonder Britain is on the decline
To understand the scale of the catastrophe engulfing our country, look no further than a three-minute clip of a Government minister being eaten alive by a veteran broadcaster today. On paper, Economic Secretary to The Treasury Emma Reynolds may well be quite bright (she has a Politics, Philosophy and Economics degree from Oxford). She certainly has no shortage of experience, having spent her entire career in and around politics. Asked to demonstrate the most basic level of understanding about what she and her department are doing with vast sums of our money, however, she was as exposed as a boggle-eyed frog on a lily leaf. The gory detail of the latest ministerial car crash scarcely matters, though in 20 years as a political journalist, Reynolds's encounter with Nick Ferrari is one of the most excruciating interviews I have heard. Put simply, she had no idea what she was talking about – which is alarming, given her power. What matters more is the overall impression created by an endless succession of ministers from Keir Starmer's Government who, under the slightest pressure, seem just as weak and ill-informed. It is not only that they refuse to give straight answers to simple questions, or to take any responsibility for obvious errors. That's par for the course among professional politicians. It is that they routinely insult our intelligence, dismiss and denigrate our concerns and continually insist that black is white. The shameless telling of bare-faced lies is like nothing I have observed before. And if caught out, they simply double down. Witness the behaviour of Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones, whose ludicrous assertion that the 'majority' of Channel migrants are women and children is demonstrably untrue, giving him no way out. Did he apologise? Not at all! Instead, he claimed he had been 'misrepresented', and tried to shift the blame to Reform UK. Oh, I know that all governments have their share of ministerial muppets and dreary career politicians who owe their rise up the greasy pole less to ability than to connections, favours owed, or absence of anyone better. Nor are crash interviews the preserve of any one political party. They happen from time to time during every administration, when interviewees are tired, distracted, or badly briefed. What is different about this lot is the sheer frequency with which they demonstrate their ineptitude, and the depths to which they sink as they try to deflect. Reynolds's calamitous appearance comes hot on the heels of a similar disaster involving her Treasury colleague James Murray last week. Nine times the minister was asked where migrants will go in the unlikely event that the Government honours a pledge to stop using hotel accommodation. Nine times he failed to give his interviewer an answer. He looked as panicked and out of his depth as a drowning man. Meanwhile, the Chancellor on Sunday tried to use victims of the grooming gangs as a shield against awkward questions about the responsibility of the many authorities that turned a blind eye, as if performative compassion should shut down that vital debate. At least she did not repeat previous shameful 'lines to take' from Downing Street, smearing the campaign for a public inquiry as 'far-Right.' In two decades reporting on governments of all political stripes, I have never witnessed such systematic incompetence and mediocrity. How can our country bear another four years of this?
