As part of the Spending Review 2015, the Chancellor invited places wanting to agree a devolution deal to submit formal, fiscally-neutral proposals with an agreed geography to the Treasury by 4 September 2015.
The response from the sector was substantial, with over 30 submissions put forward covering city and non-metropolitan areas alike. This page provides an overview of the 4th September submissions that have been made public.
September devolution submissions by area
A list of the September devolution submissions (where publicly shared online), organised by area, and links to their relevant document.
North East
North East Combined Authority
Tees Valley
North West
Greater Manchester
Liverpool City Region
Cheshire and Warrington
Yorkshire and Humber
Sheffield City Region
Hull
Leeds City Region
South East
Hampshire and Isle of Wight
Oxfordshire and districts
England's Economic Heartland (Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire)
Three Southern Counties (West Sussex, East Sussex) and Surrey
Greater Brighton
South West
Heart of South West
West of England
Gloucestershire
Cornwall
Wiltshire
Dorset
East of England
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough
Essex
Southend and Thurrock (now part of the Greater Essex bid)
Suffolk
Norfolk
East Midlands
D2N2 (Derby, Derbyshire, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire) Please also see ‘North Midlands' draft devolution deal - addition as of January 2016.
Leicestershire
Lincolnshire
West Midlands
West Midlands Combined Authority
Telford and Wrekin
London Councils
More detail
It is important to note that submissions varied considerably in terms of stages of development; some areas having come to agreement over future governance arrangements and presenting clear "asks" and "offers" to government. Others have been keen to make clear their aspirations and priority policy areas for devolution and have outlined plans for developing their submissions further to present the strongest possible business case to government.
This overview is a snapshot in time, and as such we expect the individual plans for many areas to develop and alter as they embark upon a series on sensitive negotiations with government. It is also important to note, therefore, that these submissions do not yet represent the new reality for local government- these proposals are yet to be negotiated and agreed with individual government departments.
The LGA has not included, as part of this analysis, details of submissions made available to us in confidence.