How new is the new local governance? Lessons from the United Kingdom

In recent times, a conventional wisdom concerning the governance of cities has emerged. It revolves around the contention that policy and planning frameworks are increasingly closed off from public and democratic accountability, in order to facilitate the pursuit of efficiency over equity objectives. The implication is that 'old' styles of governance were more open and accountable, while the 'new' seek to close off debate and streamline procedures. Yet the evidence to sustain such claims seems limited; this paper situates the policies and practices of local government in the UK within a historical perspective, and develops the contention that the claimed differences between old and new styles of governance are overdrawn. Using empirical material from two UK cities, we demonstrate that there are significant continuities in the procedures and practices of policy-makers, in terms of policy objectives, styles and modes of accountability. In this sense, greater clarity is required in terms of what constitutes both the old and new modes of local governance in the British cities.