At 90, fierce Remainer Michael Heseltine is calling for revolution

Revolutionary zeal is not often found on the Tory benches in the House of Lords. It is, usually, a rather genteel place containing cool and level heads who have very much grown out of their youthful passions. Yet one imposing nonagenarian has been reprising his role as an establishment hellraiser: fierce Remainer Michael Heseltine, speaking in the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill debate, has once again called for radical changes to the government’s devolution agenda.

While Tory MPs were being asked to quietly ditch the confusing term of “levelling up”, Lord Heseltine was desperately trying to give it some meaning, suggesting a reduction in the number of local authorities from 300 to 60 to make local power more meaningful and local government cheaper.

If growth is today's biggest challenge, Heseltine has a plan to supercharge the economy – giving more power back to local communities and backing that up with change and cash. He argues, as he has for many years, that small amounts of funding put in local hands with strong elected leadership can do more to create growth in areas with that all-important local input. But that requires a painful reorganisation of councils.

Of course, the fallout and political upheaval of reform always puts us off from doing it. As Lord Heseltine himself said: “Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas”, so councillors and officials are unlikely to want a dramatic shift in the status quo. From personal experience, one has seen how Whitehall has a way of dampening the radical spirit. Reform is too often put in the “too hard to do” category – and ministers are often dragged into more pressing and immediate concerns.

The result is worst of all: tinkering with small, safe policies like freeports or enterprise areas, that don’t necessarily address the root of the problem – and only add layers of complexity and more red tape to a system already hampered by it. Just look at today’s distribution of levelling-up funding that benefits the affluent Richmonds and Rutlands. It is hardly the promised injection of funding to reach the areas struggling most, those “left behind” for so long.

But the real issue is less about where the money goes – and about how it’s delivered. It’s top-down, with central government control.

Governments have a tendency to move away from their primary principles over time and find it hard to ask themselves simple questions: does this policy really attract investors? Are we addressing the fundamental weaknesses of the economy? Will this shift the dial? The money is great but are we delivering it in a way that makes a difference? Perhaps that’s why we’re still hearing the same arguments – we’ve managed to dilute our good intentions along the way.

Michael Heseltine is a big beast. His hugely successful urban development corporations that gave new life to the Docklands and Liverpool have demonstrated it. He had the stomach to do battle with the naysayers and vested interests. He backed himself. Rishi Sunak says he wants reform but does he have the stomach to do the same?

Now, this plan is not an obvious vote winner. You can’t sell the “devolution agenda” on the doorstep – and by redrawing the map, you’re asking people to let go of their sense of identity and place. It’s amazing how creating economically rational areas really offend some people’s sense of identity. Nevertheless, it does offer a radically different vision of the future and one that could make a substantive difference in those areas beyond cash handouts.

The prime minister has an unenviable in-tray, one fraught with danger. Any missteps and his detractors are ready to pounce. He is overwhelmed with problems, and any sensible adviser would caution against a radical structural change this close to an election, but it doesn’t mean it’s not needed.

The question is whether anyone in government is as brave as an outspoken 90-year-old ready to tackle the fundamental challenges.