Levelling Up- Is it ever actually possible?
Discussion
“Levelling up”, “Northern Powerhouse”, “Midlands Engine”, “Burning Injustices”- we’ve had several catchy phrases and slogans for attempting to tackle regional inequalities, but it is actually feasible? We’ve had QUANGOs, regional development agencies and corporations, enterprise zones, “north shoring”, moving civil service jobs out of London and the SE, regional mayors, but still the issues remain.
On the majority of metrics, all northern regions plus large swathes of the midlands are behind London and the south. Unemployment, average earnings, life expectancy, educational attainment, GDP/capita, house prices, Waitrose stores per 100k population- all are substantially lower in the north and much of the midlands.
Is it feasible to tackle this difference? How much can the disparity be narrowed? Can it be eliminated, or is London just too far ahead? I think many of the issues are baked in from the days of industrial decline, when many large employers went under and many areas never quite regained their momentum. Some such as Manchester, definitely did, and have gone on to thrive, regenerate and carve a new identity for themselves, though lots of problems still remain.
Do the residents of Sunderland stand to find themselves on par economically with those in Surrey, or should they all just pack their bags and head down the A1?
On the majority of metrics, all northern regions plus large swathes of the midlands are behind London and the south. Unemployment, average earnings, life expectancy, educational attainment, GDP/capita, house prices, Waitrose stores per 100k population- all are substantially lower in the north and much of the midlands.
Is it feasible to tackle this difference? How much can the disparity be narrowed? Can it be eliminated, or is London just too far ahead? I think many of the issues are baked in from the days of industrial decline, when many large employers went under and many areas never quite regained their momentum. Some such as Manchester, definitely did, and have gone on to thrive, regenerate and carve a new identity for themselves, though lots of problems still remain.
Do the residents of Sunderland stand to find themselves on par economically with those in Surrey, or should they all just pack their bags and head down the A1?
Fusion777 said:
Is it feasible to tackle this difference? How much can the disparity be narrowed? Can it be eliminated, or is London just too far ahead?
Of course it can be, but the UK has an infatuation with London, driven mainly by the city being not only the centre of Government but also the major area for GDP generation as a result of the City and the financial services industry. As a result the area gets greater public spending, which in turn makes it more advantageous for citizens at the detriment to the Regions where spending is less. Simply look at the transport network for a good example - the trains across the North are a mess, the trains from London to Manchester/ Glasgow (Avinti West Coast) are running on a threadbare timetable and have been for months, the second leg of HS2 has been cancelled and there was never even a plan for it to link with Edinburgh. If the services in the SE were on a par with those in the North there would be a government enquiry.
Until we make it attractive (socially and economically) for companies to locate in regions outside of the SE then they will keep preferring to be based there. I would put a tax on all companies with main offices/HQs inside the M25 and use that money to support investment in other areas. There is very little which happens inside London which could not be done in Birmingham, Manchester, Nottingham or Edinburgh.
Condi said:
Until we make it attractive (socially and economically) for companies to locate in regions outside of the SE then they will keep preferring to be based there. I would put a tax on all companies with main offices/HQs inside the M25 and use that money to support investment in other areas. There is very little which happens inside London which could not be done in Birmingham, Manchester, Nottingham or Edinburgh.
How about lower taxes in certain areas, rather than increasing them in London? London is essentially ahead as you say by the effects of agglomeration- investment begets investment. It would be nice to see regions given an advantage rather than a disadvantage put on a successful area.It's crazy that there are such issues with affordability of property in London and the SE when you can buy a flat in Nottingham (a core city, so one of the 10 largest economies outside of London) for less than £80k.
Given the only thing successive governments have been concerned about for a long time now is keeping house prices high and rising, whenever I hear the term "levelling up" I can't help but assume all they really mean is "levelling up" property prices everywhere else in the UK to make tham as unaffordable as they are in London and the South East.
Fusion777 said:
Do the residents of Sunderland stand to find themselves on par economically with those in Surrey, or should they all just pack their bags and head down the A1?
The smart, ambitious ones do, and in as much as those characteristics are inheritable (so slightly, but not insignificantly) they steadily reduce the supply of those characteristics left behind."levelling up" to me is maybe a little more of what nearly everyone has to deal with wages wise for a start.
Why milllions dot see a rise in income for years why should MPs get one.
They should be made to see how it feels rather than just saying they "understand"
Most of them couldnt even tell you the price of milk
Why milllions dot see a rise in income for years why should MPs get one.
They should be made to see how it feels rather than just saying they "understand"
Most of them couldnt even tell you the price of milk
I wish we could move away from tag line politics tbh.. It over simplifies and strips all context and becomes a tick box item.
I still don't understand what levelling up is defined as? Especially as we've probably levelled down so many times. How many more times before we become part of the 3rd world.
I still don't understand what levelling up is defined as? Especially as we've probably levelled down so many times. How many more times before we become part of the 3rd world.
cossy400 said:
Most of them couldnt even tell you the price of milk
Could you? How much is a 2 or 4 pint bottle in Tescos, without looking? I wouldn't know, if you want milk you buy milk, it's not expensive enough to bother worrying about, and yet for some reason has become the "de facto" measure of relatability with politicians. Fusion777 said:
It would be nice to see regions given an advantage rather than a disadvantage put on a successful area.
Because the areas outside of London need additional investment, and if you cut taxes for businesses then where does the extra money come from to improve public transport, to regenerate areas which need investment, and to increase training for local people? Condi said:
Because the areas outside of London need additional investment, and if you cut taxes for businesses then where does the extra money come from to improve public transport, to regenerate areas which need investment, and to increase training for local people?
I don't terribly mind either way, I'm in favour of what works. There's an argument that having lower rates for new businesses in an area may increase tax take. At the moment though, the regions don't have the powers to decide for themselves- everything is controlled centrally. Maybe this is part of the problem? The US and Germany both have a level of strong regional control that we don't.Condi said:
Fusion777 said:
Is it feasible to tackle this difference? How much can the disparity be narrowed? Can it be eliminated, or is London just too far ahead?
Of course it can be, but the UK has an infatuation with London, driven mainly by the city being not only the centre of Government but also the major area for GDP generation as a result of the City and the financial services industry. As a result the area gets greater public spending, which in turn makes it more advantageous for citizens at the detriment to the Regions where spending is less. Simply look at the transport network for a good example - the trains across the North are a mess, the trains from London to Manchester/ Glasgow (Avinti West Coast) are running on a threadbare timetable and have been for months, the second leg of HS2 has been cancelled and there was never even a plan for it to link with Edinburgh. If the services in the SE were on a par with those in the North there would be a government enquiry.
Until we make it attractive (socially and economically) for companies to locate in regions outside of the SE then they will keep preferring to be based there. I would put a tax on all companies with main offices/HQs inside the M25 and use that money to support investment in other areas. There is very little which happens inside London which could not be done in Birmingham, Manchester, Nottingham or Edinburgh.
Condi said:
cossy400 said:
Most of them couldnt even tell you the price of milk
Could you? How much is a 2 or 4 pint bottle in Tescos, without looking? I wouldn't know, if you want milk you buy milk, it's not expensive enough to bother worrying about, and yet for some reason has become the "de facto" measure of relatability with politicians. Fusion777 said:
It would be nice to see regions given an advantage rather than a disadvantage put on a successful area.
Because the areas outside of London need additional investment, and if you cut taxes for businesses then where does the extra money come from to improve public transport, to regenerate areas which need investment, and to increase training for local people? Most senior politicians would also be unable to tell you how much their fortnight in Antibes cost, or how much Council Tax they pay on their holiday home, or how much they spend on vintage wine per month... for them these costs are just as inconsequential and not worth worrying about as the cost of a pint of milk is to ordinary people.
BoRED S2upid said:
Has anyone defined levelling up?
Dispersal of investment and support in a way that provides the opportunity for poorer economic areas to increase their opportunities and wealth in line with other areas. The key is 'opportunities' - government can only do so much and is ultimately down to the local people to act upon the opportunities provided to them.V88Dicky said:
Average income / house price Sunderland: £26600 / £155000
Average income / house price London: £53700 / £524000
Which part to level up?
Since when was 'Levelling up' related to just house prices ?Average income / house price London: £53700 / £524000
Which part to level up?
I thought it was more related to job opportunities, employment across a range of occupations and industries, improved travel facilities etc etc ?
Vasco said:
V88Dicky said:
Average income / house price Sunderland: £26600 / £155000
Average income / house price London: £53700 / £524000
Which part to level up?
Since when was 'Levelling up' related to just house prices ?Average income / house price London: £53700 / £524000
Which part to level up?
I thought it was more related to job opportunities, employment across a range of occupations and industries, improved travel facilities etc etc ?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff