2nd October 2012

Phoenix House, Melton Mowbray

The National Context

Andrew PritchardDirector of Policy & Infrastructure2 October 2012

Introduction

UK plc – some long term trends The Failure of Regional Policy? National Infrastructure Planning Impact of ‘non-spatial’ policy decisions Conclusions

Regional Productivity

Productivity per Employed Person (1993 & 2008) by Region

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

NE NW Y&H EM WM EE London SE SW

Index (

Engla

nd =

100)

1993

2008

Population Growth

All areas are growing It is just that some

areas are growing quicker than others

These trends seem to be becoming more not less pronounced over time

Job Growth

Average Annual Net Job Creation

Total Net Job Creation

North 306 10,100

Midlands 18,748 618,700

South 82,830 2,733,400

Figures 1971-2004

Graduate Retention

Graduate/Earnings Relationship All TTWAs (inc London)

y = 8.3647x + 292.28

R2 = 0.5372

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

10 15 20 25 30

% Graduates (2001)

Av

era

ge

We

ek

ly F

ull T

ime

Wa

ge

(£)

20

03

London

Cambridge

Oxford

Edinburgh

Guildford and Aldershot

Basingstoke

Stoke

Dudley & Sandw ell

Walsall & Wolverhampton

Barnsley

Carlisle

Doncaster

Peterborough

BrightonCardiff

Craw le

AberdeenSouthampton & Winchester

Sw anseLiverpool

Hull

Loughborough

Middlesborough & Stockton

Derby

York

GB

WM

Tyneside

Sources: NES 2003, Census 2001

ManchesterGlasgow

BirminghamBristol

Belfast

The dominance of London

London is at the hub of a ‘south east mega city region’ (Prof Sir Peter Hall)

Has its own unique governance settlement A Regional Spatial Strategy (aka London Plan) Massive public investment (Crossrail,

Thameslink, Olympics = £30 Billion) Building more houses now than back in the

noughties…

The Failure of Regional Policy?

Previous Labour Government focussed on regions and RDAs, underpinned by PSAs

RDAs required to raise economic performance in all regions, but could directly only influence a very small amount of total investment

Coalition policy a mix of sub-regional (LEPs) & national competitions (RGF) – but has even less money to play with

‘Understanding Local Growth’ (BIS /DCLG 2010) Spatial pattern of development a result of

globalisation, economic liberalisation and free trade

‘attempting to act against these forces is unrealistic and unsustainable’

…in a modern, economically liberal European state in the first half of the 21st Century

“ time and tide wait for no man”

National Infrastructure Planning

2008 Planning Act introduced a new single consent regime for major infrastructure projects, underpinned by a series of (mostly non-spatial) ‘National Policy Statements’

IPC merged with PINS by Coalitition– but basic system retained

Coalition has also published 2 versions of a ‘National Infrastructure Plan’ (it even has map!)

National Infrastructure Plan

40 key projects covering roads, rail airports, ports, energy communications, water and sewerage and ‘local infrastructure’ (RGF & GPF)

A mix of public and private investment To be underpinned by £40 billion of

investment guarantees (subject to legislation)

Is it enough?

The National Infrastructure Plan presents a real opportunity to shape the future development of the UK in a conscience way

However, it currently little more than the some of its parts with no relationship to the traditional planning system

‘Non-spatial’ policy and investment decisions have a much greater spatial impact than traditional regional policy

Some questions

Why is the spatial distribution of defence spending and transport investment?

What will be the spatial impact of welfare reform?

Why are most civil servants and Government Departments based in London?

What would the regionalisation of public sector pay do to regional GVA?

What is so wrong about the BBC moving to Salford?

Conclusions

Long term patterns of economic divergence very hard to shift

Conventional ‘Regional Policy’ has so far failed to fundamentally change the situation

National Infrastructure Planning does present an opportunity to shape rather than respond to the future

However success will depend on how it is aligned with ‘non-spatial’ decisions and the planning system

Infrastructure Challenges for the East Midlands

Andrew PritchardDirector of Policy & Infrastructure2 October 2012

Introduction

Background Some good news! Some bad news! Managing flood risk Super fast broadband HS2 in the East Midlands Conclusions

Map

East Midlands: Some Key Facts

4.48 million people - and growing fast 1.9 million dwellings - growing fast until the

banking crash! 153,000 businesses £81 billion of GVA (2010) Highest proportion manufacturing employment in

the UK (13.3% - £12.4 billion) High productivity sectors: transport equipment,

food & drink and construction

Some good news!

£800 million investment in MML announced by DfT in July 2012

Councils, LEPs, MPs and businesses all singing the same song

Intervention of BIS in highlighting the direct and wider economic benefits was crucial

Some bad news!

EM has lost out on funding for affordable housing & regeneration since 2010

Government does not appear to recognise the potential of the EM (TAFKAAR)

Fragmented nature of the EM makes it difficult to articulate a case

Flood Risk

EM has the largest proportion of land at risk of flooding (17%) of any region of England

Not just a coastal issue – many inland urban settlements also at risk

Within flood risk areas….

over 350,000 people and140,000 homes a large proportion of the nations best &

most versatile agricultural land (producing a third of England’s vegetables)

some of the region’s most dynamic urban economies, including central parts of Derby, Leicester, Nottingham, Lincoln & Northampton

Maintaining investor confidence

Current EA investment program includes over 20 schemes in the EM – including Boston Barrage and along the River Trent in Nottingham

However, climate change continues to ‘raise the bar’, capital funding has been cut and EA are looking for 3rd party contributions – even in coastal areas

Meanwhile, the Government has yet to conclude deal with the ABI on maintaining access to commercial insurance in flood risk areas…

Broadband

Broadband is now the ‘4th Utility’

‘Super fast’ broadband now the industry standard (2Mbps)

Government objective is for 90% to have access to ‘super fast’ broadband by 2015

Broadband & economic growth

ICT is linked to improved business systems, e-commerce and design and innovation

Studies have confirmed that increased broadband penetration can have a significant (and quick) GVA uplift – plus 3.8% in East Midlands (£2.4 billion)

However it is clear that the market will not deliver super fast broadband to everyone – particularly in more rural areas and some deprived urban communities

Delivering S/F broadband in EM

BDUK made £34 million available to local partnerships in the EM to full the gaps left by the market – but it has to be matched

ERDF has been used elsewhere – but currently outside the remit of the EM Operational Programme

Lincolnshire has particularly poor S/F broadband access (more the 75% of households without) – but a greater need for economic diversification than most

High Speed Rail

HS2 Phase 1 route from London to Birmingham confirmed

Preferred route from Birmingham to Leeds, including EM Station to be announced ‘shortly’

First Hybrid Bill 2013 and construction from 2017 onwards

HS2 in the East Midlands

Huge potential if direct & wider economic benefits can be captured and the environmental impacts mitigated - but we need to get it right

Released classic rail capacity could transform rail service provision across the East Midlands – but an integrated approach is needed

Wherever a station is located in the East Midlands, it will have long term impacts on economic geography, housing markets and commuting patterns that we will need to plan for

An EM HS2 station must:

be accessible to a number of key population centres within the East Midlands;

be well integrated with classic rail and other public transport services;

(together with the line of route) minimise & mitigate adverse environmental impacts; and

maximise economic growth & regeneration potential at both a local and strategic level, without undermining existing urban centres

Conclusions

flood defence funding, rebalancing the economy, integrating HS2, insurance premiums, super-fast broadband, affordable housing, food security, RGF, ERDF - does it all add up in the EM?

(Fill in your own answer here!) EMC & partners attempting to stitch things together

– but a more strategic approach is needed Could a ‘Map for England’ help?

Join in a national debate withthe Royal Town Planning Institute

Individual government departments have over 100 maps relating to policies and programmes•100 maps in 95 different places•Topics covered are:

• Economic growth• Transport• Communications• Housing• Environment

•One third are explicit maps; two thirds are not

Research Findings: University of Manchester

• For the Public:• Hard to tell how government policies affect your area

• For Policy Makers:• Hard to tell what the cumulative impact of government

policies is on an area• National Infrastructure Plan• Regional Growth Funds

• For Business:• Hard to tell how government policies will affect your

business

Why does this matter?

• Open Data:• The coalition agreement states that ‘we will ensure that

all data published by public bodies is published in an open and standardised format, so that it can be easily used by third parties.’

• Localism Act:• Government becoming an enabler of spatially aware

local decision making through the provision of data.• More proactive than reactive

• Business Clusters:• BIS Supported• Contrasting experience in the North East and South

West

How does a M4E fit with Government Policy?

Example Map: Regional Growth Funds and Household Growth

Example Map: Relative Water Stress Levels

Example Map: Household growth and flood risk

Example Map: Regional Growth Funds and Deprivation

Example Map: HS2 and Deprivation

• A website portal containing layers for each of the key policies and programmes

• RTPI/IDOX Pilot launched TODAY

What do we suggest?

• Helps to boost growth

• More transparent

• Saves time and money

• Helps coordinate infrastructure across national borders

Some additional benefits include:

• Should the government bring together these maps in one place?

• What would the benefits of this approach be to your organisation?

• What key policy areas should be covered?

• Have we missed anything?

Our Consultation process is ongoing…

• Overwhelming support (95% surveyed) amongst a range of stakeholders

• ‘grounded in common sense’• ‘ensure regions receive [their] share of

funding’• ‘visualise…spatial relationships [for] planning’

What have we found out so far?

• Seeking support from government departments to assemble maps (eg on data.gov.uk) or provide basis for the Map for England

• Direct costs to the RTPI are limited to a Project Officer and support from the communications team

Map for England – what will it cost?

• Taking stock of consultation

• Seek to engender support from government and stakeholders.

• You spread the word!

What happens next?

• The study report and compendium of maps and the pilot website are available at:

• www.mapforengland.co.uk

Want to know more?