Levelling up ‘unlikely to be successful’ warn MPs
“The challenges levelling up seeks to resolve are complex and cannot be remedied by one-off short-term initiatives,” reads a report by a House of Commons’ committee reviewing the activities of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing, and Communities.
The report, released today, highlights flaws within the government’s current levelling up strategy.
“Based on the evidence we have received and given the historic frequent churn of local economic growth initiatives, it can be argued that levelling up is unlikely to be successful in achieving the objectives it seeks to address,” the report states.
“The policy requires a long-term and substantive strategy and funding approach, things this policy currently lacks,” the report reads later on.
Within the report, the committee states that government’s funding pot approach needs to change. Competitive bidding should be reduced to prevent unnecessarily wasting local and central government resources, the report continues.
“The department should move away from an overemphasis on big and judgement-based funding pots, which may impede effective local decision-making,” the report states.
The committee also notes that the funding does not replace the old system of grant funding. This is because levelling up funds only cover specific projects rather than more general priorities.
“Local authorities must be given the flexibility to use allocated funds in the most effective way they can,” the committee recommends.
MPs also criticised the government for failing to provide feedback on failed Levelling Up Fund bids in a timely, detailed, consistent, and public manner.
“This new guidance should be widely disseminated and embedded in departmental practice so that in future those who have been unsuccessful in bidding are able to derive satisfactory material from what has otherwise been a dispiriting process,” the report states.
Unless substantial changes towards implementing the levelling up policy are changed, the committee warns “levelling up risks joining the short-term government growth initiatives which came before it”.
The criticisms of levelling up are nothing new. Local authorities have been campaigning for change to the competitive bidding process for awhile. In January, Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham joined forces with other Northern leaders to call for a change to the short-term competitive funding pot process.
“We end up with winners and losers but nobody is able to actually plan for long-term investment in their areas,” he said at the time. “Hard-wiring levelling up into UK law would move us away from policy by press release and start to tackle the unequal living standards we have in our country.”
Liverpool City Region Mayor Steve Rotheram was scathing of the Levelling Up Fund policy in a tweet about the committee report.
“Let’s call the Levelling Up Fund for what it was: a nakedly political stunt to funnel money to Conservative seats at the expense of areas that need it most.
“The government forced hundreds of councils, many of whom have been cut to the bone by the Tories, to use their scant resource on a beauty contest they could ill-afford.”
The government forced hundreds of councils, many of whom have been cut to the bone by the Tories, to use their scant resource on a beauty contest they could ill-afford.
— Steve Rotheram (@MetroMayorSteve) May 26, 2023
Rotheram had voiced similar sentiments at Place North West‘s Merseyside Development Update in November, describing the “levelling up” mission as just words.
He also called for a different model of funding for true levelling up – advocating for local authorities to be given grants that they can use to manage their own projects.
“We can do things better because we’re more nimble, we’re more focused,” Rotheram said at the time. “We don’t need a monolith-like government deciding what happens here. They wouldn’t know the difference between Kirkby and West Kirby. How can they know what’s best for us?”
Levelling up in the North should include Liverpool
By Anonymous
And we’ve known all this for decades.Through Labour governments and Tory..makes no difference .
By Anonymous
It is called wealth-extraction: wealth is not created by the rulers or the City of London but they and para-businesses extract it so it ends up in the South or abroad. It thas been that way ever since the Norman-Mafia conquered England. Read your economic history books.
By Anonymous
@Anonymous
“makes no difference”
If you really believe this then you’ve either got a short memory or you’re wearing political blinkers. The 1997-2010 Labour government did huge amounts to undo the harm of the previous Conservative administrations since 1979. It could certainly have done more but to suggest they’re no different that the administration they followed is simply not true.
By Martin Cranmer
Just shows you can never trust the TORIES
By Bobb
Labour are no better also
By Anonymous
Previous labour governments have done absolutely zero for the north, no different to this lot. Short term memory or working class hero nonsense belies a very different reality. Please take the rose tinted spectacles off, they don’t work.
By Anonymous
Tony Blair’s legacy for the North is Crossrail. I think Martin Cranmer thinks Barnet is the North. George Osborne did more for Manchester than, “The things can only get better,” crowd. Also let us not forget Brown bailed out the South’s service economy in 2008 with billions of pounds, in effect nationalising the City of London. There were no such handouts for manufacturing. Labour is no friend of the North.
By Elephant
The travesty is that we’ve known for decades that addressing regional inequality is a “long game” but the politicians and our political system seem only ever to focus on short term measures and headline grabbing initiatives. Deja vue !
By John Keyes
The Labour party hate the working classes and are very london-centric, more so than the tories, Starmer himself claimed Liz Truss shouldn’t cut the basic tax rate because it upsets the markets, as the markets are what is important.
By Gilly
Well there’s a shock!!
By Levelling Up Manager
Both political parties find the north an inconvenience . Labour under Blair did very little for Liverpool , look at the mersey gateway ? tolls under labour which remains a scandal. Leaving politics aside for those of us who work around the country its almost criminal to witness the lavish spending particularly on rail etc down south and yet we still have 50 year old rolling stock ? how is that ? and that is both parties guilty as charged.
Northern powerhouse was a great principled idea , sadly that is as far as it got. We cannot trust both lots , as soon as your vote is secured its same old story . London and Home Counties centric . Scandalous
By Paul
Elephant is right. I’d also add that the city mayors idea may not have happened without George Osbourne.
Perhaps it’s time to have PR, at least in local elections. Helps stop local government one party statelets.
By SW
The individual currently called Gilly raises a fair point at the beginning only to spoil things by thinking blind faith in the markets is important for the working classes.
No, the working classes seek and want security, local organic job growth, good public services and decent wages. They don’t want Austrian School Economics which destroys all those things.
Liz Truss politically was a flop because she cut the tax rate but didn’t budget for this. She would have driven the Conservatives to near extinction if she contested a General Election.
By SW