Great discussion, Matt.
I also noted with interest that the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Left Behind Neighbourhoods published a Report this week entitled A Neighbourhood Strategy for National Renewal, and their recommendations are remarkably similar to those policies embedded in the Strategy launched 25 years ago. Although society has moved on immensely, many of the drivers for neighbourhood renewal remain the same, and many of the recommended approaches still apply. However, it is with frustration that both the APPG Report and the session with Baroness Armstrong seem to understate a key benefit that was revealed from previous programmes of neighbourhood renewal - that of reducing the potential for these areas to be ‘sink-holes’ for the Exchequer and the UK taxpayer.
Don’t get me wrong, I am a big believer in neighbourhood renewal per se. If delivered and organised in the right way, it can certainly address the challenges of our ‘left behind’ areas, and it can deliver a range of social, economic, health, education, community safety and environmental outcomes, thereby improving quality of life conditions and the satisfaction of local people. Evidence from academia and the UK Government itself confirms that neighbourhood renewal over the last 20 years has ensured significant improvements to many disadvantaged areas. Indeed, Sheffield Hallam University’s Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research produced the main NDC evaluation which concluded that it was an overwhelming success. But, more importantly, the evaluation also compared NDC areas with similar non-NDC areas, and found that without the NDC investment and the neighbourhood renewal approach, many of these comparable areas became ‘left behind’. Moreover, the evaluation revealed that most non-NDC areas had a significantly higher net cost to the Exchequer than its comparable NDC area, with increased costs to the benefit system, lower tax revenues generated, and increased costs linked to higher crime rates and poor health. Although not identified as a key conclusion in the evaluation, it is my belief that even taking into consideration the significant NDC investment over its 10-year period, many NDC’s actually saved the Exchequer money.
In effect, what I am saying is that neighbourhood renewal is not just an important way of improving people’s quality of life, it also makes financial sense for the UK Government. Turning around the downward spiral of decline can lead to less public funds being invested in those ‘left behind’ areas in the longer-term. Given this argument, I am perplexed as to why the All-Party Parliamentary Group has not stressed this point further. My previous of experience of the UK Government is that you may convince the relevant Secretary of State of a change in policy or funding, but at the end of the day the Treasury holds the purse strings.
Last week I had the privilege of chairing a Local Trust Q&A with Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top, Sarah Pearson and Angela Wright looking back 25 years on from the National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal and the New Deal for Communities. A great conversation, with some strong lessons for future neighbourhood-focused community-led policy and programmes.
https://lnkd.in/eMwjesgC