-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Poor targeting of Levelling Up Fund?
- Thread starter DarloRich
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
It is. Gets the least amount of rail investment per capita in London
ExRes
Established Member
I think you might be mistaking Devon and Cornwall with the elite second home villages, I'd suggest a visit to some parts of Exeter, Plymouth, Truro etc to see that the South West is no different to many other parts of the country, the North and North East included
DarloRich
Veteran Member
wow - that will still be 57% more, on a bad day, than Middlesbrough.
No it isn't. None of the most deprived areas in the country are in Devon or Cornwall. There are 2 on Teesside alone. It shouldn't be a competition but it is and the game is bent with areas that need funding the most loosing out in favour of those that don't need funding at all or as much as those that do. The money being spaffed on trains in Cornwall that only richer people ( because if you are really poor the train isn't an option) will be able to use could do wonders for local bus services in the north east to pick just one example.
I know there are issues for younger people finding homes and decent, non seasonal work in Devon and Cornwall and I know that incomers hoovering up second homes are destroying local communities and businesses but the issues are not as bad as the really deprived areas in this country. Another source of funding should be found for these issues so that it isn't levelling up funding used for these projects in Devon and Cornwall. That money should go where is most needed and that is at the other end of the country.
In any event the whole levelling up agenda is just a scam.
EDIT: i shouldn't let this nonsense wind me up but it is so frustrating to see money that could really help in the poorest areas of the country being misused and treated as something to "win". It is just PR guff and it so annoys me that this issue isn't taken seriously.
Last edited:
England's most deprived areas named as Jaywick and Blackpool
Eight of the 10 most deprived neighbourhoods are in Blackpool, according to new statistics.
www.bbc.co.uk
Most of the places at the top of the list are in the North (specifically Blackpool). But that doesn't mean there are huge issues in areas of the South.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
I am sure there are but they aren't as widespread. I would say your employment chances are better in the run down areas of the south than they are in, say, Hartlepool.England's most deprived areas named as Jaywick and Blackpool
Eight of the 10 most deprived neighbourhoods are in Blackpool, according to new statistics.
Most of the places at the top of the list are in the North (specifically Blackpool). But that doesn't mean there are huge issues in areas of the South.
Cornwall is one of the poorest regions of England.
I think that this argument shows that this policy is having the effect the Conservatives want it to. They've deliberately provided trivial sums of funds which are far, far too small to make meaningful improvements to people's lives, and then rejected most of the value of the bids received, in order to set people from different deprived areas against one another, thus taking the attention away from their policy of deliberately defunding public services over the last 13 years.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
is the correct answer.
Indeed, also of the 4 projects listed the total is circa £130 million, which whilst a significant amount of money for an individual in terms of government expenditures is like someone spending a fiver if they earn about £35,000.
The current practice appears to be cut central government grants to councils and then offer back to them some of that reduction but only if they bid for it (at a cost of staff time) and promise to spend it on stuff the government wants. Of course those who "win" may benefit more than if they had the budget to begin with, but then there's so many other areas which then are worse off and get nothing in return.
North East got money for electric buses, which no doubt in the spirit of leveling up will be built in China!
I wouldn't say that the Levelling up fund is poorly targeted - Cornwall and Devon are as deserving of improvements to rail as up North as an example. There are just so many good projects that could be done.
I'm looking forward to the Eden Project in Morecambe. For those who say the rail service is inadequate, the station will be a lot more convenient for rail access than the one in St Austell.
I'm looking forward to the Eden Project in Morecambe. For those who say the rail service is inadequate, the station will be a lot more convenient for rail access than the one in St Austell.
tbtc
Veteran Member
Cut the funding to Local Authorities by fifteen billion then make them all scrape around for a state of a one-off two billion that you’ve arbitrarily allocated to certain “favoured” areas…
It’s pathetic, but then this is the government who treat a lot of public spending like some Simon Cowell telly show where various towns compete in GBR Headquarters Idol, or How Do Solve A Problem Like Relocating Some Channel 4 Staff or whatever other small number of jobs they are “showering” on the provinces (and those provincial plebs had better be grateful!)
Id criticise some individual decisions like the fifty million for Newquay (or questioning why, if Cornwall is so deprived after twenty years of having an Eden Project, anyone sensible thinks that an Eden Project in Morecambe will solve that area’s problems)..,
…but frankly that’s what Westminster wants, isn’t it? They’d love it if we tore each other apart arguing the toss about why one “not entirely deprived” place is getting a bigger share of the pie… but the problem is that the pie isn’t big enough in the first place
EU funding had problems but at least we didn’t have these “song and dance” announcements or fall out about regional imbalances pre-2016
It’s pathetic, but then this is the government who treat a lot of public spending like some Simon Cowell telly show where various towns compete in GBR Headquarters Idol, or How Do Solve A Problem Like Relocating Some Channel 4 Staff or whatever other small number of jobs they are “showering” on the provinces (and those provincial plebs had better be grateful!)
Id criticise some individual decisions like the fifty million for Newquay (or questioning why, if Cornwall is so deprived after twenty years of having an Eden Project, anyone sensible thinks that an Eden Project in Morecambe will solve that area’s problems)..,
…but frankly that’s what Westminster wants, isn’t it? They’d love it if we tore each other apart arguing the toss about why one “not entirely deprived” place is getting a bigger share of the pie… but the problem is that the pie isn’t big enough in the first place
EU funding had problems but at least we didn’t have these “song and dance” announcements or fall out about regional imbalances pre-2016
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Not one part of Devon or Cornwall is listed in the top 10 poorest or most deprived areas of the country.
The total grants from the Levelling Up Fund are worth just £4.8 billion over four years. In order to reverse the decline in public services and institutions of the past 12-13 years, you'd need at least one hundred times that amount in capital funding over a similar period, plus large above-inflation rises, so 25% - 35%, this year, in revenue spending every year. This funding isn't nothing, but it's main aim is to get Conservatives re-elected by pulling the wool over our eyes, not to actually help people. Less than £5 billion for the whole of England and Wales cannot possibly bring about meaningful change at that scale.
Cornwall in the recent past has been the most deprived county, overall, in England. It may not have focussed areas of extreme and intense poverty, like Jaywick (which really does stand out from its surroundings), but rather large areas in which the previously dominant industries have died, generally without replacement, not counterbalanced by pockets of wealth or economic generation. Add to that poor quality infrastructure and the remoteness of the place from the rest of the country, and you have a lot of problems, easily comparable (sometimes disfavourably) with other ex-mining areas further norh.
The most recent (2020) ONS dataset puts Gross value-added per head of population at £18,524 per head of population for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. Devon is a little higher, at £20.614.
While there are parts of Wales, in particular, that are substantially poorer in per-head terms (income being the major contributor to these figures), the figures for Cornwall are comparable for those for the region of Tees Valley and Durham (£18,718), and indeed show that the county is overall poorer than some parts of that region (including Hartlepool and Stockton-on-Tees - £22,505).
By any measure Cornwall is an entirely appropriate recipient of Levelling Up funding!
The most recent (2020) ONS dataset puts Gross value-added per head of population at £18,524 per head of population for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. Devon is a little higher, at £20.614.
While there are parts of Wales, in particular, that are substantially poorer in per-head terms (income being the major contributor to these figures), the figures for Cornwall are comparable for those for the region of Tees Valley and Durham (£18,718), and indeed show that the county is overall poorer than some parts of that region (including Hartlepool and Stockton-on-Tees - £22,505).
By any measure Cornwall is an entirely appropriate recipient of Levelling Up funding!
Last edited:
That may be so but many areas are still very deprived. It’s not a contest to see who comes from the bigger dump.
A very good point !
DarloRich
Veteran Member
But it is - that's the whole point of this funding and the winners are not the biggest dumps. That is what winds me up.
uglymonkey
Member
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 709
Cornwall is one of the most deprived areas of Europe.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,624
Remember the context this discussion started in though. I'd very much suggest parts of Cornwall are much more deserving of rail investment than Blackpool.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Why? could the same money not be used to help local bus services in Blackpool or Hartlepool or Middlesbrough or Burnley or Blackburn that will be used by many more people than than this train, especially if the fares are held at a low level like they are in Leeds and Manchester
i don't agree. Could you show your working?
I don't deny there are areas in the South West where people are struggling but those people wont be helped by a train to Newquay. They will be helped by affordable housing, a ban on second home purchases and inward investment that helps to create long term, secure and well paid jobs rather than seasonal employment offered by dependence on the tourist trade.
This money wont provide for that.
RichJF
Established Member
Hastings/Bexhill within the top 10 most deprived areas in the UK in 2019/20. Prime South East UK & bordered by wealthy Rye & Eastbourne.
Thanet, Kent named among the 20 poorest areas by the Living Wage Commission.
There are towns/cities in the South East with VERY poor areas versus what you'd actually expect.
Thanet, Kent named among the 20 poorest areas by the Living Wage Commission.
There are towns/cities in the South East with VERY poor areas versus what you'd actually expect.
THC
Member
I led the development of a Levelling Up Fund round 2 bid for my local authority - we were unsuccessful but then expected to be, as the process ensured we were hobbled at the outset.
Why? Because all authorities were allocated to three categories and mine was placed in category 3, or least in need of levelling up. This despite having high levels of both deprivation and inequality according to the conventionally accepted measures (IMD2019 for deprivation and the GINI coefficient for inequality). It turns out that DLUHC commissioned its own index, which gave different results entirely. And this index was only published after the fact, which meant we had nothing to challenge until too late.
I do not have an issue with the successful bidders - good luck to them all, some very worthwhile projects within - but am questioning whether it is worth diverting scarce resources once again for a further bid into round 3 when the odds are so stacked against us. Simply put, we should not have to compete with our neighbours for ever scarcer funding pots, spending money, time and effort on bid development that should instead be used to deliver public services. The whole system is farcical and its competitive nature undermines the very concept of levelling up.
THC
Why? Because all authorities were allocated to three categories and mine was placed in category 3, or least in need of levelling up. This despite having high levels of both deprivation and inequality according to the conventionally accepted measures (IMD2019 for deprivation and the GINI coefficient for inequality). It turns out that DLUHC commissioned its own index, which gave different results entirely. And this index was only published after the fact, which meant we had nothing to challenge until too late.
I do not have an issue with the successful bidders - good luck to them all, some very worthwhile projects within - but am questioning whether it is worth diverting scarce resources once again for a further bid into round 3 when the odds are so stacked against us. Simply put, we should not have to compete with our neighbours for ever scarcer funding pots, spending money, time and effort on bid development that should instead be used to deliver public services. The whole system is farcical and its competitive nature undermines the very concept of levelling up.
THC
That's a fair point.
Local Authorities (as an example) end up spending so much time and effort bidding for pots of money, that it would be more efficient just allocating the resources by population and/or need.
The problem is that central Government has so many strings to attach !
Presumably you are quoting UK figures ? Back in the days of our EU membership Cornwall was in receipt of considerable sums precisely because it WAS one of the most deprived region of Europe, not just the Uk. I would believe EU figures rather than those coming out of Whitehall.
Not wishing to join the debate on whether a particular part of the country gets 'leveling up' funding, there does seem to some odd choices of projects given the funding.
For instance - Canterbury:
Canterbury Castle is an 11/12th century ruin. Thist is supposed to help tourism; even including the compulsory photographic session, I would put it down as half an hour. The clock tower square is where you find young visitors from across the channel trying to complete question sheets (I usually tell them a few answers); it is quite attractive but that is it (and there is a MacDs and other fast food outlets nearby so it provides some shelter for those consuming their output).
Regarding the walking ans cycling routes, developers keep going on about walking and cycling routes (as an excuse for not providing more car parking spaces). For existing routes, there is a decent amount of publicity already, thanks to Explore Kent (eg https://explorekent.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Explore-Canterbury.pdf)
This does seem to be a vanity project, something to consider for when he get through our present difficulties. Dover have put in for money for a campus offering training in the digital and creative industries, which may actually lead to decent paid employment. Canterbury's might mean a couple more tour guides for the summer season.
Source for quote: https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...ry-26012050?pure360.trackingid={~TrackingId~}
For instance - Canterbury:
Canterbury Castle is an 11/12th century ruin. Thist is supposed to help tourism; even including the compulsory photographic session, I would put it down as half an hour. The clock tower square is where you find young visitors from across the channel trying to complete question sheets (I usually tell them a few answers); it is quite attractive but that is it (and there is a MacDs and other fast food outlets nearby so it provides some shelter for those consuming their output).
Regarding the walking ans cycling routes, developers keep going on about walking and cycling routes (as an excuse for not providing more car parking spaces). For existing routes, there is a decent amount of publicity already, thanks to Explore Kent (eg https://explorekent.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Explore-Canterbury.pdf)
This does seem to be a vanity project, something to consider for when he get through our present difficulties. Dover have put in for money for a campus offering training in the digital and creative industries, which may actually lead to decent paid employment. Canterbury's might mean a couple more tour guides for the summer season.
Source for quote: https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...ry-26012050?pure360.trackingid={~TrackingId~}
- Status