Just Some Thoughts On Future Regeneration

At a time when Bradford Council’s finances are being slashed by central government, the devolution debate in Yorkshire remains just that, the Northern Powerhouse remains just a Government slogan and people are still scratching their heads over the Brexit implications it is tempting to put the next step in Bradford’s regeneration in the too hard pile and simply cry that ‘something must be done’ or ‘what is the Council doing about it’.
Regeneration is not just about the City or town centres, although these are the front doors onto the wider economy it is about the creation of jobs and businesses throughout the district as well as informing and equipping people for opportunities in the wider region.
This process must start with education which everyone recognises has been an Achilles Heal in Bradford for many years. Successive political administrations, of all political persuasions, have tried to solve the problem and governments and heads of OFSTED have pronounced and pontificated, all with mixed success. The truth is that no one really knows why large parts of the system are failing young people in Bradford (we need to recognise that there are some excellent and outstanding schools and teachers in the district). I have heard many theories, seen many initiatives and come up with my own ideas but the real answer is that currently nobody really knows the reasons and until this happens no one is really going to come up with an answer that sticks. We need to support young people, schools and teachers in their efforts to improve, but we should seek to invest in some work to understand whether there is a particular set of circumstances that see Bradford regularly nearer the bottom than the top of any measures used. If there are then what can be done to address them. If there’s not then maybe we are right to look at lessons from elsewhere and import what we perceive are the best but if we are to do this then we have to stick to a plan, not chop and change with fashion.
I appreciate that all of the above is complicated by the fracturing of our education system; academies, free schools, maintained schools etc, and the increasing centralisation of control from Minsters, OFTED and the Regional Schools Commissioners, but from my experience as a local councillor I would have to say that this has not made much of a difference to local people who still see ‘The Council’ as responsible for all things from admissions to standards; and as the authority with a duty to the community we serve they are right, even if we do not have the powers or tools to do all that we, or the community would wish.
As well as schools we need to look at post 16 education in all its guises. I spent several months chairing the West Yorkshire Further Education Review, established by Government to allegedly improve the co-ordination of FE provision and cooperation between colleges in West Yorkshire, after years of seeing them as competing businesses. What became clear to me was that in the eyes of the government the underlying aim was to save money and potentially create merged colleges. In West Yorkshire this proved difficult for them as the changes that the colleges themselves have made over the years meant that they are fairly lean and efficient and many work well with the private sector in developing skills.
However the biggest failure of the whole process was the explicit exclusion of school sixth forms from the process, therefore ignoring a huge tranche of provision for post 16 year olds. Sixth Form Colleges were included in the review but schools were not. No logical reason was given by ministers but in my view this was in part down to a range war between two ministries and in part because of the on going belief that schools provide academic course whilst colleges provide vocational ones. In truth the best schools and colleges provide both.
So if we are going to ensure that local people are equipped to get the jobs that are being created and will be created in the future we need to build on the success of Get Bradford Working, a scheme launched some 5-6 years ago, where training and other provision were designed to meet local demand for job opportunities, rather than on some national template. The outcomes of GBW are significantly higher than any of the national work programme or similar schemes and we need to use this evidence to get control of the Work Programme and similar budgets to make sure that the schemes reflect the local economy, not a national tick box exercise. This scheme could be run at a local or West Yorkshire level and the importance of this funding will increase as the effect of Brexit is felt in a few years time when European Social Fund Money (ESF) and other EU funds for further and higher education are withdrawn from councils and institutions.
ESF money is particularly important for funding for those who have not succeeded in the school system or have particular needs. These funds are either paid directly through EU grants or come through money top sliced at a national level. They have been used to compensate for cuts made by the UK government in the past and their loss will be critical to the most vulnerable and those furthest away from the labour market.
Get Bradford Working was funded from council reserves and will need replenishing. As a long term investment it has been a success and whilst we are arguing for the devolution of central funds it needs to be continued at a level that is both affordable and effective. This will not only support local citizens in finding employment but also support businesses already in the district, firms moving in or start ups. It will also allow the council to develop training opportunities, in alliance with other local authorities, to develop skills for growth areas in the economy across West Yorkshire to allow access to a wider labour market.
If, as is widely reported, Bradford needs 5000 jobs a year to cope with population growth, it is unlikely that these jobs will all be created in the district and so looking beyond the borders to opportunities will become more important as will the development of infrastructure to allow people to access the jobs. I may well come back to this in future musing but for now I will merely stress the importance of developing a training and skills programme that looks beyond out own, local economy.
How can the Council help create the jobs we need in the future? Given the cuts we have faced and will continue to face for the next few years we need to be very clear about what our priorities are and to concentrate on them. We have invested in public realm over the years and made parts of our district, particularly the City Centre, a more attractive place to invest but we need to maintain this realm to a decent standard. Cuts have fallen hard on the Regeneration Department, as they have on most non statutory services, and this means that our ability to be proactive, rather than reactive has been somewhat curtailed and we need to get back on the front foot.
Business growth and development is not only going to be important for employment but also for the Council’s finances going forward as business rates are going to become a major part of our income as national government removes our grant by 2020, so work to build our economy is not just important for employment but for the provision of other services in the future and should therefore be treated as an investment.
Given the limited financial and human resources available to the Council we need to develop new ways of partnering with investors to bring regeneration to the District. Currently the local economy is not self sustaining as some other cities are and we need to continue to intervene to get ourselves to this point. This means that we must be willing to commit some of our limited reserves to supporting investment but also look at the physical assets, land and buildings, that we own that can be used to lever in investment. We have done this over the years on a case by case basis but now is the time to look at a larger plan and to be proactive.
We should recognise the limitations of what the Council can do on it’s own with limited resources and market intelligence and consider setting up a Joint Venture Partnership with one or more private sector organisations who have the expertise we lack. We already have a JV developing housing on Canal Road and had one in the past which developed the area around Wakefield Road. Both of these have very specific aims but it is now time to think bigger.
The Council could put in land and property into the partnership as well as some capital, either from reserves or through borrowing for investment and purchase of strategic sites. The partners, whoever they may be, would bring their expertise and knowledge of the market as well as finance. By developing a JV that covers significant parts of the district we would be able to access a variety of potential markets, possibly building on our strong manufacturing base and growing service sector.
If the JV was established correctly it has the advantage of a level of democratic oversight that the private market does not have, the ability of the Council to influence the type of investment and the retention of some of the development profits in the local area for either further investment or service provision.
I appreciate that once the lawyers and accountants start on the detail things will not be as simple as I have stated but if the Council is clear and open on its aims and objectives in developing a partnership from the start potential partners will come into the scheme with their eyes wide open.
None of the above is a quick fix, some of it will take several years to even start making a difference, but if we do not start building now on the success we have achieved over the last few years we will again be looking around wondering what has happened to our City and district in a few years time.