Deprived seaside towns: residents have their say

“Analysis by Social Market Foundation found that UK communities living by the coast have higher rates of unemployment compared to inland area. In 85% of Britain’s 98 coastal local authorities in 2016 people were paid less than the national average, with those living by the seaside earning £3,600 less. We asked readers to tell us about the areas they live in and how things have changed over the years. …

[Great Yarmouth]
… Then there are the road networks, in particular the infamous A47 Acle Straight which needs work to stop the consistent traffic problems. MP Brandon Lewis is rarely here or shows any interest unless there is an election. All new housing is unaffordable to buy and rent is high everywhere; a lot of people live in cramped, unsafe properties. The excuses change, but everything stays the same and has done for many years. …

… A former mayor of Copeland described Millom as “a place of despair”. Redundancies in local industries (for example, Vickers shipyard which was made defunct in 2007) have led to more unemployment. Local shops have closed as larger nationwide stores such as Tesco have opened. Some local transport links have been shut down and already infrequent local buses have reduced their services. The train service is bad, with trains being regularly cancelled at short notice, and the roads are narrow and poorly maintained. This all increases the isolation communities and individuals feel.

Two bank branches have closed, as well as several pubs and the job centre. The local food bank has more demand and fewer donations. A family member and a school friend of mine committed suicide. Another two school friends have died from complications from alcohol dependency. Then there are holiday homes in the Lake District which price locals out of house purchases. People are hopeless and depressed. The situation will deteriorate without some form of intervention.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/07/poor-health-is-commonplace-readers-on-living-in-seaside-towns

Seaton to twin with Siberia?

Rumblings in Seaton and Beer, where direct buses to Exeter (X52) via RDE have been cut to two a day – 10 am and midday from Seaton and 11.20 and 13.20 from Exeter and no X52 on Sundays.

The only alternatives for those wanting to go to the hospital is the lengthy journey (30-40 minutes longer) 9A via Sidmouth, which will require a change of bus in Exeter, or an expensive taxi.

Youngsters (are there any in Seaton?) will be unable to take advantage of metropolitan education, jobs and activities unless they get up very, very early and come home by teatime and those with jobs outside Seaton will definitely need their cars.

And should guests checking-in at the new Premier Inn fancy leaving their cars behind for a day out after they have exhausted the offerings in the sleepy town on a rainy day – well, at least they will be back in their hotel in time for very early dinner and they can be tucked up safely in their beds by 9 pm!

”Devolution deadlock’ putting economic growth across England at risk’

A Local Government Association document draws attention to the failure of LEPs and the need to base devolution on English counties not artificially created areas that have little synergy and where control is ceded to unrepresentative interests and lack of scrutiny and accountability:

“Mark Hawthorne, chairman of the LGA’s People and Places Board, said councils wanted to use greater powers to build more homes, secure the infrastructure essential for economic growth, improve roads, close skill gaps and increase access to fast broadband but feared opportunities were being missed because devolution has “stalled”.

He added: “To reignite the devolution process, the government needs to engage in a debate about appropriate governance arrangements with local areas.

“This is fundamental to ensure that the momentum around devolving powers to local areas is not lost and the billions of pounds worth of economic growth, hundreds of thousands of jobs and homes on offer through non-metropolitan devolution deals is not lost with it.”

The LGA wants the government to publish its annual devolution report, setting out progress on negotiating deals, when parliament returns this week.

Under the Cities & Local Government Devolution Act, the secretary of state is expected to provide annual reports to parliament setting out the progress on devolution across England – this year’s report has yet to be published.

Concern has been sparked as no new deals have been announced for 18 months although the election of six combined authority mayors earlier this year was hailed as a significant milestone for devolution in England. …”

https://www.local.gov.uk/about/news/devolution-deadlock-putting-economic-growth-across-england-risk

The ‘ Growing Places’ report referred to above is here:

https://www.local.gov.uk/growing-places-building-local-public-services-future

W(h)ither LEPs and devolution?

“The Local Government Association has called on the government to urgently release its annual devolution report amid fears the process has stalled across the country.

The umbrella-group’s plea, released on Monday (see next post), marks two years since the government set a deadline for local areas to submit devolution proposals.

Around 34 proposals – from cities, towns and counties across England – have been submitted.

The LGA argues that billions of pounds worth of economic growth and hundreds of thousands of new jobs and homes risk being lost as a result of the so-called “devolution deadlock”.

Mark Hawthorne, chairman of the LGA’s People and Places Board, said councils wanted to use greater powers to build more homes, secure the infrastructure essential for economic growth, improve roads, close skill gaps and increase access to fast broadband but feared opportunities were being missed because devolution has “stalled”.

He added: “To reignite the devolution process, the government needs to engage in a debate about appropriate governance arrangements with local areas.

“This is fundamental to ensure that the momentum around devolving powers to local areas is not lost and the billions of pounds worth of economic growth, hundreds of thousands of jobs and homes on offer through non-metropolitan devolution deals is not lost with it.”

The LGA wants the government to publish its annual devolution report, setting out progress on negotiating deals, when parliament returns this week.

Under the Cities & Local Government Devolution Act, the secretary of state is expected to provide annual reports to parliament setting out the progress on devolution across England – this year’s report has yet to be published.

Concern has been sparked as no new deals have been announced for 18 months although the election of six combined authority mayors earlier this year was hailed as a significant milestone for devolution in England.

Council leaders said this was not the only model of devolution possible and the government should explore further options for the widespread transfer of powers and responsibilities to the whole of England to boost the economy and improve people’s lives.

A Department for Communities & Local Government spokesman said: “This government is 100% committed to devolving powers to local areas where there is strong local support for plans to deliver better local services, greater value for money and clear accountability.”

Localis think-tank chief executive Liam Booth-Smith said: “The wait has simply been far too long for the two-thirds of England that lacks the capacity and robust governance structure to deliver the government’s national industrial strategy.

“Given the economic urgency of Brexit, all parts of England, from major cities to small towns, deserve new powers to revive moribund local economies and with it the opportunity to help themselves.”

Booth-Smith said a Localis report on the industrial strategy recommended the establishment of 47 strategic authorities – based on existing county and combined authority boundaries – to control devolved powers to help drive economic growth.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/09/publish-progress-report-devolution-now-lga-tells-government

Help-to-buy helps developers much more than buyers

Owl says: But isn’t that what this government and our council wants?

Housebuilder Redrow says it’s looking forward to working with government to consider the future of the help-to-buy subsidy scheme beyond 2021. You bet it is. Since former chancellor George Osborne in 2013 committed to helping homebuyers purchase new properties with a deposit of only 5%, Redrow has reported record profits every year.

The latest annual numbers – and a share price that has improved threefold since 2013 – shows how wonderful life has become for big housebuilders. You’d almost think Redrow was producing high-tech consumer gadgets. Operating margins are running at 19% and return on capital employed has hit 26%. About 40% of its private sales are to help-to-buy purchases, which is typical for the sector.

After an improvement of a quarter in pre-tax profits to £315m, the company hiked its dividend by 70% and said there’s plenty left in the tank. Profits will rise to about £430m by 2020 and the dividend can be almost doubled again “subject to market conditions remaining unchanged”.

The obvious question is why on earth the government, having spent £4.6bn already, would wish to continue with help to buy after 2021. Yes, the scheme has allowed some people to buy homes who would not otherwise have been able to do so, but the clearest beneficiaries of the stimulus to prices have been housebuilders’ shareholders and executives.

Back in 2013, one justification was the limp state of the mortgage market. That no longer applies. The banks are well-capitalised, high loan-to-value mortgages have returned and the Bank of England these days frets about too much lending, not too little.

Osborne’s other argument was that more demand for houses would increase supply. The numbers suggest modest success, even if some of the increase would have happened anyway. But the point now is that withdrawing help to buy overnight wouldn’t obviously cause the housebuilders to down tools for fear that non-subsidised houses would sell for slightly less. A return of capital of 26% is splendid but it is still worth getting out of bed for 15%.

Before ministers commit to renewing help to buy on the same terms, they should recall the warning by Lord King, former governor of the Bank of England, in 2014: “This scheme is a little too close for comfort to a general scheme to guarantee mortgages. We had a very healthy mortgage market with competing lenders attracting borrowers before the crisis, and we need to get back to that healthy mortgage market … We mustn’t let this scheme turn into a permanent scheme.”

Ditching help to buy outright in 2021 may be undesirable since there is a fair case that first-time buyers still deserve a leg-up. But, as even wiser housebuilders concede, too many houses qualify for help to buy. Current ceilings are set at £600,000 and 20% of the value of mortgage. Both figures could usefully be cut in half before the scheme becomes an addiction.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2017/sep/05/help-to-buy-scheme-buyers-builders-subsidy

Exmouth resident disputes terms of Fun Park closure

From a comment from Save Exmouth Seafront – these are views and claims that Owl cannot verify but which do come from a usually reliable source:

“Recently we reported that last minute efforts to keep the popular Fun Park trading beyond 31st August sadly collapsed late afternoon on the final day.

We understand from a very reliable source that an officer of EDDC council said during discussions that the Fun Park was not being granted a licence to remain open to the public and trade because the tenant did not ask for this type of licence.

However it emerges that the tenant did in fact request an extension of his lease explicitly referring to trading after August 31st. This explicit request was in an email sent a week before the closure – to that same EDDC officer.

This information is verifiable. It is shocking to contemplate that an EDDC officer would or could behave in this way.

It reveals what appears to be underhanded tactics in dealing with the closure of the Fun Park. Many Exmouth residents have said they believe the tenant and the Fun Park have been treated unfairly by EDDC. Many have expressed the opinion that he has been victimised because he challenged EDDC through the Courts.

On the surface it’s made to appear publicly everything is being carried out in a systematic and business like way. Behind the scenes, however, it looks like there is no intention of allowing the tenant a decent chance to keep the Fun Park open at this time. Nor is there any intention of giving any credence to the views and wishes of residents and visitors who value and want the amenities of the Fun Park to remain longer.

So, District Councillors – including those of you who also sit on the Town Council, it is time you read, and answer, the emails being sent to you about the closure of the Fun Park. It is time to have a close look on the Facebook pages where Exmouth residents and visitors are expressing their views and their frustration at not being listened to by you. It is time for you to demonstrate that you understand you were elected to serve, not to dictate, what the community wants. The voters in Exmouth for the most part do not have a very high opinion of you at this time. You were elected once but there is a ground swell of dissatisfaction with your performance. Exmouth voters are finding their voice.

It is also time, District Councillors, to question EDDC officers more closely and to expect to be given the evidence backing up their plans and statements. It is also time to stop accepting at face value what you are told in reports and to proactively support what your electorate wants in Exmouth.”

“Coastal communities amongst most deprived in UK, says think-tank”

“Britain’s coastal communities rank among the worst performers for earnings, employment, health, education and a range of other economic and social indicators.

That is the message from the Living on the Edge report by the Social Market Foundation (SMF) think tank, which found economic output per capita was 23% lower in coastal communities compared with inland local authority areas.

The research took ‘coastal’ to mean anywhere adjacent to the sea, not just traditional holiday resorts.

It said five of the 10 local authorities in Great Britain with the lowest average pay were on the coast: Torbay, North Devon, Gwynedd, Hastings and Torridge.

Five of the 10 areas with the highest unemployment rate were also coastal: Hartlepool, North Ayrshire, Torridge, Hastings, South Tyneside and Sunderland.

Half the 20 council areas with the highest proportions of the population with bad or very bad health were coastal.

SMF chief economist Scott Corfe said: “Many coastal communities are poorly connected to major employment centres, which compounds the difficulties faced by residents in these areas.

“Not only do they lack local job opportunities, but travelling elsewhere for work is also relatively difficult.”

He said the government needed a clear definition of a coastal community and should make more effort to address their economic problems.

Policymakers overlooked some poor performers because they were in the south east and so formed islands of deprivation in generally affluent areas, Corfe added.

Issues in coastal communities rose to prominence with a report from the communities and local government select committee in 2007, when MPs took the unusual step of objecting that the government’s response had been complacent and pressed for further action.

The committee said coastal communities tended to be at an economic disadvantage as the sea reduced the size of their economic hinterland compared with inland towns.

They were also likely to have high proportions of retired people, an exodus of younger people and to be geographically remote from population centres.

Following this report, the Labour government created the Sea Change Fund to regenerate coastal towns, which was succeeded under the Coalition by the Coastal Communities Fund.

Coastal communities minister Jake Berry said yesterday there will be a fifth round of funding for this in 2019-21, to provide at least £40m of assistance.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/09/coastal-communities-amongst-most-deprived-uk-says-think-tank

“How will councils survive the funding abyss?” (Especially if they are in hock to a vanity project!)

Not to mention re-routing roads in Exmouth so developers can make more money!

“No one in Westminster can say how local authorities will be funded after 2020

From struggling northern councils to seemingly prosperous counties, talk of a financial meltdown is getting louder. “It looks as though we’re approaching a cliff edge and no one has any idea how to stop us hurtling over it,” warns Nick Forbes, senior vice-chair of the Local Government Association (LGA) and Labour leader of Newcastle city council. It is a sentiment echoed across the political spectrum.

For once, it is not the dire prospect of failing to reach a Brexit trade deal which is exercising the minds of local politicians, but rather the consequences of an inconclusive general election. The resulting stasis in government has left English councils in financial limbo, staring into an abyss. Bluntly, no one in government can say how authorities will be funded after 2020 when they were all supposed to become self-financing.

Business rates plan raises fears of greater inequality among councils
Former chancellor George Osborne’s big idea was to set councils free of Whitehall – minus multibillion-pound grants – by handing them back business rate revenue raised locally, instead of redistributing it centrally. Since 2013, councils have kept 50%, which yields £26bn nationally. In his 2016 budget Osborne proclaimed that, compared with 2010 when 80% of council funding came through Whitehall, 100% of local government resources would come from councils themselves by 2020 – “raised locally, spent locally, invested locally”. An alluring prospect?

Some fell for it, foolishly believing this would mythically fill a looming £2.6bn social care funding gap, likely by 2020 on LGA calculations. In reality, the consequences were dire. Without a redistribution formula to compensate councils in poorer areas with boarded-up high streets and, consequently, small tax bases yielding low business rates, some authorities would struggle to balance their books – a legal requirement (unlike the NHS or Whitehall departments). Alongside this financial “devolution” came a sting in the tail: a multimillion pound central government revenue support grant, a mainstay of council funding, would be phased out.

But Osborne’s grand design crashed when a local government finance bill, the delivery mechanism, fell in the run-up to the June election. It has not been resurrected. The resulting Queen’s speech omitted to mention the proposed legislation.

Forbes highlights the dilemma. While Newcastle, ostensibly with the highest business tax base in the north-east, raises £154m a year from business rates, he estimates it would still be £16m a year worse off than under the current grant regime. By contrast, Westminster city council would be the ultimate winner – raising £1.8bn annually.

Such disparities were being addressed in a “fair funding review” involving senior civil servants and local government professionals earlier this year alongside discussions on the practicalities of devolving business rates to councils by 2020. But since June there has been a deafening silence in Whitehall. No meetings have taken place. “There was a relatively advanced debate about how the 100% retention [of business rates] would work – and a debate within local government about what kind of criteria is needed for some kind of redistribution mechanism,” says Forbes. “We were gearing up over the next few years to work with government. And all of what has collapsed.”

The result is one almighty mess. Professional bodies, such as the organisation representing senior council finance officers – the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (Cipfa) – are close to despair. English local government is facing the worst of all outcomes: the phasing out of a central revenue support grant without the compensation of a locally held business rate underpinned by a yet-to-be defined redistribution formula, in which rich councils would have to help compensate the poorest.

Having seen their budgets chopped by at least a third since 2010 in the name of austerity, councils are already facing their biggest financial crisis. This is compounded by funding for adult and children’s social care consuming two-thirds of their budgets, with other once-essential services slashed or axed.

Confusion reigns. Already three areas, Greater Manchester, Liverpool city region and London are piloting the full, local 100% business rate regime, buoyed by – presumably interim – government funding to ensure they do not lose out. Other pilots were promised. But there is doubt over whether the full devolution of business rates will ever happen.

If that’s the case, Forbes wonders what the pilot areas are meant to be piloting? For its part, the LGA has one concern: “Where’s the Plan B?” asks Forbes. No one can answer. The clock is ticking.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/05/how-will-councils-survive-funding-abyss

Brighton Council crowdfunds property renovation

“The Victorians built their public structures to last, but they didn’t lose a lot of sleep over the cost of long-term maintenance.

The Madeira Terraces on the east of Brighton’s seafront were built in the mid-1800s and have formed the backdrop to the National Speed Trials, Brighton Marathon and a host of other public events. But over the years, the cast iron has taken a battering from storms across the channel and has been sorely neglected, leading to their closure in 2013.

The dangerously decrepit terraces are a sad contrast to Brighton’s glitzy attractions, such as the i360 observation tower on the main drag. This vital restoration work is the council’s responsibility, and the final bill could be as much as £30m.

Last year, Brighton and Hove council lost out in a bid for government funding to fix the problem and has now launched a crowdfunding appeal. At the time of writing, it has raised £157,193 of its £430,669 target, including a contribution of £100,000 from the council. The closing date for the campaign is 30 November.

Anyone who pledges £2 or more will become a “friend” of Madeira Terraces and will be eligible to vote on which businesses will move into the first three restored arches. A pledge greater than £5,000 will earn a name on a large plaque on the terraces. The crowdfunding scheme is organised by funding platform Spacehive, which will be paid around £15,000 if the campaign is successful. No money will be taken from donors until the total is reached….”

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/sep/05/power-people-councils-crowdfunding-regenerate-madeira-terraces-brighton

Millionare praises Brexit: he can make people work longer hours in his shops

A multi-millionaire Tory peer has been mocked after suggesting Brexit will be good for young people as they will be able to work longer hours in shops.

Lord Harris, estimated to be worth more than £100million, claimed retailers could currently only employ young people for 35 hours a week because of EU law.

In fact, the European Working Time Directive means employees cannot be forced to work longer than 48 hours a week – and even then, they can opt-out of the restriction.

Brexit-backing Lord Harris, who made his fortune through interior store Carpetright, also set up the Harris Federation – which runs 44 primary and secondary in and around London.

He was challenged on the BBC Radio 4’s Today programme to explain how leaving the EU would help young people.

Harris: “It will give us more opportunity. It will give younger people more opportunity in this country and we won’t be controlled…”

Presenter: “Why?”

Harris: “Because we’ll have more freedom of laws.”

Presenter: “What’s wrong with the laws we have at the moment?”

Harris: “If you take a retailer, we can only keep our staff on for 35 hours a week, I think it is now.”

Presenter: “You’ve done alright out of it.”

Harris: “We haven’t done too badly.”

https://t.co/wrDL6iA9Du

A new business rates sting for small and medium businesses

“A Plymouth businessman has spoken out against the new “staircase tax” which has cost him thousands of pounds.

Peter Cuddehay, who owns a printing business and art gallery on Plymouth’s waterfront, said new tax rules, which treat different floors in the same building as separate premises, are unfair.

The changes, which affect up to 30,000 small firms, have hit him in the pocket and sabotaged his investment plans.

“It’s an iniquitous tax,” the 67-year-old business owner said. “Where is the fairness? I think it’s wrong.”

Mr Cuddehay has been stung by a Supreme Court ruling which allows the Valuation Office Agency, which recalculated business rates in 2017, to levy rates individually on offices on separate floors or corridors.

Previously they were treated as a single premises.

Some firms face rate hikes of up to £15,000 as a result of the new rules – which are backdated to 2015.

Mr Cuddehay said he has been forced to rip up his accounts for the past two years and start again.

His business operates over three floors, the top one only being a store, which has now been defined by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) as “two premises”.

Mr Cuddehay, who employs five people, previously qualified for business rates relief because the rental value of his property was less than £12,000.

But he now has to pay a back-dated bill of more than £5,000 – and will face tax bills in future when before he didn’t have to pay anything for being below the limit.

He faces prosecution if he doesn’t pay up, so he’s handed over the cash, but appealed and is awaiting a date for his hearing.

“It’s a joke. We must have been one of the first companies to have been hit by this,” he said. “A retrospective action is outrageous, I can’t believe they can get away with it.”

And it’s a double charge for Mr Cuddehay, a member of the Federation of Small Businesses as he now expects his Waterfront Business Improvement District levy charge, calculated on rateable value, to rise too.

“All our plans for investment have gone out of the window,” he said. “We’ll also have to go back to out landlord and maybe say we don’t need the top floor storage.”

Mr Cuddehay has now written to Sutton and Devonport MP Luke Pollard about his predicament.

Philip Hammond, the chancellor, is now under pressure from backbench MPs to address the changes and perhaps overrule them when he announces his Budget in autumn 2017.”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/business/businessman-loses-thousands-because-new-376567

Government ripping us off – again

From The Times (pay wall). It’s going to make commuting by rail to Exeter from Axminster, Honiton, Feniton, Whimple and Cranbrook a very expensive way of getting there – so more cars will be clogging up more roads in “Greater Exeter”.

“Nobody likes being ripped off. And there is something particularly distasteful about being fleeced by your own government.

But that is precisely what is happening. Rail fares are set to rise at a much faster rate than employee earnings, with annual season tickets of over £5,000 an increasingly common sight. And interest charges on student loans in England will rise to 6.1 per cent from the autumn.

From students to commuters, the cost of living in the UK is on the rise. And some of the biggest cost increases are in areas where the government sets the terms.

Both rail fares and student loans are linked, under government policy, to the retail price index measure of inflation, long ago discarded by economists as a flawed measure of price growth. It is widely known that RPI consistently overstates inflation in the UK, and that the alternative measures of inflation, consumer prices index (CPI) and CPIH (which includes owner-occupiers’ housing costs) are a far better reflection of what is actually going on.

Indeed, in the June 2010 budget George Osborne announced that, partly for these reasons, the government would start using CPI for the uprating of benefits and public sector pensions. The same budget mentioned “reviewing how CPI can be used for the indexation of taxes and duties while protecting revenues”, yet there has been near-silence on this issue ever since.”

“Inclusive growth” or exclusive growth in East Devon (soon to be Greater Exeter?)

Greater Exeter or Greater East Devon?

A follow-on from the previous post.

“Inclusive growth is emerging as a key agenda in the UK. The general election was fought from both sides with a promise to create an economy that works for everyone.

City leaders across the country are pursuing inclusive growth as a means for addressing some of the big challenges facing their communities, from poor health and economic exclusion to high demand for services and spiralling financial pressures. Our report, Citizens and Inclusive Growth

Click to access rsa_citizens-and-inclusive-growth-report.pdf

explores how we can build on this agenda and support impactful next steps by engaging citizens as part of our strategy for inclusive growth.

The RSA Inclusive Growth Commission set out a bold vision for a new model of growth that truly moves on from the failed trickle down economics of the past. But it also identified a critical gap in current thinking and practice around alternative economic models: the role that citizens should play in shaping them. A “place based” economy is unlikely to succeed without active citizen and community participation. The RSA’s Citizens’ Economic Council has underlined the real value created by getting citizens involved in shaping economic thinking and policy, both in terms of the quality of decision making and the positive effect it has on people’s skills, as well as their sense of agency, self-efficacy and belonging to their place. …

So how can we take the agenda forward in the UK? It’s clear that citizens aren’t featuring enough in conversations and decisions about devolution and strategies for economic growth and development. The parameters of inclusive growth are largely being set by officials, which has meant that too often we are tinkering at the edges of existing growth models rather than transforming them. Evidence from the report suggests greater involvement of a broad range of citizens (especially those with lived experience of hardship and poverty) may have a transformative effect on priorities and policies for growth, encouraging greater equity and sustainability.

There are ways that government and cities could demonstrate their commitment to citizen engagement in pursuit of inclusive growth. One of our suggestions is that in future phases of devolution, localities should negotiate significant devolved funds that are controlled by their citizens through participatory budgeting. The same could apply to the programmes that ultimately replace EU structural and social funds after Brexit.

Inclusive growth should go hand in hand with an inclusive form of decision making. Towns and cities in the UK have a real opportunity to make this happen. “

https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/rsa-blogs/2017/07/give-citizens-real-power-for-inclusive-growth-to-succeed

Why “growth” is almost impossible in East Devon

Our Local Enterprise Partnership trumpets “growth, growth, we must have growth to prosper” and EDDC chose the highest growth figures to ensure its Local Plan got LOTS of housing. But they both seem to have forgotten something that their bible, the Daily Telegraph, now points out:

Britain’s productivity crisis risks getting worse because the population is ageing steadily, leaving relatively fewer younger, more dynamic workers who typically innovate more.

Unless drastic action is taken to boost skills and creativity, or to increase the number of young workers, then growth will struggle to pick up, according to new economic research published in the journal of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research.

“The share of young workers impacts the innovation process positively and, as a result, a change in the demographic profile that skews the distribution of the population to the right [older], leads to a decline in innovation activity,” said the paper, written by Yunus Aksoy, Henrique Basso and Ron Smith. …

To avert a sustained slowdown they recommend that governments should look at ways to make the dwindling proportion of young people more productive.

“Unless there are drastic changes most OECD countries will need to devise new policies to foster medium-run economic growth in an environment with ageing population, perhaps by increasing investment in human capital,” the researchers believe.

Alternative options are also available, but some may be less politically palatable – for instance, encouraging greater flows of migrants of working age into the country.

“Demographics are not destiny and our conclusions assume that there will not be major changes in rates of immigration, labour force participation, fertility or longevity,” the economists said.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/08/07/ageing-population-make-productivity-crisis-worse/

UK – tax avoidance hot spot

Almost 40% of corporate investments channelled away from authorities and into tax havens travel through the UK or the Netherlands, according to a study of the ownership structures of 98m firms.

The two EU states are way ahead of the rest of the world in terms of being a preferred option for corporations who want to exploit tax havens to protect their investments.

The Netherlands was a conduit for 23% of corporate investments that ended in a tax haven, a team of researchers at the University of Amsterdam concluded. The UK accounted for 14%, ahead of Switzerland (6%), Singapore (2%) and Ireland (1%).

Every year multinationals avoid paying £38bn-£158bn in taxes in the EU using tax havens. In the US, tax evasion by multinational corporations via offshore jurisdictions is estimated to be at least $130bn (£99bn) a year. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/25/netherlands-and-uk-are-biggest-channels-for-corporate-tax-avoidance

“Countryside in crisis”

“In a pointed letter to the Times, the [Rural] coalition declared that: “More than nine million people live and work in rural England, yet their concerns are in danger of being squeezed out if Brexit discussions focus only on agriculture and the environment.”

The effects of austerity and corporate cost-cutting had already decimated vital rural services, it argued, “risking rural communities becoming enclaves only for the wealthy”.

Talking to various members of that group, you get a feel for the range of different perspectives, but also of the shared insistence that Brexit will not just affect the countryside in terms of a withdrawal from the Common Agricultural Policy and related regulation and subsidy, but is also likely to bring to a head issues concerning the fabric of rural life that have long been unravelling.

…“Do we want the countryside just to be a national park and import our food from elsewhere or do we want it to be full of thriving communities that can be a productive part of the economy?”

… The Rural Coalition wants at least 7,500 affordable houses for young families to be built per year to reverse this trend. Paul Miner of Campaign to Protect Rural England argues that, with concerted policy action, “a commonplace sight in the countryside could be thriving communities boosted by new affordable homes”.

… There is a very big if there, of course, to go alongside the multiple other ifs on the horizon. At the heart of this one is the question of what we collectively understand rural Britain to be about. Whether it is a green and pleasant backdrop to insistently urban priorities, or whether it can re-establish a community that works for all generations and income groups. Hudswell suggests perhaps part of that solution can be created by the communities themselves.

“The story really is,” Lightfoot says, “if you sit back, nothing happens.”

“Or,” Cullen says, “you look around one day and think, hey, Christ, we have lost everything.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/15/countryside-crisis-rural-britain-north-yorkshire

Local authority companies ” should not have many council board members” – so why run the company?

Owl says: If councillors and officers are no good at running commercial companies – why are they being created?

“Local authority-run companies should avoid having too many council members on executive boards to ensure commercial success, CIPFA’s annual conference was told.

The advice on governance was issued today by Mike Britch, chief executive of Norse Group, a firm with a £300m turnover wholly owned by Norfolk County Council, at a workshop on councils and commercialism.

He told delegates the presence of too many members on executive boards could hamper the agility that a small and focused board needed to efficiently deliver services in a commercial environment.

Britch said: “You can’t run a commercial service as a department of a local authority, that means you have to get yourself from under the shackles of a 151 [financial] officer, the monitoring officer and everybody else who wants to reduce what they perceive as the risk to their shareholders.

“You need to have commercial and operational freedom to trade and to make the decisions you need to make.” …”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/07/local-authority-run-companies-should-avoid-too-many-council-board-members