Levelling Up

This audit will analyse both parameters in turn that were set out above as a baseline for levelling up the United Kingdom. Given that levelling up is a UK-wide policy initiative, the audit focuses on the political parties that contest elections across Great Britain.

 

Enhanced resources from central government for infrastructure investment.

​

The Conservative Party’s record on delivering infrastructure projects whilst in office has not been strong. It recently cancelled the final leg of HS2 between Birmingham and Manchester – the most high-profile investment in connectivity between the UK’s major cities. Their manifesto promises to reinvest the savings from this cancellation with ‘every penny saved in the North or Midlands to be spent there’. There are pledges to deliver Northern Powerhouse Rail connecting Liverpool to Hull, with further rail investment in the Midlands, South West and Wales. They pledge to invest £4.7 billion for smaller cities, towns and rural areas in the North and Midlands to spend on their transport priorities. In addition, they pledge to invest £8.3 billion to fill potholes and resurface roads. A more concerted focus on roads will potentially harm the UK’s ability to meet is decarbonisation targets. A further £8.55 billion is pledged for city regions to spend on their local priorities.

 

Whilst in office, capital investment by the Conservatives has often been neglected for immediate priorities, including tax cuts. The manifesto offers further tax cuts, promising to cut national insurance contributions by a further 2% for employees and to abolish them completely for the self-employed. Investment pledges must be seen in the context of these short-term priorities.

 

The Liberal Democrat manifesto offers similar policies to the Conservatives on transport but is vague on costing and specifics. There is a pledge to ‘significantly extend the electrification of the rail network and deliver Northern Powerhouse rail’. Further pledges are on the passenger side with a promise to freeze fares. They pledge to review the cancellation of HS2 to see if it can be delivered. On electric vehicles there is a pledge to extend charging points and mandate all new small cars and vans sold from 2030 will be zero-emission. There are pledges to work with local government to deliver tram networks. Although this would significantly enhance the effective size of local economies, the policy within the manifestos remains vague on specifics.

 

On the whole, the Liberal Democrats offer some scope to invest in much-needed infrastructure across the UK, but the vagueness of their proposals would make it difficult to hold them to account.

 

The Labour Party has a bolder transport policy, which is to bring the railways back into public ownership by not renewing franchises once they are up for renewal. They also pledge to give city mayors more control over rail planning in their localities. However, unlike the Conservative Party, the Labour manifesto is vague on specific rail projects. That said, the overarching strategy of the Labour Party has the potential to turbocharge levelling up as a ten-year infrastructure strategy that will be aligned with a ten-year industrial strategy. Short-term policy making has hindered regional policy in the UK for decades.

 

Like the Labour Party, the Green Party promises to bring railways back into public ownership in the same way. Similarly, the party is vague on specifics and costings. There is a pledge to increase electrification and reopen viable lines. Where Labour frames its transport policies around economic and environmental security, unsurprisingly the Green Party is preoccupied by environmental concerns.

 

Reform UK’s policy on infrastructure promises to ‘[f]ocus on our coastal regions, Wales, the North, and the Midlands to improve existing rail and road links’. However, its transport policies are framed by an anti- net zero stance rather than a prospect for economic development. It promises to ‘stop the war on drivers’ by banning ULEZ clean air zones. It also promises to scrap the rest of HS2 and create a new infrastructure commission that ends net zero targets.

 

Enhancing enablers through devolution.

​

The Conservative manifesto continues its approach to levelling up communities through pots of central government funding. There is a commitment to 105 towns of a £20 million endowment fund, continuation of the shared prosperity fund for three more years, and a pledge to launch a seaside heritage fund. However, this does not match the funding available in 2019, particularly as the Conservative Party’s national service policy will be funded from the shared prosperity fund.

 

There is a commitment to offer ‘level 4’ devolution powers to all local areas with a devolution deal. However, this does not equip local and combined authorities with the much-needed revenue-raising powers essential to build local capacity and place- based economic policy making.

 

The Labour Party does not pledge specific pots of money to local authorities from the central government. It is vague on its plans for devolution but does go further than the Conservative Party by promising to widen devolution. Local areas will be able to gain new powers over transport, adult education and skills, housing and planning, and employment support. It promises multi-year settlements to local councils, which will provide more certainty to local governments. However, there is no pledge to give local authorities more revenue-raising powers and so the assumption is that they will remain dependent on central government funding.

 

The Green Party is vague on local governance arrangements. There is a commitment to give local authorities the resources and power they need with £5 billion a year in extra funding, but no specifics on the power that would be transferred to local authorities. They are invited to play a key role in decarbonising the economy, but again this is not framed within rebalancing the unequal spatial economy.

​

Like Labour, the Liberal Democrats will offer multi- year settlements to local governments. There is also a vague commitment to grant local authorities more power where it ‘matters to them most’. Councils will be permitted to increase council tax by up to 500% on second homes. Whilst this is the firmest commitment to increase revenues for local government, it is quite a targeted policy at localities with tourist economies whose flourishing can be blighted by vacant second homes.

 

The Reform UK manifesto does not mention devolution, metro mayors, combined authorities or local councils once.

 

To note: we have not included this area within the overall manifesto scoring as we omitted Plaid Cymru from this topic and so inclusion in the scoring would skew the output.

​

Icon credit: Langtik/Noun Project