Source · Select Committees · Business and Trade Committee
Recommendation 3
3
Paragraph: 21
There is no doubt that geographical inequality is a structural problem in the UK and...
Conclusion
There is no doubt that geographical inequality is a structural problem in the UK and attempting to address these inequalities should be at the heart of the UK’s plans for economic recovery post-pandemic. These plans should be focused on longer-term goals, rather than just the life span of political cycles, requiring a deeper level of consensus. Whilst we recognise that there are inequalities between regions in the UK, there are also inequalities within regions, with pockets of wealth and pockets of severe deprivation. The levelling up agenda must also seek to tackle inequality within regions, not least in cities that are seen to be well performing.
Paragraph Reference:
21
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
We recognise the need for ensuring that it is not only the most well-resourced authorities who are successful in securing funding and that, particularly in the context of recovery from covid-19, local authorities currently have a significant number of calls on their time and resources. We are grateful for the Committee highlighting this important matter and will take it into consideration for future policy and funding formulation. Evidence shows that local authorities’ capacity and capability to bid for grants is variable, which can sometimes cause challenges in terms of cost and effectiveness. Whilst we do want local authorities to both think and prepare strategically and for the long-term, we are cognisant of the importance of ensuring the broadest range of local authorities have the opportunity to bid for funding, across the range of future pots which will be made available, over the long-term. Already the Government has made a number of moves to support the boosting of capacity within local authorities who are seeking to bid, or who have been awarded funds in principle. In particular, we put in place targeted capacity support for the Towns Fund, one of our largest local growth programmes to date. To boost capacity in local authorities, we have paid out a total of £21.4 million to date in revenue (section 31) grants. This has enabled local authorities who are developing proposals for the Towns Funds to build capacity and capability in key areas such as strategy and business case development. Beyond upfront capacity support through revenue grants, DLUHC procured the Towns Fund Delivery Partner (TFDP), a consortium led by Arup. They provide strategic consultancy advice and support to help places overcome capacity and capability gaps that might hinder them from developing good proposals and interventions for the Towns Fund. The TFDP provide online tools and resources, specialist advice and learning programmes tailored to Towns’ individual needs. TFDP support has enabled towns to develop their local capabilities and skills and facilitated shared learning between towns across a range of different disciplines. Moreover, for the Levelling Up Fund, we have provided £125,000 of capacity funding to all eligible local authorities which are the 93 English local authorities in category 1 of the index of priority places, all local authorities in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. This revenue funding is not ringfenced, and the primary intention is to support relevant local authorities develop their bids for later rounds of the Levelling Up Fund. Further, all Government grant decisions are subject to the Public Sector Equalities Duty risk assessment. Transparency of our mechanisms and processes are in place to ensure that councils without this capacity do not lose out, including ensuring appropriate funding is available for future funding rounds.