And is our current economic growth rate too high or too low?
Historically, the East of England has "enjoyed" growth rates which have made us one of the three English regions with gross value added (GVA) per capita above the national average. However, with growth has come large-scale migration to the region, increasing housing demand, fuelling a dual fear of both homes becoming less and less affordable; and also of the concreting of parts of our countryside in an attempt to dramatically increase housing supply. This is an unsustainable "vicious circle" for those who sometimes seek to restrict growth in the region.Interestingly, though, this decade has seen the East of England grow slower than the national average in each of the last five years. The gap between our economic performance and that of London and the South East, and that of some of our international competitors has increased. This has neither diminished the continuing rise in housing demand; nor the decreases in housing affordability - especially whilst London continues to drive the strongest propensity to commute of any region in the UK.
The draft regional economic strategy attempts to stimulate a serious debate on this paradox. Far from being too high, our growth rates this decade are dangerously low in terms of the future international competitiveness and long-term standing of our region. Developing adjacent to a world city, probably most at risk of climate change and with the lowest per capita public spend of any UK region, requires us to formulate, and thereafter plan and manage a new high growth, sustainable model of development. Creating a new "virtuous circle" will require bold, single-minded and purposeful regional and local leadership. But first we must have that serious debate...
Comments (4)
Something needs to change, most of our youngsters leave for University and do not return due to lack of opportunities, much of the local economy is based around paying minimum wages, hence the growing European work force. New housing developments continue to be built, but who is going to be buying them, certainly not the local working people. Our traditional industries, such as the fishing industry, have been decimated by European policies. And new proposed harbours will be useless without major investment in upgrading our road and rail transport to other parts of the country. - Nigel Bedingfield, Editor to the www.WaveneyValleyBlog.com
Posted on January 14, 2008 2:00 PM
Our reducing growth is a direct consequence of years of underinvestment in the region's infrastructure by Government. We have one of the largest container ports in Europe (Felixstowe), yet there is insufficent railway to enable the containers to travel direct to the Midlands. The A14 is little more than a lorry park. This underinvestment is reflected in the fact that EEDA has the lowest RDA budget of all. The East of England is a successful economy. Our leaders must wake up to the fact that it will cease to be so successful without sensible investment. This region cannot succeed simply as a dormitory for London, yet the house building requirements being imposed by Government can only suppose that our prime purpose is to provide homes for commuters. We need homes for our people, and as so many are so poorly paid, those homes should be provided through Housing Associations to ensure they are available to our workers.
Jerry Golland
Chairman
The Institute of Directors
The East of England
Posted on January 23, 2008 5:17 PM
Jerry says it all. We don't need more people, but we do need investment, and we must be aware of developments, especially in those companies that rely upon a skilled workforce.
Schemes such as Train to Gain do little but bring up to a basic standard those kids that have been failed by an education system that has become too centralised. The Education Year Book for 1937 says 'the only person who should decide what a child is to be taught is the teacher' yet we now believe that an anonymous civil servant standing behind an incompetent politician knows best.
We need investment, but not in huge lumps. We need banks that will take a risk. We need to push aside bureaucrats, because they stifle creativity. We must end short-term project funding.
I remember when the Notting Hill Carnival first started. You just had to say you had a band, and wanted to be in the carnival, and �2,500 was handed over. Yes, there was some wastage, even some corruption, but that small investment produced a vibrant and worthwhile investment, that did much to weld our community together.
It's that inspired thinking that's needed today. Not endless strategy reports written by people who have never held a dying child in their arms, never appreciated the value of a plate of food on their plates.
Everyone in EEDA should first work in a kitchen, on a building site, in a factory, in a powerless job. Then you might begin to understand how the rest of us feel.
Posted on February 26, 2008 8:01 PM
Dear Trevor, Jerry and Nigel,
Many thanks for taking the time to respond to my blog. I posted this to stimulate debate about some of the key issues facing the region, and it was really interesting to get your views and feedback. I hope we can continue the dialogue over the coming months and really begin to tackle some of the major challenges we face in the East of England.
However, Trevor: I think you are a little unfair to suggest that EEDA staff don't have a diverse range of everyday experiences. I meet all my work colleagues on a fairly regular basis, and they come from many different backgrounds and have a huge range of experiences that contribute to the way we approach our work.
Best regards,
David
Posted on April 18, 2008 1:59 PM