Date: 21st June 2021  
Subject: Rural Economy
Chair: Graham Biggs MBE, Chief Executive, Rural Services Network
Hosted: Online Event via Zoom

- To download the agenda and papers associated for this meeting, click here

- To download a copy of these learning outcomes click here

- To view the attendance and apologies lists click here

Learning Outcomes

Key issues highlighted by speakers

Mark Pragnell, Pragmatix Advisory – Towards the UK Shared Prosperity Fund

Download the presentation here

The final report is available at this link

• The RSN has already produced a Rural Lens review of Government place-based funds available at this link.
• ‘Pragmatix Advisory – Towards the UK Shared Prosperity Fund’ report follows on from this work and looks across the various funds.
• The UK Community Renewal Fund is intended to “support local areas to pilot imaginative new approaches and programmes that unleash their potential, instil pride, and prepare them to take full advantage of the UK Shared Prosperity Fund when it launches in 2022.” “This Fund will also provide capacity funding to help places prepare for the introduction of the UK Shared Prosperity Fund.” (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-community-renewal-fund-prospectus/uk-community-renewal-fund-prospectus-2021-22)
• The timetable for the UK Community Renewal Fund does not, in the RSN’s opinion, provide the time necessary for lessons to be learnt and taken into the development of the UK Shared Prosperity Fund, hence the requirement for a report examining methodologies for assessing where funds will be delivered from a rural perspective.
• Government’s funding priorities post-Brexit have been place-based funds aimed at ‘levelling up’ the country. These funds have used prioritisation methods that are all slightly different in metrics and weighting, but each has placed rural areas at a disadvantage and given higher priority to urban areas.
• ‘Towards the UK Shared Prosperity Fund’ makes the point that earned incomes are lower in rural areas, yet household expenditure is greater. This single truth provides a clear and coherent prioritisation methodology that the report recommends as the basis for the UK Shared Prosperity Fund.
• In using a simple methodology that focusses on the outcomes of inequality that matter, that uses ONS data as a trusted source across government departments; it lets local authorities consider and address the causes as only local understanding can do.
• It is recommended that political judgement is accepted, but at the margin for hard cases and with clear and transparent rationale.
• The Pragmatix Advisory report was commissioned as a piece of economic appraisal, not rural policy, work specifically aimed at influencing the Treasury.

Questions and discussion resulting from the presentation included:

• Should recommendations for the UK Shared Prosperity Fund include the need for a per capita allocation based on need, not a flat rate?
• Has the Vibrant Economy Index produced by Grant Thornton been considered in the preparation of this report?
• The 3 place-based funds are financed by different government departments and have slightly different aims, and so the different prioritisation methodologies and weightings can be understood through this perspective.
• Government now accepts that sparsity increases economic vulnerability.
• Policy in respect of town centres needs to accept the reality of the changing community relationship with town centres.
• Decade long campaigning for better broadband, affordable housing and accessible transport for rural areas has not eradicated the unmet need.
• Covid has, and will continue to, alter the way communities and economies work.
• The weighting used for the Indices of Multiple Deprivation is not appropriate, and this results in funding and policy not being directed equitably.
• Investment in metropolitan authorities and urban combined authorities does not result in a sufficient trickle down of benefit to neighbouring rural authorities.
• Where government funds are awarded through competitive processes, several factors work against rural local authorities being successful:
  • Metropolitan Districts and Combined Authorities have the scale to make multiple bids (large labour and effort required for each bid)
  • Smaller authorities have a lack of capacity to deliver if a bid is successful as well as to pitch and bid.
  • Public sector bidding is an inefficient use of public funds.
• The next steps will be to issue the report and raise the issues politically and through the press.

Graham Biggs MBE – Rural Lens Review – The Queen’s Speech

Download the presentation here

• ‘At the State Opening of Parliament on Tuesday 11 May 2021, the Government, through the Queen’s Speech, set out its priorities and programme for the coming session including the legislation it intends to pass. The Queen’s Speech states the programme it sets out will deliver a pandemic recovery that makes the UK stronger, healthier and more prosperous.’
• The Queens Speech sets out the legislative programme of the Government for the next period. It focussed on Covid recovery.
• It is high level and leads to more questions than it gives answers.
• The legislative programme was linked to Revitalising Rural ‘Asks’ by the RSN, and key facts were presented that demonstrated the importance to rural areas. The Revitalising Rural Campaign can be accessed at this link.
• The Rural Services Network (RSN) will examine legislation as it is released, looking at the detail, make comment, and represent the rural position consulting with the membership as it does so.

Attendance and Apologies:

Attendance:

Apologies: