It’s difficult to understand why anyone would object to a mechanism that will enable people to improve the energy efficiency of their homes, under no compulsion, and at no cost either [...]]]> The government’s flagship Green Deal initiative has had something of a kicking recently, with some rumours even suggesting that the scheme will be scrapped.

It’s difficult to understand why anyone would object to a mechanism that will enable people to improve the energy efficiency of their homes, under no compulsion, and at no cost either to themselves or the taxpayer, but that’s an unfortunate sign of the hysteria and misinformation that characterises much of the debate around energy and climate change policy.

The negative headlines are unlikely to help drive Green Deal uptake when the scheme undergoes what the Department of Energy and Climate Change are referring to as ‘a managed launch’ this October (the fact that they need to clarify when a policy launch is to be ‘managed’ perhaps explains a lot about previous launches).

If this leads to the scheme failing altogether, it would be a great shame, because there is much to commend it. The Green Deal is a simple mechanism that enables households to install energy efficiency measures at no upfront costs. Repayments are attached to the electricity bill of the particular property, rather than the individual, so there is no danger of remaining liable for ongoing payments if the original Green Deal customer moves house. The scheme’s golden rule states that any home where the projected lifetime energy bill savings from the cost of the measures are no less than the installation costs is eligible.

With sufficient uptake, the Green Deal has the potential to deliver significant positive social and environmental outcomes. Over a third of Britain’s carbon emissions come from domestic energy use. It has been estimated that roughly one pound in every four spent on fuel bills is wasted because of poor energy efficiency. In London, 55 per cent of households in fuel poverty live in homes classed as Band E or below for energy efficiency, meaning that it is unnecessarily expensive for them to maintain an adequate warmth.

Our research at Future of London indicates that there is a key role for local authorities in driving demand for the Green Deal.  Assets that Councils could use to stimulate uptake include:

• Policy levers – around factors such as planning procedures and parking charges. These could be used to
• Brand – a local Green Deal programme promoted and endorsed by the local council is likely to boost the credibility of the scheme, and allay fears around mis-selling or sub-standard workmanship;
• Data – Councils possess a number of datasets including tax records, data from planning and building control or previous energy efficiency schemes. These could be used to identify properties that fulfill the ‘golden rule’ of the Green Deal;
• Communication Channels – Council newsletters, social media feeds, websites and Council tax mail-outs could all be used to promote the Green Deal, as well as face-to-face communications from frontline staff in housing or social services departments, for example, or indeed by councillors themselves;
• Partnerships – On a similar basis, Boroughs partnerships with other arms of the local state (eg GPs or schools) and the community sector (in the form of faith groups, tenants and residents associations, transition towns and other green networks, or charities working on poverty issues or with older people)

The Green Deal also represents an ideal opportunity for local authorities to play a meaningful role in taking forward the co-operative agenda.

Some authorities are already involved in developing plans for energy co-operatives, based on the Dutch model, whereby a number of households buy their energy ‘in bulk’ at discounted rate, with the sign-up and purchasing process co-ordinated by the Council.

A similar approach could work for energy efficiency measures purchased under a Green Deal arrangement. The local authority would sign-up participants, then put the contract to provide the measures out to tender.

The Sustainable Development Commission have estimated that an area-based approach to domestic carbon reduction can reduce per-unit costs by about 30 per cent, so this would probably result in savings on the Green Deal for participating households.

These processes will not be without their challenges, of course. Throughout our research, the London Boroughs we spoke to observed the disconnect between some of the Government’s rhetoric on the Green Deal (Chris Huhne called it ‘a third industrial revolution’) and the difficulty that they’d had with previous energy efficiency schemes at frontline level, struggling to give away measures for free!

Nonetheless, it’s clear that local government can do a lot to support both the delivery of the Green Deal, and the wider effort to meet the UK’s long-term carbon reduction targets, ensuring we play a fair and proportionate role to averting dangerous climate change. In addition to these top-down incentives, the benefits to the community from energy efficiency improvements, including reduced energy bills, warmer, comfier, healthier homes and the alleviation of fuel poverty, also present a powerful driver for local authorities from the bottom up.

Luke Hildyard is a Research Associate at Future of London

For further information of Future of London’s report on the role of London Boroughs in delivering the Green Deal in London, please see http://www.futureoflondon.org.uk

But to achieve them all, requires serious partnership working and the progressive, flexible and placeshaping route that local government must, [...]]]> Cutting carbon, delivering local green technology-based economic growth, creating jobs and regeneration, joining-up public services’ budgets and objectives, forging new partnerships. These are all desirable and all decent, clear objectives for the environment portfolio.

But to achieve them all, requires serious partnership working and the progressive, flexible and placeshaping route that local government must, I believe, follow. We need to make Localism work for us, face up to slashed funding, and tackle many wide-ranging challenges in our communities, of which economic growth and climate change are but two. As we digest The Committee on Climate Change’s new report out today, the role of local authorities in cutting carbon emissions is vital.

The reference in the title to ‘I want it all’ came from a recent speech to an Association for Public Service Excellence Conference – ‘Energy Efficiency vs Renewables’ – and developing a political vision for this. I unusually quoted a Queen song (not my taste in music either): “I guess my initial response to the question of energy efficiencies versus renewables would be, in the words of Freddie Mercury, I want it all, and I want it now.”

To return to joining-up, I think it is vital to place these specific aims in the context of broader, and more general, policy. We must continue to strive for energy efficiencies in our operations as local authorities. And we must do all we can to influence and directly impact on carbon reduction throughout the communities we serve.

But time is running out. The International Energy Agency recently estimated that existing global infrastructure is already producing 80% of the total amount of carbon emissions that would lead to serious warming. Its chief economist said “The door is closing. I am very worried – if we don’t change direction now on how we use energy, we will end up beyond what scientists tell us is the minimum for safety.”

It is vital that we proactively increase our own use of renewable energy. We must also take a community leadership role in driving growth of renewable energy use by residents, businesses and other public services.

One theme which I believe must underpin any political vision, is that we cannot develop policy in isolation. We must look at the wider challenges for our communities, from regeneration and economic development to poor public health, from tackling unemployment to improving educational attainment. There is a temptation to develop one-off responses to each challenge we face. But we must not lose sight of the overall goals of improving life for all our residents.

In developing a vision for energy efficiency and renewables, it must form part of an overarching green vision. And we need to ensure it contributes positively and effectively in achieving the overall vision for our towns, villages, boroughs, counties or cities.

So what are the key challenges to developing a political vision for energy efficiency and renewables?

I think we need to to develop policies which:

- reflect local government’s placeshaping role

- which are progressive so local authorities work alongside our communities, and lead them when needed

- which drive and don’t just respond to the market

- which join-up with partners beyond the traditional boundaries, whether geographical or sectoral

- and policies which deliver environmental change and wider outcomes

In placemaking our vision must reflect where we are and where we want to be as a borough. In recent years, you could pick up a  council plan or sustainable community strategy and read something along the lines of ”we will strive to create a green and environmentally-friendly place with a growing 21st Century economy, where people want to live, work and play”. And you would not know which part of the country you were in. We have all seen these generic, one-size-fits-all corporate and community ambitions. In the same vein, we can no longer just base our environmental performance on meeting national indicators, broad carbon reduction targets, and chasing the reducing and very specific funding strands that emerge from central government.

I think we must raise our sights in local government.

We must work together as members and officers to develop our own progressive vision and policies which reflect our communities, and will transform where we live. This means engaging every part of our communities to develop plans that are specific and place-focussed. And that will help us better engage residents with the scale of our ambitions.

In place leadership, we have a vision in Stockton to develop a world class renewables and green technology sector. This must also help drive economic regeneration. It can deliver jobs and support development of new skills for future generations of our young people, as well as delivering the carbon reductions we vitally need.

We appreciate that we are working in the context of one of the most industrialised petro-chemical industry landscapes in Europe. But our vision must be to develop a truly green and sustainable environment alongside our economic aims.

I believe we need to drive the market, create opportunities for growth in renewables, and at the same time join up our thinking to bring wider benefits to residents.

Councils have achieved huge reductions in their own carbon emissions. This includes more energy efficient buildings, modernising and slashing our transport use, and many wide-ranging energy saving programmes. And we need to continue this work.

We also continue to have a wider role in driving carbon reduction across our communities. Again, it is about joining forces, not acting in isolation. On a small scale, for example, we have rapidly increased the infrastructure for electric vehicles in Stockton, working in partnership to install a growing network of charging points.

This on its own is not enough. We are bringing dealerships, fleet managers and other stakeholders together, asking them what more can we do to stimulate the market? Only by aligning our objectives with new partners and stakeholders can we make an impact. We need to be on the same side to drive change.

On a bigger scale, there is a huge potential prize in harnessing renewables and doing so in a way that could even influence a step change in the energy market and simultaneously drives our economic growth. We must bring our powers to bear on not just using renewables but how we can shape the market.

Councils must extend their vision for what they can achieve, and where. The volume of energy we purchase allows us to broker huge deals, stimulate the market and actively choose renewable energy sources. Based on today’s energy prices, the five Tees Valley councils alone will require an estimated £450 million worth of energy over 25 years to run their core facilities and services. This gives us real purchasing power.

But why do we need to stop there? We need to look outside our statutory, local, sub-regional and regional arrangements. Are we doing all we can to forge new partnerships to purchase power, and to encourage investment from renewable suppliers? Should we be negotiating for example in partnership with the NHS and prisons, both 24-7 operations? With other authorities across the country? And what about the private sector? And even on behalf of residents?

The somewhat haphazard nature of the UK’s waste and energy infrastructure offers an opportunity. And there is growing pressure on central government to change the dynamics of the energy market, to open it up and allow genuine choice and competition.

If we are looking at the next generation of energy recovery technologies, such as energy-from-waste plants; gasification; and ever more advanced recycling, then I want us to cast the net as far afield as possible for partners. In Stockton we have the sites, conditions and infrastructure to support much more investment. For example, maximising the opportunities for new energy-from-waste plant investment requires new thinking and joined-up approaches. Household waste – the key statutory local authority responsibility – in reality only accounts for around ten per cent of UK waste. The figure is dwarfed by commercial and industrial, mining and quarrying, and construction waste. And domestic recycling rates have risen by an estimated 29% in a decade (with volumes headed for landfill also going in the right direction).

So to really maximise the opportunity to align waste management with renewable energy production, local authorities need to look for new partnerships, and potentially to actively source ‘new waste’! We need to get involved with the wider waste agenda, work with business, and drive integrated investment in green energy production. On Teesside, this could mean we import larger quantities of waste, maybe one day even via the port, and it could arrive from the public or private sector. Waste would become a commodity and underpin a growing renewables sector locally.

And there are opportunities to further develop and secure the future competitiveness of our world-leading petro-chemical and process sector. As local authorities we must work with these businesses, and aim to attract new investment in areas such as decarbonisation and developing integrated clusters, reducing waste and creating more by-products. We need to assess investment opportunities in areas such as district heating systems and the business case for PV. These new growth opportunities and efficiencies come from scaling up, not down. They offer the chance to tackle our energy security, stabilise prices, hugely impact on our carbon targets, and boost local economic regeneration.

Again, this will require new thinking and joined-up community leadership. We need to think progressively, and differently – and to forge new partnerships. For example, can we use the Localism Act’s general power of competence to drive the market? As ever, finance, and the mechanisms available to central and local government to intelligently invest in infrastructure, will be key. The current government and London Councils have recently raised the issue of the large – and relatively healthy, in particular in comparison to many other public and private funds – local government pension funds, and how they could help deliver capital investment. Would this offer an opportunity to invest in long-term energy solutions which deliver genuine ongoing financial returns on the capital investment to the funds? New, renewable energy sources (such as the new generation of energy-from-waste plants) can deliver income – selling into the Grid – and could give local government more control over bringing renewables into their areas.

All this will require new skills and vision in local government, from members and officers alike. Proactively market-making, like placeshaping, means we can no longer just act responsively. For example, we need to understand the barriers and drivers for potential private sector partners. We must impose our visions and priorities on negotiations, develop equal relationships and shared goals.

In recent times I have seen the worst and best of the private sector in its relationship with local authorities. Multinationals have refused to negotiate on a normal commercial basis with us, and have tried to use their power and apparent belief that we have no alternative as a blunt negotiating tool. I am proud that Stockton Council officers have stood up to this and tried to develop equitable relationships, and to gain a better deal for residents.

And on the other hand, we have seen private sector partners large and small demonstrate tangible commitment to working in partnership. An energy company has understood and backed our CESP strategy – and significantly increased their obligation funding to us. And a series of contractors have employed local people including taking on new apprentices, to deliver the scheme. So whether it’s the private, third or public sector we must develop true partnerships.

Many local authorities have demonstrated how their environmental policies can deliver much wider outcomes. Toronto has pioneered many climate change strategies and ensured they are fully linked to green economic development. For example, the city has more than 1000 high-rise concrete-frame residential tower blocks – the second highest number in North America. It has developed a Tower Renewal programme, which uses energy efficient retrofits to drive community revitalisation. Through innovative financing mechanisms, training and on-the-ground community engagement, residents are leading the retrofit programme. This in turn is boosting regeneration and creating thousands of new green industry jobs.

The Labour-led Council in Liverpool has mainstreamed  its sustainability vision as one of its five corporate aims and priorities. Its commitments include promoting new green industries and technologies, and optimising the value of its green spaces. In Stockton, we are delivering the country’s largest Community Energy Saving Programme (CESP) of energy efficiency measures for private housing. We are not just achieving significant domestic carbon reductions. The scheme is also tackling regeneration, fuel poverty, health and financial exclusion. We recognised the potential for wider benefits at the outset and used housing regeneration funding as a key element of our match funding. In total we have attracted more than £6m of energy company CESP funding to help our most deprived wards.

So our green vision can be the glue which binds many of our aspirations to improve the lives of residents. To get there, as members and officers we must recognise the best policies arise from from working together. Politicians will typically look to formulate policy with these influences:

Evidence – more often than not the expertise, views and detail provided by officers

Our vision and values – as a  Labour politician I believe passionately that local government  must use every lever at its disposal to adapt and mitigate against climate change. At the same time we should develop joined up policies which benefit the many, not the few, within our communities.

And we are influenced by the experiences of our residents – this may not seem as relevant when developing a vision in this area.

But I know the difference warmer homes make to people who are struggling amidst the dire economic reality for many in the North East. And I know how much people want new investment and new jobs.

It is true that at present in local government, we are immersed in a world of efficiency savings. We need to move to transformational change. Like tackling climate change, doing nothing is not an option. For some councils, political ideology will increase levels of contracting out and commissioning of services. For some, this may be the only route left once all internal efficiency savings have been exhausted. This will inevitably lead to more private sector delivery of services, but not necessarily in a progressive way. Instead pricing will be key. Personally I do not believe there is an option to stand still. Simply relying on efficiencies, narrowing down towards the statutory services, and trying to follow direction from central government won’t do. I think this will lead to councils basically managing decline.

There are alternatives. Innovation can thrive in difficult times. By joining-up strategies and maximising resources – dare i say it, in Total Place style – and by working in genuine partnerships with all parts of our communities, we can deliver transformational change.

The Localism Act offers opportunities, not just perceived threats. As mentioned, can the general power of competence help us kick-start investment in renewable energies? How can we strategically use CIL, Enterprise Zones and new financing mechanisms to support our climate change and green economy goals? Can local government pension funds invest in, or enter joint venture-type partnerships, to create green energy investment? Councils around the country are using these new powers and freedoms, often progressively – and still valuing public services. Some are working with business, the third sector and residents to design and co-produce services, involving communities in new ways. Innovation such as the work of the Co-operative Councils network can help maintain and develop  public services and empower experienced and dedicated staff. It would be easy to be pessimistic, such are the scale of the challenges. But this is a new era for local government.

As politicians, we can develop visions and help shape policies that will support people in the toughest of times. Cutting carbon emissions through efficiencies, innovative new technologies and behaviour change is within our power, as is stimulating major investment in renewable energy. By taking on such challenges, we can help shape the places we serve. We can develop successful new partnerships. And we can improve opportunities for our residents, and make a positive difference to their lives. Which is what we are all here for.

Cllr David Rose is Cabinet Member for Environment, Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

In Manchester, Bristol and Nottingham for instance, even the [...]]]> Disastrously low turnouts in last week’s local elections reinforce the sense of local democracy being in a dire state. Dissatisfaction with national politics is on the rise and calls for stronger regional voices grow ever louder, but local politics is clearly not filling this vacuum.

In Manchester, Bristol and Nottingham for instance, even the elected mayor referendums could not entice voters to the ballot box, with turnout hovering around the 24% mark. While a jaded and despondent electorate are unwilling to hold local politicians to account, increasingly we also cannot rely on opposition politicians or local press to fulfil this role. A number of local council results in the north have wiped out any semblance of effective opposition. Knowsley council is now effectively under a one party state with Labour gaining four seats from the Lib Dems to have an astonishing 63 out of 63 councillors. Rotherham, Tameside, Manchester, Halton and South Tyneside are not far behind. Added to this, is the rapid decline of local newspapers which have up to now played a key role in holding councils to account. Many local papers, which had large readerships and influence in the areas they served several years ago, have either disappeared or seen their circulation figures dwindle.

The directly elected mayor referendums themselves were met by a resounding no by the electorate. Despite David Cameron’s warning that those cities rejecting directly elected mayors would “fall behind”, only Bristol out of the ten cities holding referendums returned a yes vote. We remain the most centralised of all the OECD countries. If this is not to be the end of the localism agenda, we need to start devolving real power, not just titles.

But what are the solutions? It is easy to blame the main political parties and their decline in popularity but it seems public dissatisfaction is as much a problem of institutions as it is parties and personalities. There was no large move away from the big three parties in the local elections towards minor parties and independents. In fact the minor parties between them lost over 100 seats.

So how do we change those institutions which people feel are failing to represent them? A more muscular localism could help. Encouraging more of the “political establishment” to move outside London, particularly the London-centric national press, but even Lord Adonis’s suggestion of moving the House of Lords northwards would help to start to rebalance representation. Perhaps also there should be serious consideration of compulsory voting or even a move towards a proportional representation voting system in local elections so that people of all walks of life are engaged, particularly young people. Likewise, any further attempts to reinvigorate local democracy need to focus less on a token scattering of figureheads and more on devolving genuine power and corresponding responsibility.

Whatever the solutions, something has to be done to encourage a more thriving local democracy. The rationale is clear for why: more localism means policies for local areas that fit local need. If people care about good jobs, public services and a happy neighbourhood, then they should care about local democracy.

Graeme Henderson is a Research Fellow at IPPR North, IPPR’s dedicated think tank for the North of England.

post-2010 election doldrums.  Despite the fact that the Conservatives still control 51% of councils in England compared to Labour’s 29%, expectations are high in communities across the UK  that Labour will provide an alternative to the austerity programme being [...]]]> 3 May will be most remembered as the day that Labour emerged from its prolonged

post-2010 election doldrums.  Despite the fact that the Conservatives still control 51% of councils in England compared to Labour’s 29%, expectations are high in communities across the UK  that Labour will provide an alternative to the austerity programme being pursued with such indecent haste by the Coalition government.

The results of the Coalition’s front-loaded, massive attack on councils and their employees are clear for all to see. Libraries closed, adult social care cut and harder to get, dangerous pot holes everywhere, nursery provision restricted, over 200,000 council jobs lost and local government workers’ pay cut by over 13% as a result of a three-year pay freeze. So, if Labour wants to build on its recent successes and win back more of its natural local government heartland in forthcoming local elections, it needs to do some serious thinking.

It’s gonna be tough. The worst of the cuts are yet to bite and the Coalition has more than half of its electoral term to complete. Labour has to demonstrate that it can rise to the challenge of  delivering more with much less in the short term , while developing longer-term economic  and social policies which recognise the critical role played by local government and its workforce.  Councils are key to  economic sustainability, the provision of stable local employment and the sense of belonging which results from high quality services which all groups within society can rely on and therefore ‘buy in’ to.

This tall order wont be delivered by simply calling ‘cuts’ something else – pretending that they are not cuts at all and just imposing new organisational forms and worse pay on service users and employees. It is important that mutuals and co-operatives, for example, do not become a vehicle for this. Last week UNISON branches from councils in the Labour Co-operative Councils Network met to discuss their experiences of being part of this expanding and interesting group. While it is early days, most felt that so far there was little noticeable difference between the ‘old’ ways of making cuts and the ‘co-operative’ route, but all agreed on one thing: There is a better route to change – through genuine co-operation between councils, their employees and users.

Privatisation or salami-slicing certainly wont do the trick either. There is little evidence that privatisation improves services and lots of evidence that it is a poor use of taxpayers’ money – either from huge procurement and consultancy costs, poorly defined contracts, outright fraud or overcharging. Neither will the slash and burn approach to pay and conditions which has been a feature of the Conservative’s leadership of the LGA – long before the Coalition took the reins of power in Westminster.

If Labour in local government does just one thing, it must do what thriving and innovative private sector organisations have successfully done for a very long time – recognise the knowledge and skills of the workforce (alongside ‘consumers’) and mobilise them in new partnerships to genuinely improve services and maximise scarce resources. They must also recognise the value of that precious asset through decent pay and conditions – not the ‘bargain basement’ approach of recent years. Above all, we must not lose the opportunity for a genuine re-think, More of the same just will not do.

Heather Wakefield is Unison’s Head of Local Government, Police and Justice

The government’s austerity drive is already impacting hardest on areas like the North East, which has the highest unemployment rate of the English regions [...]]]> Tomorrow sees a Westminster Hall debate on the North East economy. I am looking forward to hearing the government try to justify its assault one of our most important regional economies.

The government’s austerity drive is already impacting hardest on areas like the North East, which has the highest unemployment rate of the English regions (10.8%) and which received higher than average cuts to local government grant. And research published this weekend by the ippr North’s ‘Northern Economic Futures Commission’ shows the UK economy would be £40bn better off if the government recognized the potential for growth in the north.

Yet despite this, the government has dismantled key regional economic drivers and is implementing economic policies that are risking the recovery in our regions, as well as hitting hard working people at a time when the cost of living is rising sharply.

Osborne’s Regional Pay plans in the budget were the latest in a line of policy failures that show he simply doesn’t understand the drivers of growth in this country. According to the TUC, these plans could result in a real terms pay cut for 3 million workers around the country. The resulting impact on disposable income and spending will reduce demand in regional economies and will increase regional inequality and further stymie fragile growth. The regional pay proposals are expected to remove a further £78m a year from the North East economy, and that’s calculated on a mere 1% real terms pay cut (it could be more). The cumulative impact of this year on year could be disastrous. This is not simply another attack on the public sector, but will have a serious long-term impact on private sector growth.

Alongside this issue, the government is failing our regional economies with a catalogue of policy disasters – here are five of them:

1 – the idea that the public sector wages have stifled the private sector and get in the way of growth is untrue. The North East has both the lowest overall wages and the highest unemployment rate of any of the English regions – the private sector should be able to recruit irrespective of public sector wages given the level of unemployment. The idea that the private sector would magically ‘fill the void’ left by public sector redundancies was an ideological gamble which is failing.

2 – The dismantling of the RDAs has left a huge void in driving growth which Local Enterprise Partnerships, with their limited funding or staff have yet to fill. Every place has its own unique industrial and financial heritage, diverse economic patterns, variable skills base, social networks and distinct environmental characteristics, which policy driven from Whitehall cannot reflect.  While they may not have been perfect, RDAs understood their regional economies and had substantial leverage in their areas to create jobs, support businesses and drive development. There is a real danger now of less clarity of leadership and authority. The North East, for example, cannot afford to lose out to competition from Scotland on new investment opportunities because it has a well-funded, powerful agency.

3 – The Regional Growth Fund, first announced way back in June 2010, has been notoriously slow to get money out to successful bidders (just 27 of the 50 round one bidders have been funded so far). And its promises on jobs just don’t add up. BIS claim the first two rounds will leverage around £7.5billion of private investment and deliver around 330,000 jobs yet 80% of these jobs are ‘indirect’ and the net cost per job does not compare well with former (and independently verified) RDA investments.

4 – As I have previously written, the localisation of business rates could also have real implications for our regional economies. Collecting and redistributing business rates centrally has long been done in recognition of the fact that there are wide differences between the tax bases of different authorities. While ministers maintain there will be checks and balances, and the current formula will still apply for 2013, in future we could see increasing disparity between areas that are less economically resilient.

5 – The public sector pay freeze will also have a huge impact in the regions as some areas are more dependent on public sector employment. Slashing just 1% off public sector wages will see the North East lose £78m a year as family spending shrinks.

So the government must do better when it comes to economic growth in our regions. While its City Deals and Enterprise Zones do hold potential for our major cities, the coalition’s approach to driving growth is incoherent and risks creating even further disparity and inequality across the UK, as areas that are not targeted by specific new deals, funding or powers are unable to keep up. I hope tomorrow’s debate wakes them up to the importance of regional economies to the UK and makes them get a better plan in place for jobs and growth.

This article was first posted on Labour List: http://labourlist.org/2012/04/osbornes-dangerous-assault-on-our-regional-economies/

Anna Turley (Editor)