Examination of witnesses (Questions 1
- 19)
WEDNESDAY 16 FEBRUARY 2000
LORD ROGERS
OF RIVERSIDE,
MR JON
ROUSE and MS
WENDY THOMSON
Chairman
1. Welcome to the first session of our inquiry
into the proposed Urban White Paper. Today we had hoped to have
in print all the evidence that the Committee has received. For
various reasons I am afraid that evidence will not be printed
until Monday. On Monday it will be available on the House of Commons
web page for anyone who wants to see it. I am sorry it is not
available today. I welcome you, Lord Rogers, and ask you to introduce
your team.
(Lord Rogers of Riverside) Thank you. I have with
me Wendy Thomson, who is the former chief executive of Newham
and Jon Rouse who is the joint secretary to the Urban Task Force.
2. Do you want to say anything by way of introduction
or are you happy for us to go straight into the questions?
(Lord Rogers of Riverside) I would like to say a couple
of things. You have asked for us to prioritise our recommendations.
We have issued you with a paper because it is difficult to bring
it down to a few recommendations. Because a city links all our
institutions—health, education, employment and so on—in
our report there are many different sections that make recommendations.
The paper is called Summary of Key Priorities, and with
your permission I want to illustrate those recommendations. I
have brought some picture boards with me which, with your permission,
I can show you.
3. Yes. We have to watch the time, but fire
away.
(Lord Rogers of Riverside) This board makes the link
between fragmentation and social exclusion. City centres are often
in great crisis. This is a photograph of Eastern Manchester, although
it could be practically any seriously fragmented city. This is
probably about a fifth of Manchester. It has a density of about
eight households per hectare. The density used to be eight times
that at its peak. So it has gone down from something like 100
originally to something like 60 around the time of the war and
now it is down to eight. It is real dereliction and we have to
start to look at the problem of institutions. Because there is
such poverty—physical and social—everyone wants to
get out. The only way to move around this area, as it is so low
density, is by car although there are some buses. If you examine
the grain you can see where the little centres are and where the
shops are. The critical diagram on the right shows the city centre
of Manchester in the far circle and then it goes into districts
and into neighbourhoods and communities. That is starting to examine
the nature of the city. There have to be links. Ideally neighbourhoods
should be areas where people can walk to the shops, to the health
centre, creches, primary schools and so on. That is the neighbourhood.
A city has other needs. It has the city hall and so on. One can
actually start to bring back life—social and physical—to
the area, but a lot of planning and knowledge are needed. That
is probably the first plan that shows the forms of dereliction
and the reason why everyone is trying to move out because who
would want to live there? This second board shows a plan of Barcelona
as of a couple of years ago. First, look at the density. If we
say that there are eight units to the hectare in Manchester, here
we are talking about hundreds of units per hectare in historical
Barcelona. This was all derelict and much like Liverpool, but
this shows that in five years they have woven the city with the
sea in Barcelona. There used to be a complete cut-off. There is
a density of between 100 and 200 units as against 400 in the centre.
That shows the two sides of the argument and what you can do with
derelict areas in most of our cities. The third board shows a
historical example. I do not want to take it out of context. This
is Notting Hill Gate, but it could be anywhere. Here we have an
extremely successful Victorian development. There are gardens,
both small private gardens and large semi-public gardens. They
are secure because you can gain access to those areas only through
the houses. That is a community-based structure and again it is
high density. It is well over 100 units per hectare. Of course,
the houses basically met the needs of the Victorian family which
may be different from those of today. Basically this says that
you can have high density, highly social, lots of public domain
at these sorts of densities. The fourth board shows an abstract
diagram, which is something like the first one you saw on Manchester.
If we start from the smallest unit, which is basically the neighbourhood,
ideally and economically there is something to be said for neighbourhoods
being 5,000 to 10,000 people with densities of not less than 40
households per hectare, then everyone will have a five-minute
walk to the centre. If the density drops below that, as we saw
in Manchester, the people cannot walk, so they get into a car
and therefore there is no point in having a centre and there is
no community spirit. A typical neighbourhood is 5,000 to 10,000
people. Then it becomes a district and you probably have a church,
cinema and so on and then there is the city centre. It is interlocking
and building up the nature of a city in some ways in a traditional
manner, but it also creates a place where people can walk and
get to know each other and there is some sort of density rather
than the leaking out as we have seen in most cities.
Mr Donohoe
4. What should the Urban White Paper say?
(Mr Rouse) The important point is that what we have
put forward is one-third of what the White Paper needs to tackle.
Our report is on physical regeneration—we accept that that
is what it is about—needs to be combined with a strong set
of economic and social policies. I know this is a terribly over-used
phrase at the moment, but it is about "joined-up thinking",
and working out how three things integrate together: jobs, decent
homes and environment, and social integration.
5. How would you expand on the key principles
that you list in the memorandum? What do you see as the most important
elements?
(Mr Rouse) In our report we have put forward 105 recommendations.
We have submitted to you in our memorandum 25 that we consider
to be perhaps the most crucial ones that need to be put together
as an integrated package.
6. What would be the top five of those?
(Mr Rouse) Once you get down to five you can only
talk in terms of themes. In the memorandum we set out clearly
eight themes. I do not think that we can pick out five recommendations
that would, by themselves, make a significant difference to our
towns and cities.
(Lord Rogers of Riverside) Perhaps I could expand
on that. You cannot say that education is not important, or economics
are not important. It is difficult to say that one matter is more
important than another. We are saying that the compact city is
a very important element if we are to have humans walking in a
protective environment. Security comes from people watching each
other. If we have institutions like schools, health and so on
within neighbourhoods then the compact mix of things like the
poly-centric city, the walkable city becomes absolutely critical.
We are also saying that brown must come before green. That is
the most critical factor. We must utilise brown, derelict sites.
First we must have greater density in our cities. We have what
is called the "doughnut" effect and everybody, including
those in the States, talks about it. If you have a doughnut effect
everyone starts to leave the city, they take the car and there
is an end of the community. We have seen that many times. We need
sustainable design, which basically is being conscious of the
environmental impact of the scheme. Obviously, the link between
social inclusion and the compact, well-balanced city is critical.
Other factors are management and skills. I shall come back to
that. Over the past 25 years our skills have nearly disappeared
in the whole urban regeneration game.
7. Can you be more specific and tell us what
you mean?
(Lord Rogers of Riverside) Yes. In terms of a city,
we need joined-up thinking. We need professional institutions
and colleges preparing people to tackle the urban situation. We
need people who know about geography, traffic, design, economics,
land use and so on. We need a large spectrum of experts. We obviously
also need regional and local government that is conscious of that.
Chairman
8. Do you not think that we have too many experts
and not enough action?
(Lord Rogers of Riverside) I think at the moment we
lack both. I am trying to be practical. I am delighted to see
that there has been a considerable appreciation of the need to
do something. In other words, in many cities and many towns there
are urban regeneration projects. Wearing my other hat—I
am an architect—I would say that of the 20 or so cities
that I have looked at, they are appalling badly managed. I have
not found one about which I could say that it looks as though
the brief has been properly considered. Development is critical
to that. If we do not have development, we cannot have answers
to it. We have a serious problem about how we attract and train
people to the standards that we need if we are to save the cities.
I believe that our cities are in dire need of that. We need joined-up
thinking at every level if we are to solve the problem.
Mr Donohoe
9. The Task Force made a number of recommendations.
One was to key in private money into the public aspect of this.
What policy do you suggest that the Government should introduce
in that regard?
(Mr Rouse) This is now even more urgent than when
our report was published because of the decision of the European
Commission seriously to restrict aid given in the form of gap
funding for partnership investment projects many of which are
in our urban areas. We desperately need some alternative instruments.
We are looking to the Budget and to the White Paper for movement
on that front. I would pick out three priorities. The first is
to promote institutional investment in the form of special equity
funds. That may need partnership from the public sector. The Chancellor,
to his credit, has shown innovation in other areas, for example,
last week announcing special tax breaks for companies investing
in social projects. We would like to see an extension of that
principle in terms of assisting institutional investors in putting
more of their investment into property, particularly outside the
M25. The second priority is to stimulate in particular the private
rented sector which is at a dangerously low ebb in this country,
particularly in cities outside London. Given the need for a mobile,
professional labour force and the opening up of mobility in Europe,
our private rented sector in terms of quality and quantity is
at a much lower level than in most European countries. We would
like to borrow from the Real Estate Investment Trust, which is
an American concept, to stimulate institutional investment in
the private rented sector. The third area is fiscal incentives
for developers and for potential occupiers, business and residential,
in deprived areas. We published a separate report on fiscal incentives
that I hope that the Committee has received, which sets out in
detail about a dozen serious options for introducing fiscal incentives.
Mr Gray
10. On the question of fiscal incentives, yesterday
in the Daily Telegraph there was a report that the Deputy
Prime Minister is planning to equalise VAT on redevelopment and
on new-build at 7.5 per cent, which would increase the price of
a £125,000 house, on average, by £6,000. I think I am
right in saying that the report asked for equalisation and "zeroing".
Supposing that it were to be 7.5 per cent, what effect do you
think that would have?
(Mr Rouse) We said in the report that our preference
was for equalisation at zero. We said that if that could not be
achieved we would support equalisation at 5 per cent. We recognise
the pressures that that would bring to bear particularly on new-build
housing on brown-field sites. I cannot comment on the speculation,
but I would share your concerns.
11. You share our concern?
(Mr Rouse) I recognise that that would have an effect
on new-build on brown-field sites. I still agree with the principle
of equalisation.
12. You talk about fiscal incentives, rather
than fiscal disincentives. What would you feel about a green-field
site levy, a tax on building on green-field sites? Would you agree
that that would incentivise the rich to build on green-field sites
because they could afford to pay the tax, but would disincentivise
lower priced housing?
(Mr Rouse) In our report we reached the conclusion
that we were not able to assemble sufficient evidence to recommend
a green-field tax. We came up with three or four problems that
pertain to a green-field tax and suggested that the Government
should look at alternative solutions.
13. You mentioned the private rented sector.
I go back to the days when you, Mr Rouse, and I used to work together
at the Department of the Environment. Is there not the yield gap?
(Mr Rouse) That is true. With the authorised Housing
Investment Trust it looked as though we may start to solve the
problem. To be fair, a number of institutional investors were
close to launching new funds into that system. Unfortunately the
Housing Investment Trust was accidentally destroyed through some
changes to advanced corporation tax rules. That does not destroy
the principle of stimulating investment and trying to close the
yield gap by providing institutional investors with, first, some
help and, secondly, an easy exit strategy. I believe that the
American model is worth considering.
Mr O'Brien
14. People are waiting to see what the White
Paper will include. It is very important to many people and many
organisations. You say that local government should be at the
heart of the urban renaissance. What are the specific powers that
you consider that we should include in the White Paper to strength
local authorities' strategic role?
(Ms Thomson) We recognised that local government was
the most likely institution to take on that sort of leadership
role and that without some kind of leadership cities do not thrive.
The evidence for that was quite apparent in some of the cities
that we examined. It was certainly to be exercised in partnership.
Some of the powers that would make that easier and would perhaps
strengthen local government's role in that respect are being introduced
through some current legislation before the House in the form
of the Local Government Bill. That is introducing a power of social
economic and environmental well-being, which in itself will enhance
the role of local government in leading the renaissance, should
that be adopted. There are some other provisions in some of the
previous legislation around Best Value that should increase the
confidence that people have in local government that will help.
In terms of additional matters, I would mention three particularly
that are mentioned in our report. Firstly, there are restrictions
currently on local governments participating in companies. We
felt that if the pool of local municipal assets is to be put to
the task alongside private assets in realising assets for their
areas, they ought to be free to participate without the restrictions
that they have currently. The second one is something that we
have suggested, that local government has a duty, a responsibility
for the entire environment and not just specific aspects of it.
The analogy that we made was that currently local authorities
have responsibility for house strategy in their areas and not
just for the houses that they own. They are responsible for the
supply of quality homes for the whole area. Similarly, the environment
as a whole needs to be led and directed by some responsibility
in the civic realm. Other than that, one sees the gaps in the
landscape that no one looks after. In some areas there are serious
eyesores. The third matter is that we highlighted some of the
rules around compulsory purchase orders and you will be relieved
to know that I shall not go into the detail of planning law. Those
rules act as a serious disincentive towards assembling and retaining
some of the complex brown-field sites that are needed for the
kind of residential growth that we need in our urban communities.
CPOs, for example, currently have a requirement to demonstrate
commercial viability which, in some areas, we think should be
lightened.
15. On the points that you raise, you say in
your report that local authorities should have a different spending
allocation from other authorities. Why is that needed? What exactly
would you want the White Paper to say about the different spending
within urban areas? There is also the question of raising revenues.
What would you suggest we include in the report on those issues?
(Ms Thomson) Urban planning is an area that is always
being examined by government. We recognised that 90 per cent of
the urban fabric will be with us in 30 years' time. We need to
invest in that urban fabric. The urban areas in this country show
relatively lower levels of spending than in other European equivalents.
That is why we argue the importance of investment in the public
realm. One way of doing that is by recognising the additional
need to spend in urban areas. The revenue raising game is something
that is under continual examination by government. We did not
get into specific areas of revenue support grant, SSAs or RSGs.
We did not feel that that was part of our brief. We recognised
that in small areas, particularly town centre areas, things like
the town improvement zones could have a very useful and modest
revenue raising role. The town improvement zone was an idea that
would include government, business and the local authorities.
If there were an agreement between them to levy additional local
income, they could invest in that town centre for its overall
improvement.
16. How would you raise the additional revenue?
(Ms Thomson) I think we were pointing to models that
the Town Centre Association has recommended and which in some
places is in force. The actual businesses see that there is a
return on their investments and they are prepared to have an equivalent
business tax in addition to their normal business tax in order
that it is re-invested in the area.
Chairman
17. Do you think that enough money can be raised
from a business tax to carry out the regeneration?
(Ms Thomson) We were not maintaining that that was
in any way a panacea. When it comes to managing the urban space,
which is what people living in the cities complain of, in order
to improve the quality of town centre management, additional money
may be required.
18. That tends to be enough to put in just a
few flower baskets, does it not?
(Ms Thomson) There are some examples of where it does
more than that. We are suggesting that with a bit of imagination
it may do more. We saw some cities where it did.
Mrs Ellman
19. Your report recommends a number of new initiatives:
home zones, urban regeneration companies and urban priority areas.
How will that contribute to having more joined-up thinking rather
than more fragmentation?
(Ms Thomson) That was an issue that I was particularly
concerned about. Coming from one of the areas that had quite a
lot of the initiatives, I am well aware of some of the concerns.
The Task Force recognised that we needed a flexible range of measures
that could be assembled for a particular situation. In some places
the land assembly and fiscal development are more important and
in other areas social regeneration around education and health
are more important. We recommended that specific measures should
be brought together in urban priority areas where the local area
could assemble the measures and join them up themselves to suit
the local priorities.
|
