Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40
- 46)
MONDAY 10 NOVEMBER 2003
COUNCILLOR BILL
FLANAGAN OBE, PROFESSOR
STEVE FOTHERGILL,
MR STEVE
BURROWS AND
MR KEITH
MACKENNEY
Q40 Mr Cummings: I am very sad to
hear that, Chairman. Knowing the tenacity of the CCC, I am surprised
that no-one has come forward to try and accommodate meetings with
ministers. You have many friends in Parliament, many Members of
Parliament representing ex-coalfield areas. Have you ever approached
them on this particular score?
Professor Fothergill: We have
tried several routes in. Let me say the criticism here is not
directed at individual ministers but more at a corporate culture,
more at the orientation of the civil servants in the Department
of Transport.
Councillor Flanagan: Perhaps I
can explain that we are aware of it. You did ask earlier, Mr Cummings,
about emphysema, the miners' pension fund and various other things.
We have seven staff in the CCC. There is a lot of work for them
to do, and at present we are trying to get the Treasury to stop
taking £400 million out of the miners' pension fund. So we
have a lot to do, as have you.
Q41 Mr Cummings: I would certainly
agree with you there, as long as you are not expecting that £400
million to go into regeneration projects.
Professor Fothergill: The issue
on the miners' pension fund is that there is this large flow of
cash out of the fund into the Treasury, and we are saying to the
Treasury that more of that money should be left in the pension
fund for the benefit of retired miners. But we are also saying
that more of what they do take out of the pension fund should
then be recycled back to regeneration.
Q42 Mr Cummings: You have no right
to say that. It does not belong to CCC. It belongs to many hundreds
of thousands of mine workers who have contributed all their lives.
Mr MacKenney: On behalf of Kent,
there is a wide understanding that most of the expenditure on
road and rail has gone into the South East, but I have to say
that East Kent has not seen much benefit from that. It takes people
very quickly through East Kent but it does not do much for the
people of East Kent. As Professor Fothergill has made this point,
I would like to relate it to the question of the Channel Tunnel
Rail Link domestic services. Very little account has until recently
been taken of the potential regeneration benefits of introducing
these services to East Kent. I hope that things have changed now,
and things seem to be improving. However, neither the railway
nor the roads investment in East Kent take account of the regeneration
efforts of SEEDA or anyone else. There is still considerable work
required on both road and rail.
Mr Cummings: Can I thank Mr MacKenney
for that, because that was going to be my next question.
Q43 Christine Russell: Can I move
on to housing. Many coalfield areas are blighted by a collapse
in the housing market. What solutions do you have on that front?
Do you think the Government should be doing more to help you?
Councillor Flanagan: The Government
are doing all right, again, in Meden Vale, Mansfield and Bolsover
with English Partnerships. It took a long time to get it off the
ground, but there are 600 houses there. One of the problems, of
course, was the absentee landlords that bought up Coal Board estates.
When industry comes back, there will be a need for housing and
people will buy it and do it up, but it is the people who cannot
sell their property that is causing the trouble, the people who
were encouraged to buy council houses—not by you but by
some people. Then they closed the pits, and they are left with
a house that they cannot afford to keep. They cannot afford the
mortgage. They have no job. They cannot sell it because nobody
will buy it because there are no jobs to come to. They cannot
get another job elsewhere because they have this mortgage round
their neck. Houses are being sold for £200 in Grimethorpe.
This is the problem, and you can see it. It is just tiredness,
a bit of depression all round. There is money for industry, and
I think local councils have asked for a bit more to be earmarked
specifically for housing. This is the trouble; whenever we get
more for housing, it is across the board. If there is more for
education, it is across the board. If there is more for social
services, it is across the board. Those who are behind always
stay behind. You have to earmark additional money for coalfield
areas and housing, and that will do it. That would be great.
Q44 Mr Cummings: There is another
element to this, and that is the number of carpetbaggers who are
moving into coalfield areas and snatching up properties, and they
do not have any intention whatsoever of improving or regenerating
the area.
Councillor Flanagan: That is the
absentee landlord, but from this Department, from the Office of
the Deputy Prime Minister, Chesterfield has received a Neighbourhood
Regeneration Grant, which has given encouragement to about 1,500
people in that area. The money has been spent wisely, it is being
monitored, local people are getting interested, dogs are not allowed
to foul, gardens are starting to be built, cars are not parking
on grass verges. In that area, which is part of the Markham Pit,
you can see the pride coming back through getting this Neighbourhood
Renewal money. It has been tremendous. It has done a good job.
Q45 Christine Russell: So Neighbourhood
Renewal is a good programme to get into those areas, is it?
Councillor Flanagan: Very good.
Q46 Christine Russell: What about
the experience in Kent and Staffordshire? Has there been a collapse
in the housing market there in the old mining areas?
Mr MacKenney: Not in Kent.
Mr Burrows: In Staffordshire there
has not been a complete collapse in the housing market, but it
has been awarded Pathfinder status. That is partly in recognition
of the fact that it has a considerable surplus of social housing,
although much of it is in the wrong places and much of it is of
the wrong type. Much of it is three-bedroomed, semi-detached on
traditional estates where the demand is for single person accommodation,
particularly for old-person specialist accommodation. Some of
it is in the wrong areas. Some of the estates are half-occupied
and half-abandoned. We have the problem of mixed ownership, where
some is still publicly owned and some is privately owned. Those
are the issues that the Pathfinders have got to deal with. It
is intending to produce its strategy-cum-business plan by March,
and at the moment it is doing quite a lot of research into these
particular problems, but there are clearly some fairly serious
issues to be addressed.
Professor Fothergill: Even the
Government admits that of the areas of low demand housing around
the country, only perhaps half of them are within the existing
Pathfinder areas. What we are trying to do at the moment jointly
with English Partnerships is to pinpoint the scale of the problem
in the coalfields out there beyond the Pathfinder areas, and we
are beginning to get a handle on it. As to what the solutions
are, I think that is inevitably going to vary from place to place.
In some instances it will no doubt involve demolition and perhaps
rebuilding, but not on the same scale. In other areas it may involve
transfer of ownership from absentee landlords to local authorities
or housing associations or whatever. I think we are at an early
stage in tackling this one, but it is clear that if we are going
to tackle it, it is probably going to need some cash.
Chairman: Gentleman, I apologise for
the interruption in our proceedings, but we do appreciate you
coming along. Thank you very much.
| 
