European Regional Development Fund

Written evidence submitted by the National Trust

Summary

With a leverage ratio of 1:4.5, investment in heritage focused regeneration projects has delivered substantial public benefits. Heritage projects have delivered multiple direct and indirect regeneration benefits especially in more disadvantaged areas

.

ERDF has been played a critical role in this and has secured significant private and other public funds. It has contributed to improving the quality of the heritage product and to ensuring tourism’s position as the 3rd largest export earning sector in the UK.

The tax payer is receiving excellent value for money given the depth and width of multiple benefits that ERDF and other public sector investment in heritage projects can deliver, ranging from improved supply chains, direct/indirect employment, training opportunities and greater social cohesion.

The simplification and unification of processes and procedures that has followed since the abolition of the RDAs is welcome. Yet it is vital to retain ERDF’s ability to flex according to differing regional needs.

Going forwards, a system that permits seamless co-financing along the lines of the current Rural Development Programme with ‘behind the scenes’ varying levels of ERDF and national funding is recommended. This could be centrally managed yet take account of local regional variations in needs. This system should have at its core preference for projects that demonstrate multiple benefits and excellent value for money in relation to meeting the needs of areas in greatest need.

Investment in the historic environment is one such area where it has been proved that ERDF and other public funds can make the greatest inroads to delivering "win: win" social-economic, environmental and heritage benefits.

Introduction

The National Trust is the largest heritage and conservation NGO in Europe. We currently own over 250,000ha of land in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Our 4.0m members and 19m visitors to our pay-for-entry properties enjoy access to some of the UK’s most outstanding gardens, landscapes, finest buildings and historic collections. The Trust is the largest single provider of tourism facilities in the UK.

Since 2004, the Trust has received over £21,000,000 of ERDF for investments in its heritage sites. This is in testimony to the ability of heritage sites to deliver multiple benefits in terms of local employment, training and volunteering opportunities, supply chain gains and in improving the image of an area to help attract inward investment.

Indeed many of our most iconic and visited properties are located in or are very close to areas of high social deprivation. This includes sites as diverse as Seaton Deleval Hall near Blyth, Northumberland, Cornish Tin Mines in Cornwall, the Back-to-Backs in Birmingham City Centre and Hardwick Hall near Bolsover, Derbyshire. The availability of ERDF has been critical in many areas to attracting other public sector and private sector investment.

Nationally, tourism is our 5th largest industry. Heritage remains the most cited reason for people to visit Britain (Source: Heritage Lottery Fund ‘Investing in Success’ 2010 http://bit.ly/IGnbnm).

The rich diversity of our heritage thus contributes significantly to the tourism sector’s position as Britain’s third largest export earner, worth around £115 billion a year – or 8.9% of total GDP and supporting around 2.6 million jobs (Source: Visit Britain ‘GREAT campaign’ 2012 http://bit.ly/HtZ6RI).

In terms of assisting local economies, English Heritage analysis reveals that for every pound invested in the historic environment directly contributes on average an additional £1.60 to the local economy over a ten year period (Source: English Heritage ‘Heritage Counts’ 2010 http://bit.ly/fshbet ). Our own experience and case studies demonstrate that the totality of benefits – social, economic, environmental and heritage – is much wider and more significant as case studies below show.

Continued investment in heritage tourism is thus critical to maintaining and growing the sector’s contribution to the delivery of sustainable economic growth, particularly in our most disadvantaged areas. The availability of ERDF is essential to deliver added value and to attract other private and public sector funding to meet this objective.

Consultation Questions

1. How, and on what, is ERDF spent?

During the previous Financial Perspective period (2000-06), the Trust was able to secure ERDF funding for heritage regeneration projects in Objective 1 and Objective 2 areas. These projects varied but all had key characteristics such as attracting private sector leverage, direct and indirect employment and volunteering opportunities that bring people closer to the labour market.

Two case studies at NT owned sites illustrate the diversity and benefits of ERDF expenditure.

Case Study One: Hardwick Stableyard Regeneration Project, near Bolsover, Derbyshire.

Hardwick Hall is a Tudor mansion and estate of international significance on the Derbyshire-Nottinghamshire border. Visitor numbers have grown over a 15 year period from 30,000 to over 135,000 per annum to the Hall with an estimated further 125,000 visitors to the wider parkland estate. This made it the 6th most visited tourist attraction in the region. It is located in Bolsover District which is within the top 20% most deprived local authority areas in England & Wales. ERDF funding – circa £120,000 - was critical to funding a feasibility study to investigate the optimum means of improving the visitor infrastructure and delivering local benefits.

The feasibility study has resulted in a £6.5m investment to restore and convert the former disused Stableyard which had featured on English Heritage’s "Buildings at Risk" register. Over half of the capital investment is from the private sector. It has created over 14 FTE year-round new jobs and the resultant uplift in visitor expenditure will inject a further £4.4m into the local SME dominated visitor services economy by 2015.

Case Study Two: Durham Black Beaches

For centuries, coal slag and other waste products were dumped at sea at the coastal coal mines of Easington – one of the most deprived local authority areas in the North East. Washed back onto the beaches this created a sterile inhospitable environment. ERDF funding secured in partnership with local regeneration agencies has enabled the Trust to reclaim the beaches and former coal mine areas to create visitor and educational facilities that celebrate the areas restored and highly significant natural heritage. The beaches are now playing a key role in improving the image of the area, in attracting tourism and investment. The work was carried out using formerly unemployed persons to offer new training opportunities and valuable work experience in an characterised by high levels of worklessness. The initial expenditure has indirectly led to the development of new visitor sector SMEs and business opportunities.

Independent analysis of externally funded heritage regeneration projects (source: "Valuing Our Heritage", English Heritage, 2010) research concluding that for each new FTE post created by the National Trust, up to a further 9 posts were created in the local economy and that a 1:4.5 leverage ratio has often been achieved, drawing in much needed private and other public sector investments.

The current National Strategic Framework has enabled regional flexibility regarding the selection of investment priorities for ERDF expenditure within the context of national rules. This has resulted – with a few notable exceptions - in reduced opportunities for direct capital investment in heritage tourism projects in the Competitiveness and Employment regions. In the Convergence Areas of West Wales and the Valleys and likewise in Northern Ireland, the Trust has been successful in attracting circa £12m of ERDF for heritage based tourism development projects, creating much needed additional direct and indirect tourism spend.

The Trust has focused on securing ERDF through the Interreg transnational cooperation programmes. This has again demonstrated the value of investing in heritage to deliver much wider socio-economic and environmental benefits. A recent example of this is the Interreg IVB North West Europe funded ‘SHARE’ project. The ‘Safeguarding Heritage And Rural Economies’ project will demonstrate the value of investment in more local heritage to create and sustain local enterprise. In the UK, the funding – circa £350,000 – will enable the Trust and its international partners to test and evaluate a competency based system for acknowledging the skills gained by volunteers engaged in aspects of heritage conservation.

2. Is the taxpayer in England obtaining value for money from the ERDF?

From the Trust’s perspective, the availability of ERDF has been critical in delivering a wide range of socio-economic, environmental and heritage benefits. This has been referenced above but worth stressing here is the 1:4.5 average leverage identified by independent research and the significant direct and indirect financial benefits of investing in natural and built heritage sites.

A good case study demonstrating good value for money is the Interreg IVB North Sea Region funded ‘Climate Proof Areas’ project. This has facilitated the conversion of former arable land to fen at the internationally important Wicken Fen site near Cambridge. This expansion of the Fen has created significant ecological and biodiversity benefits, and it has allowed the creation of leisure and recreational routes. But more importantly for the economy, it has expanded the flood plain helping to remediate and reduce the impact and risk of flooding in Cambridge. This will facilitate the further economic development of the city. In addition, the project has helped to advance the knowledge and experience of mitigating the effects of climate change on heritage sites.

ERDF has provided essential funds to enable projects to proceed where otherwise there would be no business case. This has attracted internal funding from the Trust, from our separate trading company, from our supporters and from other public sources. The net result has included the creation of new jobs and volunteering opportunities, often critical for enabling persons to gain skills, confidence and ultimately to join the labour market.

3. Could the funds contributed to, and paid out on, regeneration through ERDF be spent more effectively by repatriating ERDF to the Government in London?

4. With the abolition of the Regional Development Agencies responsibility for ERDF in England passes to DCLG. What effects are these changes having on the administration, assessment and payment of ERDF?

As a national charity the Trust’s experience prior to the abolition of the RDAs and Government Regional Offices was nine variations in interpretation of the national and ERDF regulations. Nine variations of application forms, reporting, monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. This complexity was a positive disincentive and hindrance for the submission of applications.

The Trust therefore welcomes the simplification and unification of processes that is now being introduced post RDA abolition by DCLG. It is important though to retain regional distinctiveness in terms of the ability of ERDF priorities to flex to meet local needs.

The alignment of RDA Single Programme funds to ERDF to produce effectively co-financed funds and single application processes was also considered on the whole to be beneficial from the perspective of submitting and administrating ERDF & Single Programme grants. However, an important caveat to this is that it did lead to some ERDF focused project actions slipping through the net and no longer being funded. A good example of this is ERDF capital funding for natural (and in some cases built) heritage sites and for climate change mitigation/adaptation measures.

Going forwards, a system that permits seamless co-financing along the lines of the current Rural Development Programme with ‘behind the scenes’ varying levels of ERDF and national funding would be preferred. This could be centrally managed yet take account of local regional variations in needs. This system should have at its core preference for projects that demonstrate multiple benefits and excellent value for money in relation to meeting the needs of areas in greatest need.

Investment in the historic environment is one such area where it has been proved that ERDF and other public funds can make the greatest inroads to delivering "win: win" social-economic, environmental and heritage benefits.

Conclusion

The National Trust welcomes the opportunity to respond to this discussion paper and we are happy to comment further if required.

National Trust

April 2012