goverment's enterprise zones

[Chrysalis]

Does anyone know the criteria that was supposedbly been used to decide on these enterprise zones?

I am getting more concerned my city is getting no breaks.

It has higher unemployment than both derby and nottingham and has a higher reliance on the public sector. Yet I was shocked to read both derby and nottingham are to be zones and leicester has no mention. So the criteria is obviously different to what I would expect, nottingham I know has many more marginal seats so it wouldnt surprise me if political reasons were a priority. Liverpool another surprise as that is not a poor city. Nothing in the norfolk area which has hideous unemployment.

It seems they going to do quite a lot to selected areas, tax breaks, planning permissions slacking, fibre broadband using public money.

I expected places like hull, newcastle, leicester, blackburn.

[Ignitionnet]

There are set criteria around population, economic distress, etc, I'm sure the actual criteria will be on a .gov.uk website.

[mertle]

Your right you can guarantee those who whinge the most but not the worst will get help.

Hull whinges alot the investment they get is unreal and wastes it.

The built an office complex and far I know never ever been ocupied. They whinged about floods still is yet the worst effected doncaster got less money than them.

Will it work anyway probably not like most brainbox ideas by governments it only tinkers never makes massive impact. Problem is governments interfere too much by setting up these idocracy monstrous ideas. Like the inner city regeneration scheme.

There is huge issue when they interfere. Years ago we was to have car plant but it got goverment subsidies to move to poor area it went to North East sunderland I think. The problem is we are the biggest exporter to europe so most cars going to the continent has to be transported down the country to us for export. The company saw it was more pratical to have the plant near the export port.

We had new project just recently about building ofshore wind turbines in our area stole by Hull because government interferance yet our unemployment really bad too. Now our baby going into area which clearly not suitable because government told seimens to goto hull. We left with shallow project which will create 2,000 jobs if we lucky than the 30,000 it initially was going too.

Yet the land is prime location of A180 but because there needed to be road upgrade which this shower government pulled it wont happen.

Thats what hate about these schemes it takes jobs away from area because theyre subsidies. As long those areas have bad unemployement they should stop sticking there noses in developments favouring other areas.

Your right to be worried my friend we already seen what happens when these schemes are in place.

Eleven Enterprise Zones were announced at Budget, and then Local Enterprise Partnerships had to bid for the ten remaining Enterprise Zones - here is the document

The 11 Enterprise Zones named at budget focus on city regions and those areas that have missed out in the last ten years. Our major cities, and areas of significant untapped potential in places that have been dependent on the public sector, will be key to achieving sustainable growth.

But other areas have potential for growth too, so today Government is launching a competition to identify a further 10 Enterprise Zones in England. The locations of the second wave of Enterprise Zones will be decided on those proposals which offer the best prospect of increased growth.

London has both significant economic opportunity as well as high levels of need. Economic development policy in London is devolved. The Government invited the Mayor to bring forward proposals for an Enterprise Zone in the capital and we will work with him to implement this.

[Welshchris]

ive heard also u will be issued with a starfleet uniform and communicator when i enter one of these " Enterprise Zones" :-D

[mertle]

As I suspected usual suspects get there dirty grotty mits on it.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/video_yorkshire_cities_in_scramble_to_set_up_tax_b reak_enterprise_zones_1_3217799

OP poster Nottingham already got its mits.

First 4 sites been announced

The Boots campus in Nottingham, where the Prime Minister and his deputy visited yesterday, Liverpool Waters, Manchester Airport and London’s Royal Docks were named as the first four sites.

So dont expect any favours to help my region which for over 30 years been ignored and had to fight for businesses the hard way on its own. Nothing will change while projects/businesses will be stolen and our unemployment will get worse.

This why I hate these schemes they dont help those who got high unemployment outside these zones.

Why not do the right thing for once government designate ALL high unemployed regions as ENTERPRISE ZONES.

[Chrysalis]

mertle thats my concern also. Initially I thought was good idea but it seems they have picked out a few areas but areas with high unemployment not picked that are near an enterprise zone are at high risk now, and my city is now next to 2 picked cities.

As pointed out it seems they look at potential as well, so that is aiming for political impact.

So the fact a city with high unemployment, a huge reliance on public sector for employment has no potential, a statement from the government by not been picked. I have found a local news article about businessmen protesting already, I wonder if these same guys will move location if the situation doesnt change.

Are london royal docks and manchester poor areas?

Surely the purpose of these zones to provide new, successful, business and they would need to be in locations that have access to a large talent pool. The major cities seems a good idea for this..

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Damien

Surely the purpose of these zones to provide new, successful, business and they would need to be in locations that have access to a large talent pool. The major cities seems a good idea for this..

Thats not what there designed for at all they are supposed to help areas which have been neglected for years. Help solve unemployment and like Chrysalis say whats to stop current businesses now walk away from other locations turn up in these zones.

Thus net result NO JOBS Created merely shifting the Jobs pool.

Even in the prospectus to supposedly to meet criteria you have to have been negleted for 10 years. Somehow I dont see any of these one of the 4 have not been neglected.

If we go by your idea then surely the largest Port in the UK should qualify but as its nowhere near a city will get ignored. sorry I dont think its right to say only cities should qualify.

Its plain wrong the government like usual dropped a big one again yet with bit of thought could worked better.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Damien

Surely the purpose of these zones to provide new, successful, business and they would need to be in locations that have access to a large talent pool. The major cities seems a good idea for this..

Thats working on a different principle to what I expected.

I assumed this would be to kickstart struggling areas giving people jobs rather than maximising profits.

It does seem whenever a new thing is launched which will boost investment it goes to the same locations again and again. I also read now that the tories did the same sort of scheme in the 80s so they rehashing old ideas again. Apparently the only successful area from that is docklands in london.

Obviously I got it wrong so what I am curious about now is after the nhs etc. have been shrunk down and my city has 40-60% unemployment are the government going to pay people to relocate as a result of policy changes causing it, and are they going to build homes in these cities for people relocating to live in because policies seem to create magnets in already highely populated areas for investment.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Apparently the only successful area from that is docklands in london.

I would be interested in the source you're reading that from. The other Development Corporation created in 1981, at the same time as London docklands, was the Merseyside Development Corporation (MDC) which was also rather successful. A little more info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merseys...nt_Corporation

The MDC's legacy is still ongoing; the waterfront zones on both sides of the river have seen more o less continuous improvement and investment ever since.

I would say there is a strong case for centrally-controlled organisations, with a tight and measurable remit, as an antidote for local councils that all too easily get bogged down in amateur politicking and an inability to think strategically.

[mertle]

Chrysalis problem is though and think you will agree why should people forced to relocate when there in an environment where there friends and families.

Some will say follow the jobs trail but it does not work for everbody and settles. I hated Crawley found it hard to settle away from friends family it becomes lonely desulate.

Work suffers and all sudden if you lose your job it becomes spiral. I love my home town but it seem thats a crime.

Yet all it needs is government for once spread the wings instead concentrating on just few locations areas.

Yes it is rehash and like before they gonna completely fail as they by largely copying the blueprint which failed before. Simple target the deprived areas which had largely NO help let businesse decide which in these locations suit there needs. Not rocket science but the government dont understand its like certain parts of the uk fast becoming third world deprieved areas.

[Chrysalis]

My source is few news reports I found on the bbc. Obviously its not a source of facts but rather people's opinions. success/failure end of the day is always a matter of opinion unless hard targets were set.

Personally I think selected areas will get a boost, but the scheme itself seems to go against the principle that would be expected of it and what I heard said when claimed it would revive deprived areas. Targeting cities which are already high on economic activity is not deprived areas.

---------- Post added at 17:46 ---------- Previous post was at 17:43 ----------

Originally Posted by mertle

Chrysalis problem is though and think you will agree why should people forced to relocate when there in an environment where there friends and families.

Some will say follow the jobs trail but it does not work for everbody and settles. I hated Crawley found it hard to settle away from friends family it becomes lonely desulate.

Work suffers and all sudden if you lose your job it becomes spiral. I love my home town but it seem thats a crime.

Yet all it needs is government for once spread the wings instead concentrating on just few locations areas.

Yes it is rehash and like before they gonna completely fail as they by largely copying the blueprint which failed before. Simple target the deprived areas which had largely NO help let businesse decide which in these locations suit there needs. Not rocket science but the government dont understand its like certain parts of the uk fast becoming third world deprieved areas.

Correct but there is also physical limitations. there will be limited places to live, places which are already affluent are crowded as people go where the jobs are, if everyone were to pack their bags tommorow and move to these enterprise areas then they would have nowhere to live. There isnt enough houses to cater for an influx, whilst in deprived areas there is many empty homes because noone wants to live there.

The only conclusions I can come to is (a) political reasons and (b) trying to make more areas that standout as a success to hide failures in other parts of the country. (b) is already true as there is people who live in the uk who genuinly believe there is no such thing as poverty in this country, they have the mindset that jobs always exist, everyone on the dole is lazy etc.

I would have expected south west, north east, east midlands (although this did happen but they picked the 2 wealthier cities), and the east. I certianly would not have expected anywhere in london or liverpool or manchester.

[mertle]

Its interesting how people think london docklands liverpool was success.

I did some digging well it turn out that London docklands was quite fiasco and financial mess which ended up when the fabled Canary Wharf went into admin.

Yes we look at what is there today but really did the project work I am not completely sure.

The government to go down the exact same rocky road with almost identical locations is recipe for disaster. We need variety and many projects in deprieved areas.

Interesting article sounds like if was not for the writing off debt would still been complete failure.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/the-white-elephant-makes-its-charge-1589344.html

Originally Posted by mertle

Yes we look at what is there today but really did the project work I am not completely sure.

Absolutely, if you ignore the fact that London Docklands is a vibrant business location that generates billions in tax revenues every year, then the project was clearly a total failure.

For pity's sake ...