Think tanks are supposed to come up with outrageous ideas, but there are limits. David Cameron, this year’s leader of the Conservative Party, rushed to distance himself from the suggestion that the UK should, as the people behind the notion put it, “increase the size of London by allowing landowners the right to convert industrial land into residential land in areas of above-average employment”.
The reason why Cameron rushed to reject the idea from Policy Exchange, a Tory-friendly think tank, probably had more to do with the unpalatability of the notions put forward in Cities Unlimited – and the fact that they would frighten the electorate – than with a detailed assessment of the practical issues involved.
Take transport. One of the report’s authors, Dr Tim Leunig, may have advised the Department for Transport, but the report’s take on the subject is dodgy. The inhabitants of such northern cities as Gateshead and Newcastle may not believe this, but they have an easier commute to work than most people in the south-east, which is why local transport is always good for a quote from London’s elected mayor. Throwing even more people into the southern fray would not be a good idea.
The report also suggested allowing Oxford and Cambridge to grow. By coincidence, I visited Cambridge last week, to interview one of the country’s leading academic engineers who is now beginning to think seriously about the sustainability of cities. While it is easier than it was a decade or so ago to get to and from this East Anglian city, more than one report on the 'Cambridge phenomenon' - the region’s success as an incubator for high-tech businesses - highlights the state of the transport infrastructure as obstacles to further growth.
One argument that the report makes for moving south is that it is where the airports are. “Aviation has become more important over time, for both goods transport and passenger travel,” says the report, “so locations near airports, particularly airports that offer a wide range of destinations, have become more attractive, again favouring the south-east.”
There is just one problem there; these airports are already bulging at the seams. Throw even more passengers at Heathrow and expect chaos and not just because lone protestors can bring nearby motorways to a grinding halt.
The notion that we should all huddle in the south-east puts the problem the wrong way round. Rather than piling yet more agony on to an overstretched infrastructure, a sensible think tank would advocate improving the transport system in the North to make that more of a people magnet.
Urban regeneration underpinned the high-speed rail link from London to the Channel Tunnel. Less than a year after St Pancras started to serve the route, there has already been an increase in the number of people travelling to Europe by train from 'north of Watford'.
After decades when nothing much happened on transport infrastructure, new projects are finally underway. At long last London will get Crossrail to join up the east and west of London. Maybe one day there will also be high-speed links between the north and south. Then Londoners might even contemplate moving north, or at least doing more business there.
Further information:
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/Home.aspx
Categories: Commentary ,
Comments
All comments
You need to be registered with the IET to leave a comment. Please log in or register as a new user.