December 2010 Archives



The snow has started to fall again as I write, and I can only imagine the grimaces on the faces of retailers up and down the country as they contemplate the fate of their Christmas trade. It's difficult to know who has more power over future retail spend, the government or the weather, but it seems that those in control of both are in cahoots with each other to make retailing as hard as possible.

Many retailers were hoping for a bumper Christmas in advance of a year of VAT rise, national insurance increase, business rates increase, fragile consumer confidence and rising unemployment driven by public sector cuts.

But with the severe weather of the past few weeks, have they got their Christmas wish? 

Well, it depends on who you believe. The CBI's Distributive Trades Survey suggested the first week of December was more positive than last year; the recent ONS sales data suggested a marginal 3.4% sales increase on last year; and the BRC claims that 33% of retailers are expecting a worse Christmas than last year's.

We might not be marching down Whitehall and hanging from the cenotaph (although the thought of some of our pin-striped members doing so does make me smile), but we have been left equally disappointed and frustrated by the government's decision to increase business rates by almost 5% next year and reduce the level whereby empty properties are exempt from business rates from £18,000 to £2,600.

Cumulatively, this will cost our industry hundreds of millions of pounds, increasing the risk of development and impacting negatively on retailers' ability to invest in communities and create employment opportunities.

Among the statements from our esteemed leaders in relation to the empty rates when they were in the more comfortable position of opposition, were:

• Bob Neill MP: "[The removal of empty property rates relief] is the height of economic madness."
  
• Vince Cable MP: "What will now happen is that when property falls vacant it will be penalised for being empty in a recession - which is a ludicrous situation, completely counterproductive and economically very damaging."
  

 

Congratulations to all of the BCSC Gold Award winners, whose successes were celebrated at our annual dinner at Grosvenor House last week.

Even in a difficult market the competition was fierce and consequently there were some very worthy winners. Particular congratulations to Land Securities and Capital Shopping Centres for winning the Supreme Gold Award for St David's in Cardiff.  And to Chris Goddard of GVA Grimley for providing the perfect antidote to Rory Bremner's hilarious impersonations. 

As usual, the celebration lasted into the early hours of the morning, led by the kind of passionate post-match analysis reminiscent of a trip to Cardiff's own Millennium Stadium for the biennial Wales England gladiatorial duel. 

Awards are a good way of measuring the level of competition in a sector and I can confirm that there is no shortage of it in the retail industry, which bodes well for future growth and innovation.

Have you ever felt like you are the one at the party who was invited to stir it up a bit in the event of it getting boring?

Well, that's how it felt when I was asked to give evidence to the CLG Select Committee Inquiry into Localism  last week. The committee has been questioning witnesses for a couple of months now and on the whole it has been like a procession of the localism crusaders, primarily local council or voluntary sector reps making a case in favour of having more power - hardly turkeys voting for Christmas.  

So, as my session approached I sensed that I and my fellow 'industry' witnesses were in fact being primed to present a less positive position on the localism agenda to spice up the party.

Now don't get me wrong. BCSC broadly supports the principle of devolving power to a local level. Intuitively, it makes sense to allow those closest to a community to shape its future development. That said, the Committee didn't call us in to hear us toe the Pickles mantra!

And so, we set about to share our view that having multiple different rules and procedures around the country, as with the different LEP models with significantly different remits and powers, is likely to add to the complexity and cost of development. When asked about the re-localisation of business rates (a bit of a political hot potato at present) we applied a similar argument - multiple business rate regimes controlled by local councils could add uncertainly to retailers investment decisions.  

Our industry is in the business of regenerating communities, providing employment and training opportunities and ultimately driving local economic growth.  For this to happen effectively key decisions, on planning and business rates in particular, need to take place at the right spatial level, and (as much as this may pain some of the localism apologists) that level is not always local.  Speaking to the MPs last week, we all sought to stress the fact that politicians must not pursue devolution for devolution's sake, but should rather take a more sophisticated approach to localism that recognises not all services could or should be delivered locally.  

Fingers crossed they were in listening mode.