Recently in Government Category

Birmingham has rather opportunely engaged in the debate that has been raging this week about the UK's air capacity. The unusual bedfellows of Conservative and Labour MPs, along with business and council leaders from the West Midlands, have today united to call for spare capacity at Birmingham Airport to be used to ease congestion in the south-east.

This group of passionate drum bangers are promoting Birmingham Airport as a means of easing congestion at London's Heathrow and in the south east. They believe that in the long-term, the development of Birmingham Airport as a major gateway at the centre of the UK would reduce unproductive surface travel time and leave Heathrow as a gateway for London and the south-east.

The letter published in today's Daily Telegraph (August 30, 2012) says: "A 'hub airport' in the South East favours a small, congested, and already economically strong part of the country. We need gateways close to the manufacturing, research and development of the Midlands and the North, linking these regions directly to emerging markets.

The controversial High Speed 2 rail link between London and Birmingham is back in the spotlight following David Cameron's comments about the scheme in Prime Ministers Questions. The PM said that while he is in favour of the project, he had been told that it has now been kicked in to the long grass.

This will be welcomed by those opposed to the railway line, like 51m, the coalition of groups fighting the proposals, which this week happily posted a Spectator article on its website predicting the scheme's demise (http://www.51m.co.uk/news/tory-minister-hs2-%E2%80%98effectively-dead%E2%80%99). But others, like former transport secretary Lord Adonis will be less pleased. Earlier this month he warned that "dither and delay" by the coalition government means that HS2 may not be delivered on time. He added that plans to introduce legislation on HS2 before 2015 may be jeopardised by wrangling between the coalition partners.

Does it matter to the Midlands?  Jerry Blackett, chief executive of the Birmingham Chamber of Commerce, thinks so. Speaking out in favour of the project he said "Our competitors are surging ahead and investing in their railways because they recognise their importance in boosting regional economies and ensuring businesses can access markets. We cannot allow our future prosperity and growth to be derailed by a minority of vocal opponents in the south. If we continue to muddle along we must accept that our economy will follow suit and watch as we are out paced by the dynamic economies that had the foresight to invest in High Speed Rail."

The size of that investment is the main issue of course. For a country in double-dip recession the £32bn price tag for HS2 is a large one to swallow. Part of the money will be spent compensating landowners at the Birmingham end of the route who have had a modern-day coach and horses driven through their development sites.

Reports in today's Financial Times 2 and The Times newspapers state that Cameron insists that the government will press ahead with HS2. In my experience, the Midlands property community is fairly ambivalent towards the project, beyond a low level murmur of if-it's-good-for-the-economy-it-should-be-good-for-property. As the line offers no benefits for the East Midlands there is subdued enthusiasm there, and even in Birmingham, which stands to benefit most, property folk are more concerned with where office supply will come from in the next five years, rather than the still rather dubious possibility of thousands of travellers arriving in Eastside in 15 years time. "It's just too far away," a senior Birmingham agent told me this week and he seems to speak for many.

Is HS2 relevant now to Midlands property - what do you think?

Picture via Flickr.com courtesy of Jon Curnow

As the debate on the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) comes to the fore, and the property industry raises concerns that CIL may put regeneration schemes at risk, Stuart Andrews, head of planning and a partner at law firm Eversheds, helps navigate the CIL minefield.

The introduction of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) charging schedules by many local authorities is now gathering pace, as is demonstrated by the Mayor of London's CIL charging schedule which came into force on 1 April 2012. We have yet to see much progress in the Midlands, but local authorities are clearly gearing themselves up and this is reflected in the impending consultation exercise by Birmingham City Council. As a result, developers can expect a significant increase in the cost of development, but the complexity of the CIL regime also has the potential to cause unexpected difficulties when dealing with complex development schemes.

For example:

1. CIL has been widely reported as a tax on the net increase in floorspace of new developments, but in practice existing buildings may still be subject to the charge where they have been out of use for significant periods before the development is permitted.

2. Where a section 73 application alters details of a development after construction has begun, but before it is completed/has been used for a period of time, the entire development could incur fresh retrospective CIL charges.

3. If a section 73 application is made, landowners and developers could be forced to pay for the same infrastructure twice in the form of a CIL charge on top of a planning obligation.

4. The discretionary exemption where CIL charges would make a development scheme unviable will virtually never apply.

5. If different rates apply to different areas of a site, the location of social housing and the reliefs from liability which accompany it could significantly alter the total cost of CIL affecting the site as a whole.

6. Where several parties own different parts of the same development site, liability for CIL payments will be proportionate to the relative value of each interest in the site - the collecting authority's calculation of the relative value of these different parts of the site is likely to be controversial.

7. If a party assumes liability to pay CIL and defaults on its payments, the liability will fall back on the owners of the site. Therefore, landowners will want to ensure that liability is assumed by a party with sufficient covenanting strength and that robust indemnities are provided to protect against such circumstances.

In short, the CIL regime is a minefield and navigating your way around the charges is rarely likely to be straightforward.

As the debate on the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) comes to the fore, and the property industry raises concerns that CIL may put regeneration schemes at risk, Stuart Andrews, head of planning and a partner at law firm Eversheds, helps navigate the CIL minefield.

The introduction of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) charging schedules by many local authorities is now gathering pace, as is demonstrated by the Mayor of London's CIL charging schedule which came into force on 1 April 2012. We have yet to see much progress in the Midlands, but local authorities are clearly gearing themselves up and this is reflected in the impending consultation exercise by Birmingham City Council. As a result, developers can expect a significant increase in the cost of development, but the complexity of the CIL regime also has the potential to cause unexpected difficulties when dealing with complex development schemes.

For example:

1. CIL has been widely reported as a tax on the net increase in floorspace of new developments, but in practice existing buildings may still be subject to the charge where they have been out of use for significant periods before the development is permitted.

2. Where a section 73 application alters details of a development after construction has begun, but before it is completed/has been used for a period of time, the entire development could incur fresh retrospective CIL charges.

3. If a section 73 application is made, landowners and developers could be forced to pay for the same infrastructure twice in the form of a CIL charge on top of a planning obligation.

4. The discretionary exemption where CIL charges would make a development scheme unviable will virtually never apply.

5. If different rates apply to different areas of a site, the location of social housing and the reliefs from liability which accompany it could significantly alter the total cost of CIL affecting the site as a whole.

6. Where several parties own different parts of the same development site, liability for CIL payments will be proportionate to the relative value of each interest in the site - the collecting authority's calculation of the relative value of these different parts of the site is likely to be controversial.

7. If a party assumes liability to pay CIL and defaults on its payments, the liability will fall back on the owners of the site. Therefore, landowners will want to ensure that liability is assumed by a party with sufficient covenanting strength and that robust indemnities are provided to protect against such circumstances.

In short, the CIL regime is a minefield and navigating your way around the charges is rarely likely to be straightforward.

In the second of our series of elected mayor referendum specials, Nottingham-based Tim Garratt, director at Innes England, gives his view on the much-anticipated referendum on 3rd May and what it could mean for the East Midlands' capital.

Nottingham is one of the selected cities where there's a referendum on 3rd May to decide whether to elect a mayor. If the answer is 'yes' then the city has a vote in November. A mayor would follow.

The city council got into hot water after spending taxpayers money on a 'no' campaign. The leader of the council is fundamentally opposed to the suggestion - principally (I believe) as it will take away some of his power and certainly some of his status.

We have entered a period of small-time politics and spin, in my view. Leaflets delivered talk about the costs (£1m plus) without any detail as to how this is made up! It's all rather negative.

2012 is a new world. The landscape we work and live in has changed beyond belief - and perhaps the time has come for a new way of working.

Nottingham's private sector is keen to see Nottingham punch above its weight. Inward investment is something close to the property sector's heart. A mayor could help with this.

Look what Boris Johnson has done for London - he has raised the profile of the capital city.

Nottingham has an opportunity to raise its game. Prime minister David Cameron is offering a place at the table twice a year for a Mayors Cabinet. Can Nottingham (as a core city) afford not to be there?

My problem with all of this is that the debate is being downplayed. The "yes" campaign only started with less than three weeks to go. The campaigning has had little airing which is a great pity.

I see the mayor as a great opportunity. We should embrace it wholeheartedly. The present leadership won't agree, because turkeys have never voted for Christmas...

What are your views on elected mayors? Please feel free to leave your comments below.

In just over two weeks citizens of Birmingham, Nottingham and Coventry go to the polls to decide whether to have a directly elected Mayor. These much-anticipated referenda on May 3rd will also be held in 7 other UK cities. 

In the Midlands many question marks still hang over the issues of what powers the new elected mayors may have, what policies will come to the fore and - perhaps most interestingly for the property industry - what influence these new figureheads will have over the planning regime. 

In a series of special guest blog posts, we get property insiders views from Birmingham and Nottingham about the campaign and what it could mean for the regions' cities

In the first of these guest blog posts, Martin Field of Birmingham-based public affairs company RJF, gives his views...

The entry of former treasury minister Liam Byrne into the contest to be Birmingham's first elected mayor has catapulted the issue at last into the mainstream. 

The prospect of elected mayors in England's major cities is now no longer of concern only to political nerds and the chattering classes in Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds and elsewhere. The fact that a former cabinet minister is considering leaving Westminster for the regions has elevated the status of local government at a stroke.  

But Byrne's move - and the subsequent coverage in the national media - has done little to move the debate beyond the personalities in play and the party political shenanigans that have ensued. 

What about the policies, the actual powers - both 'soft' and 'hard' - that will be wielded by elected mayors in some of the core cities in just a little over six months' time? It's highly likely that citizens in Birmingham and other cities will vote for the change in referendums on May 3. Leicester, of course, is already a mayor-led city. 

The question of powers is a tricky one, with the government's Localism Act - which triggered the mayoral referenda - infuriatingly coy about exactly what extra authority and money mayors will have. The government expects and hopes that mayors will be the dominant actors when it comes to regional transport and infrastructure projects. This raises interesting questions for a property industry still absorbing the implications of the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Will mayors - some of whom may be new to politics - seek to influence planning decisions on the ground, when the legislation gives them no more authority over planning committees than currently exists for council leaders? 

And, given the example of Crossrail in London, will mayors seeking grand projects implement Community Infrastructure Levies (CIL's) like they're going out of fashion?

The answers will only become clear as we move beyond the referenda on May 3 and into the mayoral election campaigns proper, when the policy platforms of candidates are opened up for scrutiny.

What is clear, however, is that the nature of politics and government in at least some of the UK's major cities is set for a shake up more radical than any seen in the past 100 years.

RJF Public Affairs' Martin Field has over 25 years experience in the property industry, specialising in planning, development and the residential sector. Management consultant Field is based in the Midlands, providing inward investment, local government policy and public affairs advice to both national and international clients through The Urban Consortium. He is also a member of the UK executive committee of the global non-profit research and education organisation Urban Land Institute. Field has been deputy chairman of Marketing Birmingham, is chairman of the Chicago-Birmingham Sister Committee and is a former member of the advisory panel for Locate in Birmingham. He is co-founder of RJF Public Affairs, which counsels organisations on issues of public policy where legislative, regulatory or governmental decisions could affect their operations, prospects or value.

What are your views on elected Mayors? Please feel free to leave your comments below. 

Pic courtesy of wwarby via Flickr.com

John Forkin, Marketing Derby's managing director, reflects on the circumstances that have left the future operations of one of the city's largest employers hanging in the balance.

The campaign to save UK rail manufacturing enters its end game in September. An industry created here 180 years ago is about to exit. Why?

Because the British government awarded a juicy £1.4bn contract for 1,200 Thameslink train carriages to be built in Germany by Siemens, instead of choosing Derby-based Bombardier.

Now at risk are 3,000 jobs in Derby and up to 15,000 jobs across the Midlands and beyond.

A united Derby launched a campaign to challenge the decision with 50,000 people signing a petition and 10,000 marching through the city. Everyone from Jeremy Paxman to the Wall Street Journal has covered the story, despite the phone hacking, riots and Libya.

A Conservative/Liberal City Council has asked for a meeting with the Conservative/Liberal Government - so far, and following eight letters, David Cameron refuses to meet. That's why on 7th September the city brings the case to London. On the day that the Transport Select Committee is holding an enquiry into the whole affair a dedicated train of workers, managers, politicians and business people heads to St Pancras. The outcome is unknown. It's now a purely political call.

Derby will survive. Its hi-tech sectors are stronger than ever and will see the place through.

STOP PRESS: Since this blog was written, the Government has announced a year's delay in the Crossrail rolling stock tender, encouraging hopes that at least some of the work might be diverted to the Derby plant. 

In the second guest blog post from Alliance Planning director Keith Fenwick this week, Keith shares exclusively with Estates Gazette much needed detail and expertise on dealing with Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Relief and warns to watch out for the small print!

One document which does now start to provide additional detail on CIL is the Community Infrastructure Levy Relief: Information Document (DCLG May 2011 click here)   - this is a MUST READ for every developer, although be warned, you will need your lawyer, accountant and tax advisor to guide you through. The document sets out the circumstances by which relief will be granted to CIL.

There are 3 main strands of relief, those for charities, where social housing is provided and exceptional circumstances.

Charitable relief is largely self explanatory (even if the process isn't), there are two types of relief, mandatory and discretionary.  The key point here is that authorities will only be able to offer discretionary relief to charities, where they have an adopted policy already in place stating that they may do so, they can't apply a discretionary relief to your charity just because they accept your circumstances when an application is made. The policy must already be there. If you are a charity - start your lobbying now.