What next for the long term plan for towns?
What next for the long term plan for towns?
By Matt Baker, a Senior Fellow at IPM, and Lauren Newby, a Director at ekosgen, part of GC Insight.
When it was announced last year that more than £1billion would be invested into 55 towns through a £20million endowment-style fund to develop decade long plans, it was heralded as a new idea that would create a different style of politics. But, in truth, you could argue that this idea has been around for some time.
A decade earlier, the high street veteran Bill Grimsey, a Senior Fellow of IPM, argued that towns should be supported to develop long-term plans to help them manage the disruptive impact of technological change. And in 2021 a cross party group of MPs said local authorities urgently needed to develop and regularly update forward looking local plans owing to consumer trends that had accelerated during the pandemic.
So when this commitment came at the end of the last Parliament, many would argue it was long overdue. But with a new government now in place, the question is will the Long Term Plans for Towns (LTPT) policy last?
As placemaking practitioners working on one of the first wave of towns to be selected in the former mill town of Nelson in Lancashire, we have seen first-hand the pros and cons of this approach.
Firstly, there is a lot of enthusiasm in local communities for LTPTs and a desire for their voices to be heard in shaping the plans. The favoured bottom up approach of putting “funding in the hands of local people” is key to this and it has the potential to reinvigorate local democracy and increase public trust in local authorities.
We consulted widely across communities and carried out drop in sessions in libraries and food banks, discussions with residents, businesses and voluntary groups and held focus groups with young people, councillors and homeless people to get a measure of the challenges facing Nelson.
Everyone from social prescribing linkworkers and entrepreneurs to artists, police and teachers had their say, and, as the plan progressed, we saw a noticeable difference in community support.
Our first round of engagement indicated considerable scepticism about LTPTs. But as early drafts of plans were circulated in the second phase of consultation, the scepticism softened as they could see how their feedback had shaped the plan and we saw a much more positive response. Once people see their views reflected and feel heard in plans they feel more invested in them.
The main challenge we faced, though, was balancing the competing needs of formulating a long-term aspirational vision with deep seated frustration at current problems. In discussions in working men’s clubs, community halls and libraries, people argued passionately that fixing potholes, tackling litter and restoring law and order should be the plan’s main priority.
On the other side there were plenty who wanted to push more imaginative interventions. They wanted water features and splash pads, smarter transport interventions, large scale investment in key assets such as the canal to leverage opportunities to support leisure and recreation, events programmes to create great experiences, meanwhile use initiatives to repurpose vacant units with wraparound start-up support. But in the main they were a minority. The dominant community voices were those that wanted ‘the basics’ tackled first.
And here’s the rub. Developing a long term plan that ensures towns are best prepared for the future and are able to exploit their full potential will only work when you have the foundations in place.
Over the last decade we have seen massive changes sweep through our high streets and towns urgently needing to develop plans to manage these and formulate their own unique identity. Big chains have been lost, banks are disappearing and places need to reinvent themselves to continue to stay relevant to their target audience. This will only happen when bold thinking is encouraged and LTPT funding cannot be a sticking plaster to patch up longstanding problems that have come about due to long term under-investment.
Ultimately, the purpose of this funding should not lost. It’s there to drive transformational change not tackle the basics for which existing maintenance funding should be paying.
Working in Nelson we found large numbers that deeply cared about their town centre. This passion and wealth of ideas is mirrored across the country and we need to work with communities to unlock the potential of our towns and rebuild them from the bottom up.
So while it’s still early days for the LTPT’s we would encourage the new Government to stick with them, improve it where necessary and encourage other towns to develop plans. But to unleash brave, experimental and imaginative thinking, we need to create a viable future for all our towns. This will only happen when communities have assurance that the basic public services they all rely on are properly funded on a long term basis.
Update from Professor Cathy Parker MBE SFIPM:“I agree with Matt and Lauren – there is huge potential in this programme but it’s still unclear what its status is with the new Government. I asked MHCLG for an update on 14th August and I will share their response when they respond”.
About the author
Formed in 2006, the Institute of Place Management is the international professional body that supports people committed to developing, managing and making places better.