To retain its young people and thrive, the city and its wider region need to create interesting, well paid jobs. But the private sector isn’t buying what Liverpool is selling.
Thanks for a challenging and thoughtful article even if it was an uncomfortable read for someone who committed a significant chunk of his life trying to secure and retain investment in Liverpool.
Successful economic development in the City region has always felt like “three steps forward and one step back” rather than the smooth, continuous process we’d all like it to be. But we should recognise that three forwards and one back still constitutes progress. That’s not complacency; it’s a recognition that economic growth is never a linear process but one that responds erratically and sometimes unpredictability to macroeconomic and political forces and stimuli not always in our control.
Think how radically Liverpool’s corporate profile has changed over a comparatively short time. From 1978-86, I was chief economic advisor for Merseyside County Council and in those days, the city’s employment was dominated by a small number of large businesses, many of which had originated in Liverpool, like Royal Insurance, Mersey Docks & Harbour Company, Littlewoods, Liverpool Daily Post and Echo and Bibby. In the suburbs and neighbouring boroughs were massive industrial employers like Ford, Vauxhall, Unilever, Cammell Laird, Plessey, Pilkington Glass and others. Huge food processing companies like Tate and Lyle, Kraft, Cadbury and Birdseye all had major factories in the area as did manufacturing and engineering giants like Dunlop, British Leyland, English Electric, AC Delco, Cross International and many others.
Most (not quite all) of those names have disappeared completely or changed beyond recognition not because of the competence or otherwise of the City Council but because of much greater forces like merger and acquisition activities, globalisation of markets, manufacturing and supply chains, membership of the Common Market changing international trade flows and, latterly, the self-harm of Brexit.
If you’d told me in, say, 1980 that those businesses would have all but disappeared by the year 2000, I’d have feared for the economy. But the conglomerates were replaced with scores of smaller new businesses and whilst there have undoubtedly been policy errors and political own goals, the economy is in better shape than it was when the multinationals dominated. Much of that was and is still public sector driven like the work of the Merseyside County Council and Merseyside Development Corporation in restoring Albert Dock and the South Docks, Liverpool City Challenge’s successful transformation of Queens Square and the swathe of the city centre from Lime Street to the cultural quarter around Hope Street or the City Council’s outstanding work around European Capital of Culture: we should give credit where it’s due. Other quasi public sector businesses have made massive contributions including the universities and Community College who’s growth has underpinned much of the physical renaissance quoted in your piece. Likewise the cultural assets like The Phil, The Tate and the NML’s museums and galleries have helped reinvent the city. So too has the private sector through Grosvenor’s Liverpool One, Bruntwood’s work on The Plaza and Cotton Exchange and huge renovation projects at India Building and The Royal Liver Building, among others. Likewise Peel Group’s stewardship of the Port of Liverpool and its investment in creating Liverpool2 have been positive and their plans for further development on both river banks need to be critiqued and challenged but generally supported, not routinely denigrated.
I recognise the thread of disquiet running through the your article as a constant factor in debates about how well or otherwise the city is governed and throughout my time as CEO of Liverpool Chamber of Commerce (2005-12) I openly questioned why we were not doing much more to create top quality commercial space in the city centre. I believe that is finally understood and being addressed by developers and planners: build it and they will come.
It would be nice to have a decade or two without political scandals but it is possible to exaggerate their negative impact on economic development. The economic fundamentals are still strong and business will respond if the return is good enough.
My good friend and former colleague Mark Basnett is hugely experienced and committed to Liverpool City Region and is as good an economic development professional as we could wish for. He is right to point out that every economy experiences ebbs and flows. But it is also right that the people charged with steering economic growth are scrutinised and articles like this are exactly what is needed. Great start to The Post - keep making us uncomfortable!
You might think differently about Peel Ports if you lived in the toxic footprint of the docks and roads around it. It’s not normal house dust that accumulates on people’s window sills. Never mind every kid with inhalers and the lowest life expectancy in the borough. Bet that never gets discussed on the golf course when all the deals are being made with a funny handshake.
You’re dead right. If I and my family were suffering pollution from the port (or anywhere else) I’d be as angry as you are and I’d be getting the dust analysed to see if was chemically harmful and in breach of any legal emissions laws. I’d be lobbying the company, the council, my MP and anyone else who might help change the situation. I’d take pictures and videos, get statements from the neighbours, send them to the press and get local and national journalists to come and see the evidence for themselves. I’d mobilise my GP, health visitors, the community health authorities, the schools’ head teachers and the hospitals to demonstrate the dangers to my kids’ health.
I’m sure you’re doing all those things and more because you don’t sound like the sort of person who’d just make lazy assumptions about funny handshakes and golfers (never came up against too many of either of those when I was growing up in Breck Road, Speke and Croxteth).
Oh so you’re aware of the Save Rimrose Valley campaign? And you know that in the consultation residents overwhelmingly rejected it, yet Highways plan to go ahead anyway? And Sefton and LCR have helped fudged pollution stats? And the residents along the A5036 corridor face some of the highest cancer rates in the country, authorities are aware and largely ignore it? Peel were given the green light to expand, something that until I pulled you up on you thought was the best thing since sliced bread, without planning for the impact then simply lobbied for a road. Highways meet with all the LCR stakeholders regularly and deny FOI requests. It’s taken years of lobbying to
even get Rotherham to comment. I’m sure you knew all this because you genuinely have got your finger on the pulse on local issues. Look forward to seeing you at our next demo at Highways in Manchester where school kids artwork will be presented to them.
Other than that, I enjoyed your post. I’m old enough to remember the Merseyside County Council being abolished not long after the buses were deregulated. Now I’m so happy the German government own our buses, and we subsidise their transport system.
Mateo - superb response! I totally respect the Rimrose Valley campaign and urge you to keep fighting for your community. You and I are in the same page on most things - I just hated the implication I was a
privileged Freemason, which could not be further from the truth. I do like a game of golf, though, and learned to play the game at “Royal Bootle” but I’ve never gone in for funny handshakes or aprons.
Thanks for saying you enjoyed the rest of the post. The Post could be a great platform for your campaign. You enjoy the weekend, too!
No mate, I wasn’t implying you were at all, more the way a lot of business is done in the UK in my opinion, apologies if it came across that way.
I know from your lengthy post you’ve plenty of skin in the game, and as you say we pretty much want the same things. Hope they let you in West Lancs or Birkdale now!
Has the Plaza ever been fully occupied? When I worked there just a few years ago it was deserted and from what I can see, it's currently home to mostly SMEs. Same with the Cotton Exchange, which is a bit of a dump.
I’m happy to be corrected but I think The Plaza is pretty much occupied, as is the Cotton Exchange. I don’t understand your point about those locations being mostly SMEs - that’s their raison d’etre and it’s exactly what the city needs. Across the road, Sony employ several hundred people in a single location but that is the exception - very large footloose investors are as rare as hen’s teeth, even in Manchester.
There are entire floors empty in both buildings, if the real estate websites are up to date. It's just that the article repeatedly argues that companies are leaving because there isn't enough available space, when all I see are to let signs and blank lift directories.
Your information is out of date on this. The Plaza has been fully let for some time. All floors. One floor has half been half cleared out for a development.
Thanks. I ran a business in The Plaza from 2012-14, and the place had a real buzz. I found Bruntwood to be ready good landlords who understood how new/small firms need flexibility with easy leases and access. I think the point in the article is that most big potential inward investors (or larger scale relocatees) are usually in the market for new buildings rather than older conversions. There are exceptions like Sony in the Post and Echo building but generally speaking cities need a mix of new and refurbished space and Liverpool is short of the new stuff. Voids in places like The Plaza and Cotton Exchange are generally built into the developers’ business planning.
I'm not sure I can take you seriously now if you describe an identikit office block full of boring service industry jobs as having a "real buzz". I enjoyed working in Liverpool Science Park, but I still wouldn't get that excited about it.
My company is based in Kirkdale at a factory we bought and renovated three years ago. Good location, excellent public transport links and it's enabled us to expand, increasing the number of locals we employ.
It took us three years to receive agreement from Liverpool council for us to widen our factory gates to be able to turn an HGV in our yard. Endless calls to the council trying to find the right person to speak to, calls to our councillors asking for help and three site visits by council employees who all agreed that what we were asking for was sensible but needed approval from "someone".
My company exports 1/3rd of our output globally and everywhere I travel overseas on business Liverpool is known and respected, for music, for football, for culture but unless we can get the simple stuff right it we will fail to get the big stuff right.
I've read these arguments about lack of office space many times before, but no one ever addresses the vast number of "grade A" buildings that have never been fully occupied, e.g. St Paul's Square or the Lewis's building. And no mention of Sensor City, which now stands mysteriously mothballed? There's a bigger story here that you don't seem to have grasped.
Hey, this sounds interesting and wasn’t mentioned by anyone I spoke to in development. Do drop an email to editor@livpost.co.uk with any details you think we should take a look at. Thanks for reading
Cheers for reading Kev, certainly isn't a quick fix but it isn't unsolveable either. As many have pointed out - political stability would of course help
Woe will befall any city in the world when the public sector was disconnected to the private sector to the extend that it actually discourages investors. This happens when too many of the democratically elected found themselves out of their depth when called upon and had to rely on the services of the hordes of 'advisers' most of which either have their own agendas or affiliated to entities that do. Those lucratively paid government-appointed commissioners better give the taxpayer's money's worth by sorting these fundamental problems out quickly or we will be wasting even more money promoting Liverpool for one-night-stands like the Eurovision Song contest until the cows come home and nothing will change long term. After nearly a hundred years since Lyne Andrews wrote her novel, I hope there is not going to be a new version of 'The Leaving of Liverpool'.
Ha, thanks for the comment Rennie. Certainly since the departure of Tony Reeves there's a real sense within the city's politics that the commissioners need to step up now. Little love for them at the moment certainly. And you're right to point out how much of this stems back to politics. Hoepfully the succsses that do exist can be built upon once some stability is introduced.
You are spot on to raise the point that many business leaders and developers are extremely wary of the council. There is an acute lack of appreciation of what it takes to stay in business in the city. There is also a failure to be able to identify the difference between genuine business successes (eg home bargain, castore) and fake business or ideas (eg "overseas investors", a nice restaurant, a Merseyside barrage etc).
Dealing with the council are at best opaque and byzantine and at worst laced with a barely concealed contempt and even on occasion threat.
After 20 years developing a successful construction and development business (carpenter investments) with 150 employees, £100m in net assets we now have no ongoing work in the city. We employ more staff in Derby and Stockport than Liverpool and I am feeling the inevitable drift away from the city that seems to happen to all successful businesses that have an eye on surviving and prospering for more than a few years.
Yeah it's such a common story isn't it and very sad. Various people have reached out by email and such with similar tales since we published. Best of luck to your business, wherever you have to go!
There is no mention here of the political instability in Liverpool over the years which surely must deter businesses from investing here. And thats been going on for at least 40 years. Wirral Council is a complete (broke) basket case. So not difficult to see why local politics may be acting as a shackle on any efforts to bring employers in and keep them there as well as explaining the absence of decent initiatives. By the way, I was reporting on a Mersey Barrage and a Dee barrage 50 years ago!!
Hi Wendy, thanks for reading! I think you do raise a very good point about political instability, it doesn’t help confidence in the city for investors and probably should’ve been mentioned. However I do think it can also be a bit of a cop out at times for ‘new’ politicians. Liverpool isn’t the only city with political issues and that isn’t an excuse to negate, say, putting in place an effective mechanism to ensure businesses feel supported when they are here.
And do get in touch re. your Mersey barrage reporting. Would be interesting to know how the concept has evolved over time. Of the several people I asked about it in its current form that Steve Rotheram is pursuing the consensus was that it is deeply fanciful.
I’ve also gathered some stuff about the Mersey barrage scheme. There are two informative reports (search ‘ The Energy River:
Realising Energy Potential from the River Mersey’ and ‘ Opportunities for tidal range projects
beyond energy generation: Using Mersey
barrage as a case study’ Peel Ports (😡) have an interest in it and if this ‘Charter Cities’ concept develops? Don’t start me on Charter Cities though 😡😡
I was trying to say that Liverpool’s lreputation for political instability seems to me deeply rooted going back to the Hatton era and that , unlike other cities, it has found it difficult to shake off. More recent political events havent helped. It is a long time (circa 1970)since I produced a Radio Merseyside environmental programme (unsubtly called ‘Aftermath’) one of which was about a Mersey and/or Dee barrage. I only recall that it seemed like a good idea on paper but there wasnt the political will nor cash to get even a feasibility study done. It isnt fanciful. If it had been built then, we probably wouldn’t have had an energy crisis looming now. Tidal power is the ultimate natural resource.
When Heseltine did up the Albert Dock and fobbed the city off with the Garden Festival he was also selling the old London docklands and the communities that had grown up alongside them off to the highest bidder to build “shiny new cathedrals of capitalism”. There’s a brilliant South Bank Show piece on YouTube with Bob Hoskins detailing what was going on back then.
Mateo - This is a flawed and unfairly reductive view of Heseltine’s role. Whatever you think of his politics, his commitment to Liverpool was sincere and his positive impact on how the challenges in the UK’s inner cities needed to be addressed was incredibly important.
I think a big reason companies have been leaving is simply, and paradoxically, because they haven't been arriving. Who wants to stay in a shrinking market that shows no ambition? Where are the prospects of (legal) profit in that?
Our "wins" especially versus Manchester have been few and far-between. If the winding down of the Liverpool's serious inward investment teams was a mistake it was an unforgivable one.
The city seems populated by organisations like the LEP and BID whose contribution to our well-being I cannot for the life of me pin down. What's more, their own prosperity always seems certain even when ours is far from it. How can that be right?
From the outset, the LEP have had a seat at the table in the combined authority. We've had no say - and can have no say - in that whatsoever, and this is meant to be our top tier of democratic decision making.
Never mind this talk of "playing to our strengths", just to wait for them to be whittled away elsewhere. Where is our MIDAS looking at our gaps, and creating strategies to fill them??
The LEPs grandiose website does not seem to reflect the results we are seeing on the ground. When our inward investment levels are rivaled by the likes of Barnsley, I would like to know what sort of metrics justify their continued occupation of such a vital space.
Thanks for a challenging and thoughtful article even if it was an uncomfortable read for someone who committed a significant chunk of his life trying to secure and retain investment in Liverpool.
Successful economic development in the City region has always felt like “three steps forward and one step back” rather than the smooth, continuous process we’d all like it to be. But we should recognise that three forwards and one back still constitutes progress. That’s not complacency; it’s a recognition that economic growth is never a linear process but one that responds erratically and sometimes unpredictability to macroeconomic and political forces and stimuli not always in our control.
Think how radically Liverpool’s corporate profile has changed over a comparatively short time. From 1978-86, I was chief economic advisor for Merseyside County Council and in those days, the city’s employment was dominated by a small number of large businesses, many of which had originated in Liverpool, like Royal Insurance, Mersey Docks & Harbour Company, Littlewoods, Liverpool Daily Post and Echo and Bibby. In the suburbs and neighbouring boroughs were massive industrial employers like Ford, Vauxhall, Unilever, Cammell Laird, Plessey, Pilkington Glass and others. Huge food processing companies like Tate and Lyle, Kraft, Cadbury and Birdseye all had major factories in the area as did manufacturing and engineering giants like Dunlop, British Leyland, English Electric, AC Delco, Cross International and many others.
Most (not quite all) of those names have disappeared completely or changed beyond recognition not because of the competence or otherwise of the City Council but because of much greater forces like merger and acquisition activities, globalisation of markets, manufacturing and supply chains, membership of the Common Market changing international trade flows and, latterly, the self-harm of Brexit.
If you’d told me in, say, 1980 that those businesses would have all but disappeared by the year 2000, I’d have feared for the economy. But the conglomerates were replaced with scores of smaller new businesses and whilst there have undoubtedly been policy errors and political own goals, the economy is in better shape than it was when the multinationals dominated. Much of that was and is still public sector driven like the work of the Merseyside County Council and Merseyside Development Corporation in restoring Albert Dock and the South Docks, Liverpool City Challenge’s successful transformation of Queens Square and the swathe of the city centre from Lime Street to the cultural quarter around Hope Street or the City Council’s outstanding work around European Capital of Culture: we should give credit where it’s due. Other quasi public sector businesses have made massive contributions including the universities and Community College who’s growth has underpinned much of the physical renaissance quoted in your piece. Likewise the cultural assets like The Phil, The Tate and the NML’s museums and galleries have helped reinvent the city. So too has the private sector through Grosvenor’s Liverpool One, Bruntwood’s work on The Plaza and Cotton Exchange and huge renovation projects at India Building and The Royal Liver Building, among others. Likewise Peel Group’s stewardship of the Port of Liverpool and its investment in creating Liverpool2 have been positive and their plans for further development on both river banks need to be critiqued and challenged but generally supported, not routinely denigrated.
I recognise the thread of disquiet running through the your article as a constant factor in debates about how well or otherwise the city is governed and throughout my time as CEO of Liverpool Chamber of Commerce (2005-12) I openly questioned why we were not doing much more to create top quality commercial space in the city centre. I believe that is finally understood and being addressed by developers and planners: build it and they will come.
It would be nice to have a decade or two without political scandals but it is possible to exaggerate their negative impact on economic development. The economic fundamentals are still strong and business will respond if the return is good enough.
My good friend and former colleague Mark Basnett is hugely experienced and committed to Liverpool City Region and is as good an economic development professional as we could wish for. He is right to point out that every economy experiences ebbs and flows. But it is also right that the people charged with steering economic growth are scrutinised and articles like this are exactly what is needed. Great start to The Post - keep making us uncomfortable!
You might think differently about Peel Ports if you lived in the toxic footprint of the docks and roads around it. It’s not normal house dust that accumulates on people’s window sills. Never mind every kid with inhalers and the lowest life expectancy in the borough. Bet that never gets discussed on the golf course when all the deals are being made with a funny handshake.
You’re dead right. If I and my family were suffering pollution from the port (or anywhere else) I’d be as angry as you are and I’d be getting the dust analysed to see if was chemically harmful and in breach of any legal emissions laws. I’d be lobbying the company, the council, my MP and anyone else who might help change the situation. I’d take pictures and videos, get statements from the neighbours, send them to the press and get local and national journalists to come and see the evidence for themselves. I’d mobilise my GP, health visitors, the community health authorities, the schools’ head teachers and the hospitals to demonstrate the dangers to my kids’ health.
I’m sure you’re doing all those things and more because you don’t sound like the sort of person who’d just make lazy assumptions about funny handshakes and golfers (never came up against too many of either of those when I was growing up in Breck Road, Speke and Croxteth).
Oh so you’re aware of the Save Rimrose Valley campaign? And you know that in the consultation residents overwhelmingly rejected it, yet Highways plan to go ahead anyway? And Sefton and LCR have helped fudged pollution stats? And the residents along the A5036 corridor face some of the highest cancer rates in the country, authorities are aware and largely ignore it? Peel were given the green light to expand, something that until I pulled you up on you thought was the best thing since sliced bread, without planning for the impact then simply lobbied for a road. Highways meet with all the LCR stakeholders regularly and deny FOI requests. It’s taken years of lobbying to
even get Rotherham to comment. I’m sure you knew all this because you genuinely have got your finger on the pulse on local issues. Look forward to seeing you at our next demo at Highways in Manchester where school kids artwork will be presented to them.
Other than that, I enjoyed your post. I’m old enough to remember the Merseyside County Council being abolished not long after the buses were deregulated. Now I’m so happy the German government own our buses, and we subsidise their transport system.
Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
Mateo - superb response! I totally respect the Rimrose Valley campaign and urge you to keep fighting for your community. You and I are in the same page on most things - I just hated the implication I was a
privileged Freemason, which could not be further from the truth. I do like a game of golf, though, and learned to play the game at “Royal Bootle” but I’ve never gone in for funny handshakes or aprons.
Thanks for saying you enjoyed the rest of the post. The Post could be a great platform for your campaign. You enjoy the weekend, too!
No mate, I wasn’t implying you were at all, more the way a lot of business is done in the UK in my opinion, apologies if it came across that way.
I know from your lengthy post you’ve plenty of skin in the game, and as you say we pretty much want the same things. Hope they let you in West Lancs or Birkdale now!
Has the Plaza ever been fully occupied? When I worked there just a few years ago it was deserted and from what I can see, it's currently home to mostly SMEs. Same with the Cotton Exchange, which is a bit of a dump.
I’m happy to be corrected but I think The Plaza is pretty much occupied, as is the Cotton Exchange. I don’t understand your point about those locations being mostly SMEs - that’s their raison d’etre and it’s exactly what the city needs. Across the road, Sony employ several hundred people in a single location but that is the exception - very large footloose investors are as rare as hen’s teeth, even in Manchester.
There are entire floors empty in both buildings, if the real estate websites are up to date. It's just that the article repeatedly argues that companies are leaving because there isn't enough available space, when all I see are to let signs and blank lift directories.
Your information is out of date on this. The Plaza has been fully let for some time. All floors. One floor has half been half cleared out for a development.
Thanks. I ran a business in The Plaza from 2012-14, and the place had a real buzz. I found Bruntwood to be ready good landlords who understood how new/small firms need flexibility with easy leases and access. I think the point in the article is that most big potential inward investors (or larger scale relocatees) are usually in the market for new buildings rather than older conversions. There are exceptions like Sony in the Post and Echo building but generally speaking cities need a mix of new and refurbished space and Liverpool is short of the new stuff. Voids in places like The Plaza and Cotton Exchange are generally built into the developers’ business planning.
I'm not sure I can take you seriously now if you describe an identikit office block full of boring service industry jobs as having a "real buzz". I enjoyed working in Liverpool Science Park, but I still wouldn't get that excited about it.
My company is based in Kirkdale at a factory we bought and renovated three years ago. Good location, excellent public transport links and it's enabled us to expand, increasing the number of locals we employ.
It took us three years to receive agreement from Liverpool council for us to widen our factory gates to be able to turn an HGV in our yard. Endless calls to the council trying to find the right person to speak to, calls to our councillors asking for help and three site visits by council employees who all agreed that what we were asking for was sensible but needed approval from "someone".
My company exports 1/3rd of our output globally and everywhere I travel overseas on business Liverpool is known and respected, for music, for football, for culture but unless we can get the simple stuff right it we will fail to get the big stuff right.
Thanks for the comment Ruth! Glad to hear it was sorted in the end but sounds like a nightmare process. Best of luck to your business
Shocking! Someone needs to be held to account, absolute inept shower!
Grim tidings. Glad you overcame.
I've read these arguments about lack of office space many times before, but no one ever addresses the vast number of "grade A" buildings that have never been fully occupied, e.g. St Paul's Square or the Lewis's building. And no mention of Sensor City, which now stands mysteriously mothballed? There's a bigger story here that you don't seem to have grasped.
Hey, this sounds interesting and wasn’t mentioned by anyone I spoke to in development. Do drop an email to editor@livpost.co.uk with any details you think we should take a look at. Thanks for reading
I imagine people who work in development don't have a very well rounded or unbiased view of what "development" looks like.
Doesn’t make good reading that…Our city and our future generations being let down again and again
Cheers for reading Kev, certainly isn't a quick fix but it isn't unsolveable either. As many have pointed out - political stability would of course help
Didn't want it end.
Fascinating insights (interestingly mostly the anonymous ones)
Possibly some uncomfortable truths. But all solvable.
Thanks for reading!
Woe will befall any city in the world when the public sector was disconnected to the private sector to the extend that it actually discourages investors. This happens when too many of the democratically elected found themselves out of their depth when called upon and had to rely on the services of the hordes of 'advisers' most of which either have their own agendas or affiliated to entities that do. Those lucratively paid government-appointed commissioners better give the taxpayer's money's worth by sorting these fundamental problems out quickly or we will be wasting even more money promoting Liverpool for one-night-stands like the Eurovision Song contest until the cows come home and nothing will change long term. After nearly a hundred years since Lyne Andrews wrote her novel, I hope there is not going to be a new version of 'The Leaving of Liverpool'.
Ha, thanks for the comment Rennie. Certainly since the departure of Tony Reeves there's a real sense within the city's politics that the commissioners need to step up now. Little love for them at the moment certainly. And you're right to point out how much of this stems back to politics. Hoepfully the succsses that do exist can be built upon once some stability is introduced.
Excellent piece.
Thanks Alan!
Hi Jack,
You are spot on to raise the point that many business leaders and developers are extremely wary of the council. There is an acute lack of appreciation of what it takes to stay in business in the city. There is also a failure to be able to identify the difference between genuine business successes (eg home bargain, castore) and fake business or ideas (eg "overseas investors", a nice restaurant, a Merseyside barrage etc).
Dealing with the council are at best opaque and byzantine and at worst laced with a barely concealed contempt and even on occasion threat.
After 20 years developing a successful construction and development business (carpenter investments) with 150 employees, £100m in net assets we now have no ongoing work in the city. We employ more staff in Derby and Stockport than Liverpool and I am feeling the inevitable drift away from the city that seems to happen to all successful businesses that have an eye on surviving and prospering for more than a few years.
Yeah it's such a common story isn't it and very sad. Various people have reached out by email and such with similar tales since we published. Best of luck to your business, wherever you have to go!
There is no mention here of the political instability in Liverpool over the years which surely must deter businesses from investing here. And thats been going on for at least 40 years. Wirral Council is a complete (broke) basket case. So not difficult to see why local politics may be acting as a shackle on any efforts to bring employers in and keep them there as well as explaining the absence of decent initiatives. By the way, I was reporting on a Mersey Barrage and a Dee barrage 50 years ago!!
Hi Wendy, thanks for reading! I think you do raise a very good point about political instability, it doesn’t help confidence in the city for investors and probably should’ve been mentioned. However I do think it can also be a bit of a cop out at times for ‘new’ politicians. Liverpool isn’t the only city with political issues and that isn’t an excuse to negate, say, putting in place an effective mechanism to ensure businesses feel supported when they are here.
And do get in touch re. your Mersey barrage reporting. Would be interesting to know how the concept has evolved over time. Of the several people I asked about it in its current form that Steve Rotheram is pursuing the consensus was that it is deeply fanciful.
I’ve also gathered some stuff about the Mersey barrage scheme. There are two informative reports (search ‘ The Energy River:
Realising Energy Potential from the River Mersey’ and ‘ Opportunities for tidal range projects
beyond energy generation: Using Mersey
barrage as a case study’ Peel Ports (😡) have an interest in it and if this ‘Charter Cities’ concept develops? Don’t start me on Charter Cities though 😡😡
I was trying to say that Liverpool’s lreputation for political instability seems to me deeply rooted going back to the Hatton era and that , unlike other cities, it has found it difficult to shake off. More recent political events havent helped. It is a long time (circa 1970)since I produced a Radio Merseyside environmental programme (unsubtly called ‘Aftermath’) one of which was about a Mersey and/or Dee barrage. I only recall that it seemed like a good idea on paper but there wasnt the political will nor cash to get even a feasibility study done. It isnt fanciful. If it had been built then, we probably wouldn’t have had an energy crisis looming now. Tidal power is the ultimate natural resource.
When Heseltine did up the Albert Dock and fobbed the city off with the Garden Festival he was also selling the old London docklands and the communities that had grown up alongside them off to the highest bidder to build “shiny new cathedrals of capitalism”. There’s a brilliant South Bank Show piece on YouTube with Bob Hoskins detailing what was going on back then.
Mateo - This is a flawed and unfairly reductive view of Heseltine’s role. Whatever you think of his politics, his commitment to Liverpool was sincere and his positive impact on how the challenges in the UK’s inner cities needed to be addressed was incredibly important.
I think a big reason companies have been leaving is simply, and paradoxically, because they haven't been arriving. Who wants to stay in a shrinking market that shows no ambition? Where are the prospects of (legal) profit in that?
Our "wins" especially versus Manchester have been few and far-between. If the winding down of the Liverpool's serious inward investment teams was a mistake it was an unforgivable one.
The city seems populated by organisations like the LEP and BID whose contribution to our well-being I cannot for the life of me pin down. What's more, their own prosperity always seems certain even when ours is far from it. How can that be right?
From the outset, the LEP have had a seat at the table in the combined authority. We've had no say - and can have no say - in that whatsoever, and this is meant to be our top tier of democratic decision making.
Never mind this talk of "playing to our strengths", just to wait for them to be whittled away elsewhere. Where is our MIDAS looking at our gaps, and creating strategies to fill them??
The LEPs grandiose website does not seem to reflect the results we are seeing on the ground. When our inward investment levels are rivaled by the likes of Barnsley, I would like to know what sort of metrics justify their continued occupation of such a vital space.