13 February 2008 10:09
IF ANY one programme summed up New Labour's approach to housing it was the New Deal for Communities. It would be regeneration unlike what had gone before and would concentrate on people rather than bricks and mortar. Like the Social Exclusion Unit, it would be aimed at closing the gap between deprived communities and the rest of the country. And in typical New Labour language it would be holistic and joined up and based on 'what works', drawing funding from a variety of different sources and combining initiatives in health and education as well as just housing.
Ten years and £1.5bn on and the government has just published an independent evaluation of the 39 partnerships in the programme that concludes that 'evidence of change at the area level is overwhelmingly positive'. The evaluation by Sheffield Hallam University looks at the evidence of change in the areas between 2001/02 and 2005/06 based on 36 indicators and finds evidence of improvement in 32 of them. The most positive changes have been seen in outcomes linked to place, including crime and fear of crime and attitudes to the area.
However, impressive though this seems to be, the true test of the programme comes in comparisons with the rest of their local authority area and with other depirved areas that did not receive the same help. After all, the New Deal has been running during a period of sustained growth and high employment. The report compares progress with other areas across 22 benchmarks. On 13, performance was similar or slightly better than elsewhere. In six, progress was significantly better. For example, New Deal residents' satisfaction with their area as a place to live increased from 60% to 71% while at a national level the fiugure stayed the same at 87%.
Progress was not so good in measures that relate to people-based outcomes related to health, education and worklessness. Performance was better than in other deprived areas on 18 out of 31 benchmarks but worse on 13. And the number of people on means-tested benefits actually increased. Bricks and mortar has, it seems, extended to trees and paving stones, but not yet to individual life chances.
But one of the main conclusions of the report is that persistence pays - it takes time for renewal spending to work. The government would do well to remember that and avoid its tendency to introduce yet more new initiatives in response to problems. That applies in particular to the intractable problem of worklessness. Half-baked ideas from the top seem unlikely to succeed where ten years of regeneration on the ground have so far failed.
Posted by Jules Birch, Feb 13
Posted in Regeneration