A forum for open discussion on communities and local government policy.

City Development Companies

City Development Companies are city or city-region wide economic development companies formed to drive economic growth and regeneration. The 2006 Local Government White Paper announced the intention of Communities and Local Government to promote the concept of city development companies for English cities and city-regions.

The Government is looking to learn from the wide variety of city development companies that exist abroad as well as from domestic experience. We believe there is much to be learned from the range of existing special purpose bodies in existence. On 12 December, the Government launched a consultation on city development companies for English cities and city-regions – available to download or order from www.communities.gov.uk/consultations

This discussion forum will run alongside the public consultation until 7 March 2007. Contributions will be considered as consultation responses.

The consultation paper asks ten specific questions. In order to allow discussion within this forum to remain focused, we are asking that postings relate to one of the four questions set out below. We also ask that all contributors follow the discussion rules of the site:

  • What are the advantages and risks in moving towards a more unified approach to economic development at the city or city-regional level?
  • Which existing models might be suitable for city development companies?
  • What are the functions that city development companies could most usefully perform?
  • How could city development companies pursue innovative but reliable approaches to meeting running costs whilst avoiding conflicts of interest?

login to post comments | previous discussion | next discussion

Closure of Forum

Posted by Matt Collins on 08/03/2007 - 11:50

Thanks for the comments on this forum as well as the consultation responses sent in via email and hard copy.

We have to respond to the overall consultation exercise within three months, and aim to do so by 31 May. This will be available on our website.

Matt Collins
Communities and Local Government Urban Policy

login to post comments

Consultation ends 7 March

Posted by Matt Collins on 05/03/2007 - 14:30

Thanks for the comments so far. The consultation period ends on 7 March, so please do post any comments before then.

I’d be grateful if contributors could take a few minutes to fill in the Hansard Society’s evaluation survey, to help us evaluate this online consultation. The link is on the right of this page.

Matt Collins
Communities and Local Government Urban Policy

login to post comments

CDCs

Posted by atheyg on 01/03/2007 - 15:26

My main concern is that CDCs might be given huge and wide ranging remits. Its tempting to make them into unwieldy beasts.

They are probably best focused on a small area, or a tight functional remit - at least at first. (i.e. they should be for a 'special purpose').

And they are best used for tasks that are appropriate to an arms length agency or their main features - e.g. where private sector involvement is appropriate or might add the most value.

If I was thinking about setting one up I would be asking what could I do better with a CDC that I can't do with existing organisational or agency structures.

Also there's complications of TUPE, staff transfer etc to deal with.

Dr. Glenn Athey

login to post comments

City Development Companies - logical distinctions

Posted by Bob Line on 26/02/2007 - 17:18

I think there are useful distinctions to be made which can help

1. political representation and decision making.
2. services delivery
3. strategy development

They are linked, of course, and need to be joined up, but don’t necessarily need to be delivered by the same organisation on the same administrative geographical aggregation.

Strategy, - for example on economic development, planning or housing, - needs to be carried out on the basis of city regions, travel to work or housing market areas.

Service delivery can be by contractor or provider at almost any scale, whatever works best, and across areas used for administration of the other functions.

Representation should be at a scale that people can engage with, - which is probably not at most local authority wards level, but smaller and more local -, and could also be based around issues or concerns as well as more general (party) politics.

City Development Companies need to be strategic first , and then focus on getting these strateges and mechanisms for implementation accepted through the political representative processes, and on enabling delivery through whatever service delivery mechanisms are best.

login to post comments

A more unified approach to economic development

Posted by Mr David Nelson on 13/02/2007 - 15:22

I agree straongly that we need a more unified approach to economic development if we are to acheive sustainable economic success in our major cities. Having been closely involved in the arena of economic development and regeneration over the past 25 years I recognise the current fragmentation of structures, responsibilities and funding create a disfunctional environment that discourages public and private sector investment alike. Most importantly the private sector have become almost non-existant as partners in the regeneration of cities and communities. Organisations such as Chambers of Commerce, The CBI, Federation of Small Businesses, IoD etc have become much less focused on this agenda and are more likely to engage on such generic matters as deregulation etc. At city/local area level the traditional lobby around the raising and spending of the product of the business rate is no longer there and leaves business feeling disempowered to influence their business environment.

Elsewhere, the time consuming nature and broad span of structures such as LSPs fails to engage these interests. Yes, we need more coherent structures for long term economic development but we also must ensure focused governance structures that can engage and excite employer interests and the private sector in particular. They can help provide a strategic perspective on wealth creation at city level. The Regional Development Agencies alone are not the solution to this particular problem.

more | login to post comments

Structure

Posted by billmccallum on 02/02/2007 - 17:26

It is interesting to note that the consulatation document takes the view that CDC's would take on the structure similar to many other "Partnerships".

"Members would normally include local authorities, RDAs, andother partners such as English Partnerships..."

Sustainable city regions will house a wide variety of communities, faith, culture & interest. But where are these communities represented in the structure of partnerships?

Tees Valley Regeneration has one member from the "voluntary & community sector", although many of us appreciate that the major elements of regeneration programmes at sub-regional level will be led by local authorities, with the substantial financial contribution from the private sector, it is the people who will live and work in these wonderful new City Regions (and in particular those who already live here, but don't have jobs) who will make or break the city region programmes.

It has been recognised by government and the wider VCS that social regeneration must be delivered alongside physical regeneration to provide long term success.

more | login to post comments

Welcome to the forum

Posted by Matt Collins on 13/12/2006 - 09:19

Welcome to the web forum on city development companies. This forum will run alongside the public consultation period, up until 7 March 2007. Postings made here will be considered as responses to the full consultation.

Please feel free to add your name and organisation if you wish.

Comments may be submitted over the Christmas period. They will not however appear on the forum until they have been uploaded in the new year.

Matt Collins
Communities and Local Government Urban Policy

login to post comments