North of England lost out on £140bn for transport in ‘decade of deceit'
The north of England could have built the equivalent of seven Elizabeth lines with the transport funding it has missed out on during 'a decade of deceit', research shows.
If the north had received the same per-person spending as London, it would have had an extra £140bn over the last 10 years, analysis of Treasury figures by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) and IPPR North has found.
In the decade to 2022-23, London received £1,183 per person per year while the north got less than half of that – £486 of transport spending per person.
The figure for the north-west was £540, there was £441 spent per person in Yorkshire and the Humber, and as little as £430 in the north-east.
The East Midlands fared even worse, with an average of £355 per person spent – less than a third of that received by London.
Related: The north of England had high hopes for this government. Why is it only offering us crumbs from the south? | Peter Hetherington
Marcus Johns, a senior research fellow at IPPR North, said: 'Today's figures are concrete proof that promises made to the north over the last decade were hollow. It was a decade of deceit.
'We are 124 years on from the end of Queen Victoria's reign, yet the north is still running on infrastructure built during her reign, while our transport chasm widens. This isn't London-bashing – Londoners absolutely deserve investment. But £1,182 per person for London and £486 for northerners? The numbers don't lie – this isn't right.'
He added: 'Ministers have begun to restore fairness with their big bet on transport cash for city leaders. They should continue on this journey to close this investment gap in the upcoming spending review and decades ahead'.
Last week the government announced what it called the biggest-ever investment in city local transport, after decades of underfunding.
Rachel Reeves pledged to invest £15bn in the spending review this Wednesday to improve trams, trains and buses outside the capital, after rewriting Treasury investment rules to be able to increase spending on parts of the country that need it most.
Related: The Guardian view on Labour's investment plans: sugaring the bitter pill of austerity | Editorial
The announcement is thought to be one of a number ways the government is responding to the threat of Reform, as polls show the rightwing party is gaining ground across the UK, particularly outside major cities.
But IPPR North said the government needed to go further. The thinktank is partnering with Jim O'Neill, a former Treasury minister and the chair of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership, to call for Great Northern Rail, a large-scale plan to build and improve rail networks across the north of England.
Lord O'Neill said Reeves needed to use the spending. 'Good governance requires the guts to take a long-term approach, not just quick fixes,' he said. 'So the chancellor is right in her focus on the UK's longstanding supply-side weaknesses – namely our woeful productivity and weak private and public investment.
'Backing major infrastructure is the right call, and this spending review is the right time for the chancellor to place a big bet on northern growth and begin to close this investment chasm. But it's going to take more than commitments alone – she'll need to set out a transparent framework for delivery.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Business News
an hour ago
- Time Business News
The Scent of Queues: How Master Bun Pastry Is Winning Over London with Chinese-Inspired Creative Baking
Chinese Pastries Land in London, Spark a 'Baking Craze' In a city renowned for its culinary diversity, a new wave of flavor is redefining what dessert means to Londoners. Master Bun Pastry — a beloved bakery brand with over 300 stores across China — has quietly ignited a unique baking phenomenon with the launch of its very first UK store in London's Chinatown. Combining traditional Chinese craftsmanship with a modern twist, the brand is bringing 'Eastern creative baking' to the heart of the British capital. The Eastern Sensation Changing British Taste Buds Unlike the typical structure and taste of Western desserts, Master Bun Pastry's products showcase the uniquely Chinese combination of crispy, chewy, savory, and sweet. Its signature bestseller, the 'Meat Floss Chiffon Bun,' blends seaweed, pork floss, and a fluffy chiffon base into an irresistible multi-layered treat. Other crowd-favorites include chocolate mochi puffs and chewy choux pastries with creamy centers and crispy shells — textures and flavors that many UK customers say they've never experienced before. From First Bite to Loyal Fans: Real Customer Stories 'Our first few weeks saw long lines forming outside the shop — many people were drawn in just by the crowd,' says the store manager. 'One young British customer tried a chocolate puff, bought five boxes on the spot, and came back ten minutes later for more.' Regular customers now include local residents of Asian heritage, and even Chinese students in France have brought boxes of meat floss buns back to Paris. Some long-time Malaysian and Hong Kong customers in the UK even call ahead to reserve their favorites — 'just in case they sell out.' Social Media Drives Organic Hype and Cultural Connection Master Bun Pastry's success is no accident. Riding the wave of Asian baking and Gen Z's cultural curiosity, the brand naturally fits into London's urban landscape — a city that celebrates diversity and innovation. Without traditional advertising, the brand has gained traction through organic user-generated content on platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and Xiaohongshu. Customers snap photos, post reviews, and film taste-test videos, forming a grassroots cultural bridge between Asian and local communities. Product Philosophy: Reinvention, Not Replication The founding team at Master Bun Pastry emphasizes that they never simply copy traditional Chinese pastries. Instead, they draw inspiration from Cantonese bakeries, Jiangnan sweets, Japanese wagashi, and blend it with British aesthetics and the evolving tastes of younger consumers. 'We see our work as a kind of cultural experiment — something delicious, playful, and memorable — to reimagine the role of Chinese pastries in the global dessert scene.' What's Next: Rooted in the UK, Aiming for the Mainstream Master Bun Pastry is already in the early stages of expansion. The brand plans to open 15 additional directly operated stores in major UK cities including Manchester, Glasgow, and Birmingham over the next three years. They are also exploring collaborations with local department stores, commercial developers, and lifestyle brands. More Than Just Desserts — A Cultural Resonance For lovers of Chinese pastries, dessert influencers, international students, and curious local foodies, Master Bun Pastry offers more than just a puff or mochi — it offers a modern expression of taste memory and cultural fusion. More than just a bakery from China, Master Bun Pastry is a cultural vessel — a warm, delicious experiment in flavor, identity, and belonging. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Wayve CEO on London Self-Driving Cars Trial With Uber
Wayve Technologies CEO & Co-Founder Alex Kendall discusses the company's plans to remain "asset light" and adaptable for all car manufacturers. This comes after the startup's announcement earlier this week that they will be partnering with Uber to trial fully autonomous vehicles in London. The two companies have been working together for some time, with Uber owning a strategic investment in the London-based startup. Kendall speaks to Bloomberg's Tom Mackenzie at sidelines of Founders Forum in Oxfordshire, UK. Sign in to access your portfolio
Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
US-China Trade Talks: The Limits Of Diplomacy
Delegations of China and the U.S. pose for a group photo prior to the first meeting of the ... More China-U.S. economic and trade consultation mechanism in London, Britain, June 9, 2025. The meeting opened here on Monday. Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, attended the meeting with U.S. representatives. (Photo by Li Ying/Xinhua via Getty Images) In early June 2025, officials from the U.S. and China convened in an attempt to to prevent salvage economic ties from spiraling out of control and causing significant damage to both economies. Talks took place in London's historic Lancaster House, as they sought to rescue an earlier negotiated tariff truce and defuse escalating export controls. The negotiations aimed to extend the 90-day pause on punitive tariffs agreed in Geneva, revive cross-border trade flows, and hammer out a framework on rare-earth minerals and high-end technology exports. However, the talks ultimately accomplished few tangible benefits that President Trump sought to originally gain from the implementation of these tariffs, namely to stem the flow of fentanyl, motivate companies to reshore to the US, and close the trade deficit. Instead, he temporarily paused these measures by both sides and returned to the dynamics prior to his 'Liberation Day' and the imposition of tariffs globally. The June 9 to 10 London talks — led by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and USTR Jamieson Greer from the U.S. and China's Vice Premier He Lifeng and Commerce Minister Wang Wentao — were convened against a backdrop of deep mutual distrust. Since 2018, the two sides have imposed tit-for-tat duties, with U.S. tariffs on Chinese exports staying around 19-21% from the end of Trump's first term until the beginning of his second, and Beijing following suit with…. After Liberation Day, US tariffs reached a high of 145% before decreasing to 30%, while Beijing imposed a retaliatory tariff of 125% before settling at its current level of 10%.These actions have stifled more than $600 billion in bilateral trade and rattled global markets. At the same time, The Trumps' administration's erratic and inconsistent messaging has also allowed for Wall Street to start pricing in volatility. Moreover a new TACO theory emerged, 'TACO or Trump Always Chickens Out.' This asserts that despite Trumps tough trade policy rhetoric, when markets become too volatile Trump will always reverse course. US Reliance on Critical Rare Earth Metals US Reliance on Rare Earth Imports from China In April 2025, China further escalated tensions by instituting a requirement of export licenses for critical rare-earth minerals, resulting in a 20% year-on-year decrease in shipments to the U.S. and Europe. Due to China's dominance in rare earth exports to the US, this triggered alarms in various industries, most notably in the electric vehicle and aerospace sector. Meanwhile, Washington broadened its export curbs on advanced semiconductors, chip-making equipment, and aerospace components, with a particular intensification after the two countries' Geneva talks, amplifying China's sense of economic siege. Despite the high stakes, negotiators emerged from London with only a modest 'interim framework' rather than a sweeping accord. However, Trump still claimed in a Truth Social post that 'the relationship is excellent.' The enthusiasm from the president is in large part due to China agreeing to temporarily grant export licenses for rare-earth magnets and related components, enabling U.S. automakers such as Ford, GM, and Stellantis to replenish inventories after April's curbs. At the same time, the U.S. stopped short of lifting its tech export restrictions on AI chips and aerospace tools. Commerce Secretary Lutnick characterized the outcome as 'putting meat on the bones' of the May Geneva deal, while Ministry of Commerce spokesperson He Yidong stated the two sides reached a consensus framework to 'implement the important understandings' reached during the June 5 phone call between Trump and Xi. From an economic perspective, the London agreement delivered a short-lived reprieve. Following reports of the rare-earth license concession, global equity markets ticked higher, echoing relief seen after the Geneva truce. Yet core barriers remain firmly in place: U.S. base tariffs on Chinese goods remain near 30%, China's on U.S. exports linger around 10%, and neither side agreed to roll back its export-control regimes. Without a detailed enforcement mechanism or significant new commitments, the framework may merely defer a return to pre-Geneva duties once the 90-day window lapses in August. Current versus pre-Geneva Tariff Levels Geopolitical undercurrents will also further limit any long-term détente. In Washington, a bipartisan consensus has emerged around the need to 'de‐risk' critical supply chains, not merely as a commercial maneuver but as a national security imperative. Policymakers and industry leaders alike fear that overdependence on China for semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, rare‐earth minerals, and even basic manufacturing capacity leaves the United States dangerously exposed to coercive economic pressure or abrupt supply shocks. This conviction has translated into a suite of domestic incentives—ranging from the CHIPS and Science Act to expanded Defense Production Act authorities—designed to shore up American production of key inputs and diversify procurement to 'trusted' partners. On the other side of the Pacific, Chinese leadership interprets these U.S. measures as part of a long-standing containment strategy. Official rhetoric in Beijing routinely casts de-risking initiatives as destabilizing 'decoupling' efforts that threaten China's development model and tarnish the mutually beneficial aspects of economic integration. State media and senior diplomats argue that a sovereign nation, particularly one bearing the mantle of a developing‐country status, must safeguard its industrial base against foreign interference. Despite the rhetoric on economic self-reliance, both the U.S. and China have much to lose from a prolonged trade war. According to the military think tank RAND, 'roughly 40 percent of China's exports to the United States fall into categories where China supplies more than half of America's total imports.' Meanwhile, China is eager to gain access to GPUs and CPUs from American companies like NVIDIA and AMD to power its growing AI infrastructure. Even knowing this, leaders on both sides remain committed to showing strength and independence. Trump administration officials are wary of ceding control to China, while Beijing officials do not want to appear weak on the global stage. The talks, while cordial, still have not permanently de-escalated the trade war, with 30% and 10% baseline tariffs remaining on the American and Chinese sides, respectively. Furthermore, China has only agreed to a six-month license for American companies seeking to import rare earth minerals and magnets. Beyond the economic impact, the visa statuses of Chinese students in US universities will continue to remain uncertain as long as the trade war remains unresolved. As the two economic superpowers prepare for the current deadline on a comprehensive trade deal by August 10, the London talks underscore both the value and the limits of diplomacy: they bought time, but a durable resolution remains elusive. Special thanks to Jonah Kim, and Nathaniel Schochet, for their exceptional thought leadership, research, and editorial contributions to this article. Special thanks to Hanah Kim and Artem Valyaev Kunisky for assisting in providing info-graphics.
