North missed £140bn of transport investment during last government
Independent analysis by think tank the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) looked at Treasury figures between 2009/10 and 2022/23, during which time the Conservatives were in power.
It reached the figure, which it said was enough to build seven Elizabeth Lines, by considering the amount of spending per person across the different English regions over that period.
While England as a whole saw £592 spent per person each year, London received double that amount with £1,183 spent per person, the IPPR said.
The entire North region saw £486 spent per person, with the North East and North West seeing £430 and £540 spent per person respectively.
This amounted to £140 billion of missed investment for the North, more than the entire £83 billion estimate of capital spending on transport in the region since 1999/2000, according to the analysis.
The region with the lowest amount of investment over the period was the East Midlands with just £355 spent per person.
Among the most divisive transport investment projects for the previous government was the HS2 rail project, which was axed north of Birmingham in October 2023.
Then-prime minister Rishi Sunak pledged to 'reinvest every single penny, £36 billion, in hundreds of new transport projects in the North and the Midlands', including improvements to road, rail and bus schemes.
Earlier this week, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a £15.6 billion package for mayoral authorities to use on public transport projects across the North and Midlands ahead of the spending review.
It is expected to include funding to extend the metros in Tyne and Wear, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands, along with a renewed tram network in South Yorkshire and a new mass transit system in West Yorkshire.
Rachel Reeves has set out plans for new transport investment in the North and Midlands (Peter Byrne/PA)
Marcus Johns, 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 rein – 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.
'This Government 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.'
Former Treasury minister Lord Jim O'Neill said: 'Good governance requires the guts to take a long-term approach, not just quick fixes. So the Chancellor is right in her focus on the UK's long-standing 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.'
Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, said: 'For too long, the North of England has been treated as a poor relation to the South when it comes to government spending on transport infrastructure, and this analysis makes stark reading – exposing the vast scale of underfunding over many years.
'The Chancellor's announcement of £2.5 billion funding for transport in Greater Manchester will be a game-changer for our city-region, enabling us to expand the Bee Network, and deliver the UK's first, zero emission, integrated, public transport system by 2030.
'We have also made the case for a new Liverpool-Manchester railway, which would further rebalance infrastructure investment, and could boost the UK economy by £90 billion by 2040.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
28 minutes ago
- Sky News
The five considerable problems with the chancellor's U-turn on winter fuel payments
There are considerable problems with the winter fuel payment U-turn, but perhaps the political argument in favour outweighs them all? First, Rachel Reeves has executed the plan without working out how to pay for it. This, for an iron chancellor, is a wound that opponents won't let her forget. A summer of speculation about tax rises is not a summer anyone looks forward to. Politics latest: Treasury minister challenged over reason for U-turn Second, the fig leaf that she and Treasury ministers are using is an improvement in economic conditions. If you were being polite, you'd say this is contested. The OBR halved growth this year and the OECD downgraded UK forecasts, albeit only by a little, last week. The claim that interest rates are coming down ignores that their descent is slower because of government decisions of the last six months. Third, the question immediately becomes, what next? Why not personal independent payments (PIP) and the two-child benefit cap? At this stage, it would feel like a climbdown if they did not back down over those. But then, what will the markets - already policing this closely - make of it, and could they punish the government? Fourth, this is aggravating divisions in the Parliamentary Labour Party: the soft left Compass group and ministers like Torsten Bell pushing bigger spending arguments. Those MPs in Tory-facing seats who rely on arguments that Labour can be trusted with the public finances are worried. 👉Listen to Politics at Sam and Anne's on your podcast app👈 Fifth, this has created a firm division between No 10 (the PM) and No 11 (the Chancellor). No 10 is now conscious that it does not have enough independent advice about the market reaction to economic policies and is seeking to correct. Others, I am told, are just critical of the chancellor's U-turn - for she wobbled first. Read more:UK to become 'AI maker not taker', says PMHow much cash will Reeves give each department? Given the litany of arguments against, why has it happened? Because the hope is this maxi U-turn lances the boil, removes a significant source of pensioners' anger and brings back Labour voters, a price they calculate worth paying, whatever the fiscal cost. We wait to see who is right.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
I'm NOT sorry! Reeves refuses to apologise for winter fuel shambles despite restoring payments to millions of pensioners... amid fears of tax hikes to fund U-turn
Rachel Reeves claimed she had 'listened' and refused to apologise today as she humiliatingly restored winter fuel payments to nine million pensioners. The Chancellor has announced that more than three-quarters of older people will get the allowance - worth up to £300 - this winter. But another two million on incomes of more than £35,000 in England and Wales face having the money clawed back in higher tax bills. The move is the culmination of a shambolic volte face on the hated policy, which has been blamed for the dramatic plunge in Labour's popularity. It wipes out the overwhelming bulk of the savings Ms Reeves had originally pencilled in from slashing the previously-universal allowance. Only the poorest received it last winter. The Treasury is now expected to save just £450million compared to 2023-24 - blowing another £1.25bn hole in Labour's spending plans. But Ms Reeves is dodging saying where the funding will be found, amid mounting fears taxes will have to rise again as MPs push for a further U-turn on benefits curbs. The Tories demanded Ms Reeves and Keir Starmer say sorry for making vulnerable elderly people choose between 'heating and eating'. Charities welcomed the shift, but suggested the axe should never have been wielded in the first place. Extraordinarily, Ms Reeves again argued today that she had been right to make the cut. 'It will be still means-tested, but at a higher level, we've listened to people's concerns around the level of the means test,' she said. 'Because of changes we've made and the stability we've brought back to the economy, we are able to increase that amount.' 'Targeting Winter Fuel Payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. 'It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the Winter Fuel Payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out. 'This will mean over three quarters of pensioners receiving the payment in England and Wales later this winter.' All pensioners will automatically be paid winter fuel this season. The level will be £200 per household, or £300 if one person is aged over 80. But where both incomes are above the threshold it will be recouped later through PAYE or a Self-Assessment return. The £35,000 cap is per person, so in theory two-pensioner households where one has an income above the level will still get the cash. People who want to opt out of the payment altogether will be able to do so, with a mechanism to be confirmed. Ms Reeves will not spell out how she is funding the overhaul until the Budget in the Autumn. She told broadcasters: 'We will set out in the normal way, in the Budget, how everything is funded, but no-one should be in any doubt about my commitment to the fiscal rules to ensure that the sums always add up.' The Chancellor is due to lay out departmental spending allocations running up to 2029 - the likely timetable for the next general election - on Wednesday. But the generous fiscal envelope set at the Budget last Autumn has been put under massive pressure by the economic slowdown, calls for more defence cash, and Labour revolts on benefits. Ms Reeves has signalled she will announce real-terms increases to budgets for police as she tries to quell Home Office resistance. However, that is likely to be offset by cuts to other areas, with the NHS and defence sucking up funding. The political backdrop to the proposals this week is the Reform surge, with Labour panicking about the challenge from Nigel Farage. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'Keir Starmer has scrambled to clear up a mess of his own making. I repeatedly challenged him to reverse his callous decision to withdraw winter fuel payments, and every time Starmer arrogantly dismissed my criticisms. 'This humiliating u-turn will come as scant comfort to the pensioners forced to choose between heating and eating last winter. The Prime Minister should now apologise for his terrible judgement.' Introducing a tough means test on winter fuel allowance was one of the first announcements Ms Reeves made after entering No11, and has been blamed for triggering the headlong slump in Labour's popularity. Only those on the lowest incomes, receiving pensioner credit, have been entitled to the handout. Keir Starmer dramatically announced a U-turn last month, without saying what exactly was being proposed or when it would take effect. Last week Ms Reeves confirmed confirmed the changes would be in place 'this winter' – but was still unable to say who will qualify. She also said the Government will not set out how the reinstated payments will be funded until the Autumn Budget. Designing a cost-effective means test for the benefit - which ministers are adamant should not be paid to 'millionaires' - has been causing major headaches for officials. The idea has been condemned by unions amid fears bereaved families could be hit with unexpected demands for cash. Labour insiders have voiced alarm at the 'optics' of trying to recoup the allowance from the estates of those who died after getting it. The PM's official spokesman said: 'HMRC will not ask for repayment from a deceased PAYE (pay as you earn) customer if the only money owed was from a winter fuel payment.' Alex Clegg of the Resolution Foundation think-tank - which used to be run by pensions minister Torsten Bell - said: 'The new scheme for means-testing Winter Fuel Payments means that that the number of pensioners receiving support will rise from 1.3million last winter to around 9million this winter, and not far off the 11.6million who received Winter Fuel Payments two winters ago when they were universal. 'But this U-turn doesn't represent a return to the status quo. The new means-test will create new complexity in the tax system, including a cliff-edge for those with around £35,000 of income. 'The reported savings of £450million will be reduced further by the cost of increased pension credit take-up as a result of the original policy, and the cost of administering the new means-test.' Caroline Abrahams CBE, charity director at Age UK, said: 'The Government's winter fuel payment announcement makes this a good day for older people. 'The decision to restore the winter fuel payment to nine million pensioners – all but those on the highest incomes who should be able to pay their heating bills without it – is the right thing to do and something that will bring some much-needed reassurance for older people and their families. 'At Age UK we heard from many through the winter who were so frightened about their bills that they didn't even try to keep their homes adequately warm. 'We have always said what really matters is that the estimated 2.5 million older people who lost their winter fuel payment when they couldn't afford it get the money back, by one means or another. These 2.5 million comprise older people entitled to pension credit but not claiming it; those whose small incomes take them just above the line; and a third group who face extremely high bills because of severe ill health or disability.' The charity 'would much have preferred it had the Government taken this approach last summer', she added.
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
How Labour moves on from the self-inflicted winter fuel payments fiasco will be key to its fortunes
Feeling heat WHAT an incredible waste of time and money — and what a shocking way to treat our vulnerable elderly. Labour insisted they HAD to remove winter fuel payments from OAPs to fill a financial black hole left by the Tories, which subsequently proved to be non-existent. Just months later, the red-faced Chancellor Rachel Reeves is having to hand it back to nine million pensioners. The whole fiasco — and the anxiety it has caused older folk — has saved a paltry £450million. That's less than a TENTH of what is spent housing migrants in hotels, and a tiny fraction of the current welfare bill. But the price in terms of the Government's reputation for competence in the public's eyes is likely to be much higher. Winter fuel was not the only mistake of Labour's first months in power. The National Insurance rise on employees threatens to push up prices and lead to job losses. The workers' rights bill will make running a business harder still. Adding VAT on private schools schools — but recruitment targets will likely be missed. Meanwhile, we still don't know how yesterday's screeching U-turn will be paid for, with tax rises on the cards. How Labour moves on from this self-inflicted fiasco will be key to its fortunes . . . and our pockets. Border farce CAN we ever have a hope of making our own decisions on immigration while Britain is signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights? Experts say plans to increase income thresholds for people applying for visas for family members are too tough and therefore unlawful. No matter what lever the Government tries to pull, the ECHR — which also stops us deporting dangerous foreign criminals — is almost guaranteed to gum up the works. Even soft-touch Lib Dem boss Ed Davey now agrees reform is needed. So what is staying the Prime Minister's hand? Cold blast IN a chilling warning, Nato boss Mark Rutte says Brits had 'better learn to speak Russian' if Sir Keir Starmer isn't prepared to spend more on defence. Rutte's view is that members of the alliance should be spending five per cent of GDP. The PM won't even say how we will get to three per cent. It's no good just speaking the language of national security.
