Why the Levelling Up report is laudable but lacking

EDITOR’S COMMENT From the image used on the government announcement of the final publication of the long-awaited Levelling Up report, to its Marvel-esque promise of 12 “bold” missions, it was clear the plan was always going to be a little more style than substance. Now, I don’t mean to be overly pessimistic about what could and should be an absolute focus for this country. We absolutely need to equalise wealth, health, connectivity, opportunity and accessibility. And I could not agree more with levelling up secretary Michael Gove’s ambition that “where you live will no longer determine how far you can go”.  The ambition and intention in the paper is laudable.  Devolution – if properly carried out and regions really are given full control of their economies and future – can only be positive. If there are more leaders across this country like the Andys Burnham and Street, who are committed to delivering the very best for their regions. That will inevitably be good for those locations and the country as a whole.  Greater investment across the UK in R&D, capitalising on the great brains and universities we have, is to be applauded. The UK can – and does – lead here. Let’s get stronger. But I can’t be alone in thinking that these 12 “bold” missions sound more like elevator pitches than actual deliverables with clear, trackable targets. Especially when there doesn’t seem to be any new money to make any of it happen. The private sector will have a huge role to play in making sure that government can deliver on its pledges – especially if it wants to complete these missions by 2030. While our politicians playfight in the Commons, in significant part it will be down to business to make the country a more equal place. And no sector will be as necessary as real estate in delivering on the government’s agenda. One of the 12 missions is to create 20 King’s Cross-style developments across the country. Starting with Sheffield and Wolverhampton, Gove wants to see derelict urban sites transformed into “beautiful communities”. A great ambition, but definitely not something that will even get close to being delivered by 2030.  King’s Cross was decades in the making. And it was spearheaded by the visionaries at Argent (it does help, of course, that Argent founder Peter Freeman is now chair of Homes England). Real estate isn’t exactly flooded with those sort of visionaries (harsh but true), so there will be a big job for the sector to do to bring more of those big thinkers and doers into the sector to deliver on these objectives. That will require support from government and a much better understanding of the crucial role the real estate sector has in ensuring government completes these missions.  As is always the way, despite some good ambitions, the report comes with strange misconceptions about real estate. Like property owners love having empty stores. Giving local authorities the power to force landlords to fill empty shops if they have been vacant for a set period of time is futile. Every property owner wants income, not the cost of an empty unit. But occupiers – good occupiers – will only come if the environment is right, and that will require a collaborative approach that allows local authorities and property owners (and occupiers) to work together to create place. While I have yet to fully digest the 332-page report, one thing is clear. Without proper collaboration and real public-private partnership, levelling up will be (12) mission impossible. To send feedback, e-mail samantha.mcclary@eg.co.uk or tweet @samanthamcclary or @EGPropertyNews