The EconomistDecember 21st 2019 Leaders 1512 Prosperous cities like Manchester, Liverpool and Newcastle are
almost unrecognisable from two decades ago. In 2017 (the most
recent year for which data are available) Newcastle and Liverpool
enjoyed faster growth in gross value added, a measure of output,
than the capital. In 2018, according to ibm, a computing giant,
Manchester and Liverpool were among the top ten cities in the
world for inward foreign direct investment.
The left-behind parts of the north are not its cities but its
towns. Many have still not recovered from deindustrialisation
under the Conservative governments of the 1980s. Their labour
markets lag behind the rest of the country, with poor employ-
ment rates and lower wages. The clearest sign of this economic
failure is that young residents are leaving. Towns like Redcar and
Scunthorpe have seen the number of resident 18- to 24-year-olds
fall by more than 20% since the 1980s, while the number of
over-65s has risen by 30% or more. Ageing populations have cut
local spending power and put pressure on stretched local-gov-
ernment budgets as the demand for social care rises.
Northern towns are stalling even as their neighbouring cities
are doing well partly because dire transport links make the likes
of Manchester or Newcastle seem a world away from Wigan or
Hartlepool. The transport infrastructure of the north has suf-
fered from decades of underinvestment. In 2018-19 government
transport spending per person was £903 in London, against less
than £500 in the north. In the past five years the government has
spent more on transport infrastructure for 9m Londoners than
England’s 15m northerners.
The consequences are clear. In the south, Brighton has weath-
ered the decline of its tourism industry by becoming an attrac-
tive place to live within easy reach of the capital. Blackpool, a
once-lively seaside resort in the north-west, is a byword for de-
cline. Although it is closer to Manchester than Brighton is to Lon-
don, the trains take 20 minutes longer and are a quarter as fre-
quent. Inter-city connections in the north are a mess. By train, it
is quicker to travel 250 miles (400km) to Newcastle from London
than it is to get to Newcastle from Liverpool, just 120 miles away.
Buses are slow and pricey. And pity anyone without a ministerial
helicopter if they need to get to Scotland. North of Newcastle, the
a1 (a “strategic national road”, no less) in some places narrows to
a single carriageway that is often blocked by tractors.
Rail is just the start. According to firms surveyed by ey, a con-
sultancy, ropy infrastructure, including power, internet connec-
tivity and transport, is the largest reason for not investing in Eng-
lish towns. Better vocational training would mean that once
residents of Blackpool arrive in Manchester, they would have
more chance of getting a job. A comprehensive deal with the eu
would be better for the north than the skimpy effort that Mr
Johnson seems intent on dashing off by the end of 2020.
Giving more powers to English city mayors would help them
draw up integrated regional-transport plans. Although improv-
ing railways would be a long-term project, buses could rapidly be
made better—perhaps in time for the election in 2024, when
northerners will get to decide whether to cement their relation-
ship with the Conservatives. The north does not need or want to
rely on London to get back on track. If the government would
only stump up the cash, the north will help itself. 7“I
have slepton the Embankment,” wrote George Orwell in
1933, adding that, despite the noise and the wet and the cold,
it was “much better than not sleeping at all”. Under the nearby
Charing Cross bridge, Orwell reported that “50 men were wait-
ing, mirrored in the shivering puddles.” Nine decades on and
Charing Cross and the Embankment are once again full of rough
sleepers, even during the coldest days of December. Across Lon-
don their numbers have more than tripled since 2010.
It is a pattern found in much of the rich
world. Almost every European country is seeing
a rise in the number of homeless people, includ-
ing those who live in temporary accommoda-
tion, as well as the smaller number who live on
the streets. Homelessness across America is in
decline, but it is soaring in its most prosperous
cities. Roughly 5,000 people live on the streets
of San Francisco, a 19% rise in just two years.
It does not have to be this way. In post-war America there was
little rough sleeping, and homelessness was falling so fast that
sociologists predicted its imminent disappearance. Even today,
some rich, successful cities, including Tokyo and Munich, have
few people living on the streets.
These places offer lessons on how to reduce homelessness.
One is that tough love can sometimes work. Conservatives argue
that softer policing tactics in the 1970s, including lax attitudes topublic drunkenness, were in part responsible for the rise in
homelessness. The world could learn something from Greece,
where strong family networks ensure that those down on their
luck find someone to take them in. Many experts argue that it is
counterproductive to give money to someone begging on the
street. Better, they say, to donate to a charity.
Yet tougher tactics will ultimately do little if housing costs re-
main high. This is the underlying reason for rising homeless-
ness—which is perhaps one reason why Ameri-
ca’s Supreme Court on December 16th affirmed
that lawmakers may not criminalise rough
sleeping. Few Americans lived on the streets in
the early post-war period because housing was
cheaper. Back then only one in four tenants
spent more than 30% of their income on rent,
compared with one in two today. The best evi-
dence suggests that a 10% rise in housing costs
in a pricey city prompts an 8% jump in homelessness.
The state can do something to help. Cuts to rent subsidies for
Britain’s poor are probably the biggest reason why Charing Cross
has so many people sleeping on the streets once again (see Brit-
ain section). Making such subsidies more generous might actu-
ally save governments money in the medium term—after all, de-
mands on health-care services and the police would decline.
People would also be more likely to find a job.Mean streets
How to reduce homelessness in the world’s priciest citiesHomelessness