Mid Sussex political leaders weigh in on White Paper
Mid Sussex’s political leaders have weighed in on what levelling up could mean for the district.
Jonathan Ash-Edwards, leader of the Conservatives at Mid Sussex District Council, said: “Levelling up is about making sure all parts of our country succeed so that no matter where you live you have access to the same opportunities.
“This is as important in Mid Sussex as anywhere else in the country. Locally, we are already working on boosting opportunities for local residents, such as seeking to bring high skill, high wage jobs into the district through a new science and technology park as well as investment in gigabit speed full fibre connectivity to encourage inward investment.
“I welcome the fact that the new Shared Prosperity Fund, which replaces the EU structural funds which Mid Sussex received little from, will be devolved to district councils to help us boost skills, support businesses and invest in our local communities.”
Robert Eggleston, deputy leader of MSDC’s Lib Dem group, said that while everyone could applaud the objective of ensuring all regions have the same opportunities and equal access to well-paid jobs and decent infrastructure ‘the fact that it has taken the Tories decades to recognise this shows how out of touch they have been’.
But for him the White Paper only ‘rehashes existing policies’ and he doubted there will be sufficient funds to make levelling up a reality.
Mr Eggleston said Mid Sussex had ‘very little to cheer about’ with the White Paper serving up a ‘bowl of very thin gruel’ as it ignored Mid Sussex’s infrastructure challenges and ‘in some respects actually makes worse’.
A bid for the first phase of levelling up funding to help
regenerate Burgess Hill town centre was unsuccessful last year. He added: “What is evident is that time and time again Mid Sussex has missed out on government funding to solve, for example, the failure to regenerate the town centre of Burgess Hill which needs a levelling up agenda all of its own.”
He suggested that the inevitable consequence of shifting funding for brownfield development to the North and Midlands would mean the pressure for housing development in the district would fall on greenfields even more.
Three ‘crumbs of comfort’ were the UK Shared Prosperity Fund, support for local community and cultural assets and a desire by the government for communities to have a greater say and control over their priorities.
Anne Eves, from the district council’s Green group, said that while they were still digesting the lengthy White Paper they would welcome more devolution if properly funded and more integrated rural transport.
She added: “But the White Paper is so light on detail, and very light indeed on achieving net zero, which should be our priority.”
For Pam Haigh, chair of the Mid Sussex Constituency Labour Party, the White Paper was the ‘latest in a series of missed opportunities from the Conservatives’ and after 12 years of the Tories being in power she highlighted how the district has seen a real terms reduction of 45 per cent in grants and funding streams available to councils outside of the council tax and Public Health grant.
She said this had led to above-inflation council tax rises, closure of children and family centres, loss of facilities such as the Martlets Hall and the ‘failure’ to regenerate town centres.
Without further spending commitments she suggested the White Paper’s 12 missions ‘will stay as paper promises with nothing substantial achieved’.
Ms Haigh pointed out how in Mid Sussex there is deprivation, an urgent need for genuinely affordable housing and improvements to education where there are shortages of schools, teachers and even of basic equipment.
She said her party would make integrated regional planning a priority, spreading new development away from protected areas to places in need of regeneration, with infrastructure an ‘absolute prerequisite’.