Runcorn & Widnes Weekly News

MP questions uneven approach to levelling up

Political bias query over funds promised for deprived areas

- BY CHRISTOPHE­R MCKEON

ANEW fund meant to help “left behind” areas has been criticised for appearing to give priority to Conservati­veheld boroughs over more deprived, Labourvoti­ng ones.

Weaver Vale MP Mike Amesbury, whose constituen­cy includes Runcorn, said he was “suspicious” about the government’s new £4.8bn Levelling Up Fund announced by the chancellor last week.

The fund is supposed to help deprived areas as part of the government’s promise to “level up” the North – a key part of its successful election campaign in 2019.

But analysis by several newspapers has suggested that it disproport­ionately benefits places that are represente­d by Conservati­ve MPs, with less deprived Tory seats being placed into the fund’s “priority one” band ahead of more deprived Labour areas.

Mr Amesbury has written to the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, pointing out that Halton was in “priority two” but Mr Sunak’s Richmond constituen­cy fell into “priority one”.

He said: “Throughout the pandemic, the government has reiterated that it wishes to offer support to areas most affected by Covid and those in the greatest economic distress.

“Halton, a part of my constituen­cy, falls into this category, it is ranked 39th in the England deprivatio­n index.

“By comparison, the local authority, Richmondsh­ire, that covers part of your Richmond constituen­cy ranks 251. Yet only one of those areas has been categorise­d in priority one, the higher need of the Levelling Up Fund, and it is not Halton.”

Analysis by the Financial Times suggests there may be some substance to Mr Amesbury’s concerns.

The FT found 14 boroughs that were less deprived than the national average but had been deemed “priority one”, all of which were represente­d by at least one Conservati­ve MP.

The paper also found that Conservati­ve areas “were consistent­ly placed in a higher priority category than their deprivatio­n level and many Labour voting areas in a lower one”.

The Labour Party has accused the government of skewing the fund for political gain, but the Treasury has claimed the priority bands “do not represent eligibilit­y criteria” and promised to release more details of how money will be allocated in due course.

But Mr Amesbury has pointed to a number of other government funds that appear to disproport­ionately benefit Conservati­ve areas.

This included the Town Deal Fund, which has attracted criticism for inviting bids from Conservati­ve-held towns like Southport but ignoring more deprived Labour areas like Widnes and Runcorn.

He said: “I am sure the government would wish to avoid repeating the experience of the Towns Fund, over which the Public Accounts Committee raised serious concerns of politicisa­tion and lack of transparen­cy.

“Unfortunat­ely, the people of Halton have been subject to a litany of broken promises even before the pandemic.

“In 2018, the Government failed to provide £40million of funding for Runcorn’s proposed new hospital campus, the second time rejection since 2010. The hospital and surroundin­g community are in desperate need of investment to deal with health, social and economic inequaliti­es.”

The Ministry of Housing, Communitie­s and Local Government declined to comment further on Mr Amesbury’s claims.

 ??  ?? ● Runcorn Shopping City
● Runcorn Shopping City

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom