ASI comments on Migration Advisory Committee thresholds report

The Adam Smith Institute welcomed the recommendations of the Migration Advisory Committee for a more welcoming visa system after Brexit.

The ASI’s Head of Research Matthew Lesh said:

“Today’s Migration Advisory Committee recommendation to lower the income threshold is an important first step – but we should remember that income is an arbitrary measure to restrict migration. Now that the numbers target has been dropped, the government should stick to their commitment to scrap the salary threshold as well.

“The MAC report’s recommendations to make it easier to migrate for those with a job offer, and provide more pathways for the exceptionally talented without an offer, are also important steps. But we should be moving towards an even more welcoming system, lowering fees and thresholds to enable more people who could contribute to the UK.

“Recent rises in public support for migration underline that Brexit was never to bring up the drawbridge on immigrants – but to ensure immigration matches the needs of the economy and aspirations of society while being under control. A clear and coherent policy can rebuild trust in the migration system while keeping it responsive to the needs of the economy.” 

Red tape strangling our high streets

A new paper from the neoliberal think tank the Adam Smith Institute argues that the problem with the High Street has been totally misunderstood. The ASI says that to reinvigorate our town centres we need to reform restrictive planning rules and reject a policy of managed decline:  

• National  Planning Policy  Framework’s ‘primary  shopping areas’ (PSAs)  designation in town centres  concentrates retail and leisure  uses in one small zone, creating inactive dead zones outside the PSA and separating retail from the residential areas where their users live

• Primary shopping areas are often dominated by one or two large single-owner shopping  centres, limiting the rental market. This allows property owners to charge higher  rents to small businesses, hurting the high street. 

• Local  planning  policies are  based on retail  capacity assessments  that can be-come out of date before the plans are even adopted. 

• Mixed use development, combining retail, office, leisure and residential uses, creates  more viable, safe and liveable spaces with night-time activity and the ability to adapt to changing economic and social circumstances.

• This paper looks at two concerning case studies of overregulation of the town centre, Stafford & Stone and Milton Keynes, and looks also at Aylesbury where less restrictive local planning rules show the benefits of more widespread retail.

With online shopping on the rise, and more people wanting to live in our cities, the high street needs to be made fit for purpose in the next decade. The free market think tank the Adam Smith Institute says that we should expect fewer big chains dominating the high street. Instead we should expect to see supermarkets and pharmacies next to yoga and dancing studios beneath residential apartments and the odd hipster cafe serving smashed avocado on toast.

Instead of a single street designed for chain shops concentrating retail and leisure uses  in one small area, creating dangerous inactive dead zones in our towns and cities, and separating retail from the residential areas where its users live — towns, cities and national planning guidelines should expand the areas that shops and cafes can set up to encourage mixed use. 

The paper identifies four ways that national planning guidelines have led to dead high streets across the country: 

1. They’ve encouraged monopolistic ownership by national landlords jacking up rents;

2. Mixed residential, commercial and office space has been limited;

3. Designated  primary shopping  areas are already  heavily developed and  sometimes overlap with conservation  areas or contain a large number of  listed buildings which has restricted growth;

4. Towns and cities are often inactive outside their centres, leading to unattractive  and unsafe streets, especially at night.  

Far from boosting growth, local plans have in many ways hindered our high streets, the report argues. The bureaucratic nature of local authorities and the policy making process means that local plans are often out of date, superseded by new developments, other policy documents and market changes, before new ones are adopted. 

Plans are based on evidence gathered around a year or two before its publication, and local authorities are in constant political flux with a third of the council being reelected on three out of every four years. A ten-year plan is liable to be at odds with the policy direction of a new administration within a year or two of its adoption, or sometimes even before its adoption.

A lack of central planning can actually be a good thing when it comes to local planning. The Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan 2013-2033 was rejected by the Government in 2014, and remains unadopted to this day. It may seem counterintuitive when nearly one in ten shops stand empty across the UK, but making it easier to set up shop throughout Aylesbury has meant the local town now expects to double the amount of retail space by 2033. The town is allowing new shops to set up where they will be able to entice people in, where punters want to be, and where rents will be competitive.

The Adam Smith Institute recommends seven ways that the government could bring life back to our high streets across the country by learning from this example. 

1. Remove the requirement to set strict areas of shopping activity;

2. Encourage mixed-use developments and a diverse range of uses within and around town centres;

3. Shorter term plans to complement or replace long-term plans;

4. The examination process for local plans should be simplified or abolished;

5. Neighbourhood Planning within urban areas should be encouraged further to take advantage of local knowledge and expertise and produce plans better focused on local needs and priorities.

6. Permitted development rights should be expanded to allow conversion of residential or office buildings to retail use and vice versa.

For Britain’s high streets and town centres to remain active and viable, a looser approach to planning is needed which is better able to respond quickly to changes in technology, habits, and markets. For the retail industry to survive and compete effectively against growing online competition, retailers need to be free to adapt to their customers’ needs in terms of floorspace and location.

A move away from zoning is required to allow local authorities and town centre economies to grow, adapt and survive. We need to remove the red tape strangling Britain’s high streets. 

Thomas Walker, author of the report, said:

“Everybody knows Britain's high streets are struggling. In order for that to change we need a new approach to planning policy that gives our town centres the flexibility to react and adapt to rapidly changing economic conditions and consumer needs. We need to move away from the old idea of dedicated retail zones and embrace a more dynamic, mixed-use approach to make our town centres prosperous and create a safe and active environment for residents, workers and visitors.”

Matthew Lesh, Head of Research at the Adam Smith Institute, says: 

“High streets across Britain have too often become soulless and empty, and we risk creating a country of ghost-towns. Our one-size-fits-all national planning rules don’t fit anyone or anywhere. We need to encourage the dynamic use of high streets and mixed-use retail, residential and commercial across towns if the government is to revitalise forgotten communities.”

Rob Butler MP, the newly elected Member of Parliament for Aylesbury, says:

“This report is an excellent exploration of the challenges our towns are facing, and how reconsidering restrictive zoning can potentially help reinvigorate them, to ensure our town centres thrive in the new decade.”

Notes to editors:  

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact Matt Kilcoyne, Head of Communications, matt@adamsmith.org | 07904 099599.

The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

Flybe should not get special treatment, no one company should

Matthew Lesh, Head of Research at the Adam Smith Institute, warns that the government should not be picking winners in industry when it comes to bailouts or tax cuts.

“The collapse of Flybe would be a tragic event for its staff and travellers. But the Government is right to remember that no business is too big to fail. It must avoid the temptation to bailout a failing, carbon-intensive business. If customers are unwilling to pay the true cost of a business it should not continue to exist — we must be willing to allow the economy to adapt to new circumstances and demands. We should not ask taxpayers to subsidise the travel of politicians and businessmen.

“A broad lowering of air passenger duty would be a better approach than a direct cash injection into a single business. But even this appears to be inconsistent with broader government goals to reduce carbon emissions. Short haul flights, particularly where the same journey could be taken by train, are a disproportionate contributor to carbon emissions and the government will be hard-pressed to explain why this will be encouraged in future budgets at the expense of future generations. “

For further comment, or to arrange an interview, please contact the Adam Smith Institute press team on mobile 07904099599, landline 02072224995, or email matt@adamsmith.org.

High Pay Stats unoriginal, uninteresting and unhelpful

With the news that the CIPD and the High Pay Centre have released their cod stat report on executive pay saying the exact same thing that it always does the Adam Smith Institute's Head of Research, Matthew Lesh, has issued the following statement calling out the politics of envy and economic illiteracy. 

“Once again the so-called High Pay Centre are revealing their hatred of high pay. These nonsense statistics are unoriginal, uninteresting and an unhelpful contribution to public debate.  

“This is just more of the now discredited Corbyn-style politics of envy. We should be talking about how to help the worst off in society — how to cut red tape, increase the threshold for payment of national insurance, and cutting the Factory Tax that is holding back workers’ wages and unbalancing the economy.

“In a global market for CEOs, British firms must be able to compete for top talent. These people provide immense value to our society. Decisions made by Britain’s makers and doers now have global impacts and their value to firms reflects this. Limits on executive pay would drive top British talent and companies offshore, ultimately leading to fewer jobs and lower pay for workers."

For further comment or to arrange an interview please contact Matt Kilcoyne on 07904099599, via landline 02072224995 or email matt@adamsmith.org