“The North East has historically been considered a ‘low skills’ region, with low levels of formal qualifications among the adult population and a record of ‘exporting’ much of its brightest talent. This is now changing, with positive indications that the region has the potential to become a significant hub for professional and technical skills.

Despite low overall qualification levels, rates among young people and city residents are comparable with similar areas outside London, and take-up of some new forms of vocational training is high. There are good employment opportunities, and rates of pay, for technical staff in science, engineering and technology. The region’s post-compulsory education sectors perform well in attracting students from elsewhere, retaining graduates in the region, and providing programmes in areas which support the North East’s industrial strengths.

Challenges include forecasting future skills needs; business engagement and collaboration in providing training; and some issues around understandings of education, training and careers. We make specific recommendations for North East and Tees Valley skills bodies to address these.

REWIRING THE NORTH EAST

This is the second in a series of three reports ‘Rewiring the North East’, which challenge common assumptions about the region’s economy and highlight ways in which it can play a critical ‘hub’ role in relation to wider northern and national prosperity. The first report, At the crossroads: Regional trade in the North East is available here.

Key findings

ON QUALIFICATIONS

In the North East, 26.5 per cent of the population aged 16 and above have no formal qualifications, the second highest rate for any English region. It also has the lowest proportion of residents qualified to Level 4 (equivalent to an undergraduate degree).

However, there are important indications that this situation is beginning to change.

• Qualification levels for younger people are much higher. Only 11 per cent of 16–34 year olds have no qualifications and one-third of those aged 25–34 hold a degree or equivalent.
• Within the North East, Newcastle has skills levels broadly in line with other core cities.
• Despite a lower proportion of graduates across its adult population, the North East has the highest proportion of people with an apprenticeship qualification and or a vocational qualification at Level 4 or 5, suggesting that new forms of employment-related training are particularly important for North East residents.

ON SKILLS SHORTAGES, SKILLS GAPS AND JOB OPPORTUNITIES

Anecdotal evidence suggests that some skills problems persist in the North East. The rate of skills shortage vacancies in the region (23.5 per cent of vacancies) is very similar to the national one (22.6 per cent). These appear to be most marked in professional and sales and customer service roles, both of which are identified as growth areas for employment. However, the North East has fewer skills shortage vacancies than other regions in associate professional and skilled trade occupations.

Rates of skills gaps are again similar national ones. Slightly higher rates in professional and machine operative roles may be due primarily to the introduction of new products and services, and to gaps in ‘complex analytical skills’. These could become problematic as initiatives to boost innovation in the North East come to fruition.

Recent forecasts suggest that private-sector jobs growth in the North East will be relatively strong, especially in IT, construction and services; developing skills for these is important for the regional economy.

ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND GRADUATE RETENTION

The North East has five universities with over 83,000 students in 2013/14. Far from exporting talent, the North East appears to attract students, with some evidence for good rates of graduate retention and strong graduation rates in subjects which support the region’s economic specialisms.

• Nearly one-quarter of all students come from outside the UK and international postgraduate students represented 8.4 per cent of the total.
• North East universities attract a net inflow of students, and the proportion of students studying in the region who also grew up there is falling.
• North East universities have a good track record of widening participation in higher education.
• The North East retains around 58 per cent of its degree course graduates (undergraduate and postgraduate) six months after graduation – lower only than London (71 per cent) and the North West (70 per cent).
• The North East awards a high number of research degrees relative to the size of its higher education sector, particularly in key subjects for the regional economy such as maritime, electronic, chemical, process and energy engineering. The region has high levels of first and taught postgraduate graduations in computing and IT.

Engagement in further education is also strong with the second highest regional rate of growth in Level 2 and Level 3 completions since 2005/06; only London fared better.

ATTRACTING AND RETAINING A HIGH-SKILLED WORKFORCE

For a region to retain a highly skilled workforce, its labour market must offer both access to jobs in the short term, and the option of pursuing a whole career there. In the North East:

• Employment rates for people with qualifications at Level 3 or above are good compared with other regions, but the same is not the case for people with no qualifications. This highlights the importance of raising skills levels.
• Employment has risen since 2004/5 for professional, associate professional and technical workers, and in roles requiring Level 3 or apprenticeship qualifications.
• Technical staff in science, engineering and technology have rates of pay which are comparable to, or even higher than, those for similar regions. Lower wages for managerial and professional roles may be counterbalanced by lower costs of living and higher quality of life.

Recommendations

Despite a surprisingly positive outlook for the North East as a ‘skills hub’, particularly in technical and engineering sectors, our research identified three significant challenges and areas of uncertainty.
Considerable gaps persist in our knowledge of current skills shortages, and potential future skills needs. At present this makes it difficult to plan skills provision strategically to support the region’s industrial strengths. There is even the potential for labour market disruption if companies compete for skilled labour rather than prioritising in-house training and skills development. We recommend:

• Skills bodies in the North East and Tees Valley combined authorities should work with other agencies and businesses to clarify current and future skills needs, and develop regional sector skills forums to encourage business collaboration in appropriate training initiatives.

The North East has relatively high rates of new enterprise formation and a good record for business survival. However, business and public expenditure on research and development is lower in the North East than in some other regions. This brings a significant risk to the potential for the North East to exploit innovation and provide opportunities for highly skilled workers in the future. We recommend:

• Improving and enhancing business support, particularly for workforce training; business startup; and finance for startup and research and development.
• Establishing a single body with oversight of knowledge transfer partnerships (KTPs) in the North East to help retain postgraduate research graduates and promote university–business collaboration.

There are still some ‘cultural’ challenges around the understanding and perceptions of education, training and careers in the North East. These vary for different age groups and include gaps in knowledge about available opportunities, issues around parental approaches to education, aspirations and attitudes towards particular kinds of work; and gender stereotyping in recruitment and in the workplace. We recommend:

• The North East and Tees Valley combined authorities’ skills bodies should work with schools to enhance careers advice and guidance; improve understanding of links between school, further study, and careers; and develop projects to engage with older workers who would benefit from reskilling opportunities.”

The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) has designs on the housing crisis – drawing up a 20 point plan to pitch solutions:

• Housing policy should be added to the remit of the National Infrastructure Commission and future infrastructure schemes should include details of their impact on housing supply.
• The Government should adopt the RIBA and House of Lords’ Select Committee recommendation for the establishment of a Chief Built Environment Adviser.
• The cap on Housing Revenue Account receipts should be lifted to allow councils to borrow to build social housing.
• Central and local government should set up public sector investment vehicles and a national housing investment bank to issue bonds and ISAs, recycle right to buy receipts and attract long-term institutional investment.
• Local authorities should set up Local Housing Development Funds, with initial capital for investment provided by local authority pension funds. Once such schemes are up and running, they would be able attract secondary institutional investment. More decisions made locally As part of the drive towards devolution, the Government should transfer responsibility and resources for housing and planning to local and regional authorities. This transfer needs to be accompanied by greater autonomy over policy setting. The regeneration of housing estates should be based on an approach which makes the most of the strengths of existing communities and addresses the challenges exacerbated by the urban environment such as anti-social behaviour or high rates of obesity
• Local leaders should be empowered to shape their local housing market by taking control over requirements for affordable housing, including the tenure composition for new developments (social rent, affordable rent, living rent, shared ownership, Starter Homes) based on local housing need, rather than fixed national targets.
• The Guiding Principles of the Estates Regeneration programme should be strengthened to ensure that engagement with local communities is at the heart of the process and the rights of existing residents to remain after regeneration is complete – including those who exercised the right to buy – is protected. Support for new approaches that expand the market Local authorities should have an expanded role in facilitating innovative development models. Selfbuild and custom build add value to a locality, can be an affordable routes to home ownership, and are valuable as delivery mechanisms for new, high-quality homes. The Self-Build and Custom Housebuilding Act and the Housing and Planning Act aim to identify land and provide planning policies to support custom build. However, unless local authorities have sufficient resources, they will struggle to implement their duties effectively.
• Sufficient resources must be made available to identify land and for the management and promotion of the custom build register. A focus on good design The focus on the number of new homes must not lead to lower design and quality standards. Local communities should be given greater powers to shape how development in their area meets local needs – including for local amenities like schools and health centres, as well as housing. Clarity for architects, developers and communities on the quality and design standards expected will be particularly important to the success of permission in principle and the conversion of offices to housing.
• The Government should ensure Design Review Panels are an integral part of the planning process – particularly for larger and more complex schemes.
• Local and neighbourhood plans should include design review to help drive high quality design in new housing developments.
• Key factors that affect quality of life and affordability of housing like space, access and environmental standards should be subject to regular review to ensure that the highest possible standards are adopted. Better use of public sector land Local authorities should dispose of public land only where it leads to high quality design and the right supply of housing. Up to 40% of land suitable for development, and about 27% of brownfield sites suitable for housing are currently owned by the public sector. Long-term best value considerations should be paramount when public land is sold.
• The value of social return should be given equal consideration to economic return and the long-term impact of a proposal on the public sector should be taken into account to ensure that inappropriate development is avoided.
• Local authorities should consider partnering arrangements where land and ownership is retained by the authority, possibly in the form of Community Land Trusts, to ensure long-term best value for those assets. Support for new types of housing development Our ageing population has huge implications for the houses that we need to build. A broader range of housing options is needed – both to ensure that people are living in the best possible homes, but also to unlock larger housing for families. The Government should examine the options for freeing up under-used homes by incentivising older residents to ‘right-size’ and it should be made easier to build homes aimed specifically at older generations.
• The removal of stamp duty when moving to a smaller home should be piloted in the Autumn Statement.
• A distinct, clear planning use class should be introduced for housing for older people that is designed to Housing our Ageing Population: Panel for Innovation (HAPPI) principles.
• Local authorities should be required to address the principles of inclusive design in internal and external environments and the needs of older people in plan-making and land allocation.
• Research into concerns around viability, build quality and overheating should be commissioned to help guide future standards.
• The metrics currently used to calculate energy efficiency and CO2 reduction should be reviewed; learning from other European countries such as Germany and Denmark.
• A VAT rebate scheme should be made available for the renovation and improvement of homes with poor energy efficiency. A more transparent market Close working relationships and public trust are vital components of tackling the housing crisis. However, too often, negotiations between developers and local authorities are hampered by a lack of trust, and public perceptions that their interests are secondary to decisions about the construction of new homes. For that reason, we believe that a much more open, transparent and approach is needed.
• The Neighbourhood Planning and Infrastructure Bill should be amended to ensure that viability assessments used in Section 106/CIL discussions are public documents – with no commercial confidentiality restrictions.

“Around 40,000 people a year, the majority over 60 years of age, receive Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs) to pay for changes to their homes such as the installation of stairlifts, level access showers and ramps.

The report commissioned by the national body for DFGs and home improvement agencies, Foundations, said awareness of the grants is low, its provision is fragmented and too often older and disabled people are forced to find solutions on their own.

The grants are allocated by councils and mainly delivered by home improvement agencies. These are non-profit organisations which support older or disabled people to maintain their homes and are often based in housing association or council offices.

The report said home improvement agencies and NHS staff should work together, potentially in the form of new arms’-length management organisations. This could raise the profile of the grants and ensure they are delivered more efficiently.”

Here is the report:

dfg-report-main-findings-final

The government has increased funding for DFGs from £220m in 2015/16 to £394m in 2016/17. Councils also contribute funding for the DFGs. However, the report found that cuts to council budgets have resulted in “considerable variation” between councils, with some contributing “very little” and others matching government funds.

Inside Housing surveyed 219 English councils to find out how many bids had been submitted to government and received 74 responses, with 61 confirming they haven’t bid.

Under the scheme, councils submit an expression of interest to build a settlement of between 1,500 and 10,000 homes.

To be eligible a proposed development must be a new separate settlement, as opposed to an extension of a town. The government plans to update planning policy to support the development of these new sites. They also have to meet other criteria, including having good design, while making best use of brownfield or public sector land is encouraged.

In return, the government has promised a tailored support package which “could include a limited amount of funding” for items such as staffing costs or to pay for studies or assessments in 2016/17 and 2017/18.

The government, which aims to support up to 12 garden villages, will now assess the bids and make a decision. The government is also supporting garden towns or cities, which have more than 10,000 homes. There is no set deadline for bids for this support.

Garden village applications known to date

Bolton
Carlisle
Cornwall
Dudley/Sandwell/Walsall/Wolverhampton – joint application
Huntingdonshire
North Tyneside
Rotherham
Rugby
Sevenoaks
Sheffield
Stratford-on-Avon
Waverley
York

The Brexit vote has already led to speculation that there will be more controls over immigration and on migrants’ eligibility for services such as welfare benefits and social housing.

Nothing will change in the short term and timescales are not yet known, but here we sketch out some of the key issues about housing need and eligibility for housing which will have to be addressed.

Here is the latest briefing:

Brexit and how it might affect migration, housing need and eligibility

KEY FINDINGS

1. At the moment, ‘devo-health’ is more akin to delegation than devolution. In Manchester, the health secretary rather than the newly elected mayor will remain ultimately accountable for health and care. Going forward, this may need to change, with local mayors given clearly defined roles in the NHS and the centre stepping away from its responsibilities, in order to give local leaders ‘skin in the game’ and enable local communities to hold them to account.
2. Devo-health has the potential to drive improvements in health from both within and outside of the NHS. Devo-health can catalyse reform within the NHS (particularly integration) and can drive improvements in the social determinants of health through the creation of place-based public services. The latter has particular potential given that health devolution is likely to be part of broader decentralisation deals.
3. The potential benefits of devo-health do not imply that every area in the UK should take on powers over the NHS, but rather that it should be considered as one option in looking to drive reform going forward. There is a better case for proceeding with devo-health in urban areas with clearly established geographic boundaries and with a strong history of joint working between the NHS and local government. All future devolution deals should adhere to the decentralisation principles set out in IPPR North’s report Decentralisation decade (see Cox et al 2014): they must have a clear purpose; be joined up across silos; be given time to bed in; have cross-party support; and will necessarily be asymmetrical.
4. There are risks involved in health devolution. Rather than simplifying the post-Lansley landscape, devo-health in Manchester has so far just created a new level of bureaucracy; rhetoric appears to be running ahead of reality, given that history shows structural changes rarely deliver in terms of efficiency or heath outcomes; and there are very real concerns that ‘devo-health’ will ultimately lead to finger-pointing between central and local government as the next round of public sector cuts hit.
5. Having said that, the most commonly cited concern – that we will lose the ‘N’ in the NHS – has been exaggerated. Significant variation in the quality of care and the health outcomes achieved already exists across England under our more centralised system. While it is feasible that devo-health could make this worse, that seems unlikely, especially as the NHS Mandate and NHS Constitution will remain in place.
6. A huge number of unanswered questions remain. How much freedom should local areas have to differ from national policy? Should full devolution follow delegation? Is there a role for fiscal devolution? How can local areas unlock the potential benefits of devo-health, and what should local areas do with their devolved powers? How do we keep the ‘N’ in the NHS while also delivering place-based public services? Will the funding pressures on the NHS and local government ultimately undermine efforts at reform? Our programme will look to address these questions and more over the coming months.

Under the proposed Right to Buy extension, association tenants living in a non-eligible home will be able to use a portable discount to buy an ‘alternative’ housing association property.

With hundreds of thousands of homes potentially subject to exclusions, there has been concern thatdifficulty designing the portable scheme could delay the implementation of the extended Right to Buy.

The NHF says a HA local policy should set out how the process will work for the tenant and outline a definition of a reasonable offer of an “alternative property”. It should explain at what point the association considers it has discharged its duty under the scheme, with alternative properties are likely to come from new build homes, voids or through partnership agreements to sell other housing associations’ homes.

Inside Housing quoted:

“An association with a large development pipeline may feel it is reasonable to offer the tenant an off-plan brochure of their entire pipeline and allow the tenant to choose,” the document added. “Another with highly limited stock… may only have a single available property within the next year, or not even that. Being clear in your policy on the extent of your ability to meet expectations will be key in managing them.”

Tenants will not be allowed to use portable discounts to buy homes on the open market which are not owned by associations.The briefing confirms that HAs should design a “clear and transparent” local policy on which homes will be excluded, as they have ultimate discretion over the sale of homes.

It suggested Section 106 planning agreements, loan security and stock transfer agreements could provide legal barriers and gave “illustrative examples”, including rural and supported housing, where an association may choose not to sell particular properties.

The document also confirmed associations will not be expected to meet the “one-for-one” pledge individually, as some associations will make up any shortfall by building more than one-for-one.

A pilot scheme with five landlords has been running since February. No firm start date has yet been set for the Right to Buy extension, although the government had hoped to introduce it this autumn.

The  government intending to make £140 million of loan funding available to kick-start the transformation of 100 estates.

CIH published with Poplar HARCA and Sheffield Hallam University has shown that housing-led regeneration is a good investment, and that a mix of public and private finance could help to get more schemes off the ground and to deliver more of the new homes that we badly need.

Here si the report of regeneration case studies:

Sector Showcase Regeneration

Attention now turns to the detail of the government’s plan – and this is absolutely vital. Schemes must be developed in the right way if they are to be successful and in particular if they are to benefit – rather than displace – existing communities. Housing organisations, working at a local level, will have a major role in ensuring this is the case.

CIH research identified three top tips to take forward regeneration in your area:

1. Work with partners to develop a shared vision of the areaSuccessful regeneration always involves partnership working between a number of organisations at a local level. Housing plays a vital role in this, and you may well find that you are particularly well placed to take the lead in working with the local community and in developing and driving forward a vision for the area. However, in many cases investment in other aspects of the local infrastructure, such as transport, is also vital in order to make regeneration viable, so a joined-up approach is essential.The first step is therefore to build relationships and to create forums for organisations to agree – and then collaborate on delivering – a vision for the area. The exact nature of these, the organisations involved and the specific roles of individual partners will vary significantly from area to area, but whatever approach you take needs to deliver effective local leadership to get regeneration activity off the ground.

1. Invest in engaging with the existing local communityWhile attracting new people into the area is often a legitimate objective, it’s vital that regeneration brings benefits for existing residents. Engaging with the local community and enabling them to take some ownership of plans is challenging and can be very labour intensive but it is also a hallmark of successful schemes.Many of the organisations we spoke to devoted considerable resources to making sure that they got this right. Where possible, using the same officers throughout the project, enabling them to develop a thorough knowledge of the local area and to build relationships and earn the trust of the local community over time can help with this – as can offering priority to local people to ensure that they benefit from new homes in their area.

1. Develop a funding package that works for your areaFinancial concerns can also pose a significant obstacle to getting planned regeneration activity off the ground. The nature of the challenge varies significantly depending on the area. In some parts of the country, low land values can make it difficult to generate sufficient returns from things like building new homes for outright and shared ownership to cover their costs. In others, high up-front costs from, for example, buying land and owner-occupied homes can create cash-flow difficulties, even where the scheme will eventually generate a financial return.

There is no single ‘right’ answer to this and our case studies relied on funding from a number of different sources. This included both public and private investment, and with organisations often needing to develop a ‘cocktail’ of funds secured from different places.

Lord David Freud has commissioned an “urgent” review into the high rate of rent arrears owed by Universal Credit claimants.

The welfare reform minister said the number of Universal Credit claimants in debt was higher than he had expected. He described the proportion of claimants already in arrears before they switched over to direct payment of benefit for housing costs under Universal Credit as “frightening”.

Lord Freud revealed that he has “commissioned work from the department to help understand the true level and causes of these arrears”.

“There is a lot of complexity here; it is not straightforward at all. I am looking at it with some urgency,” he said. “We need to understand what the existing arrears are. They are much higher than we expected – 50% – and that is a frightening fact.” The government confirmed over the weekend that Lord Freud will continue in his role as minister for welfare reform.

A report by the National Federation of ALMOs (NFA) and the Association of Retained Council Housing (ARCH) found 79% of 3,000 tenants claiming Universal Credit in England are in rent arrears, compared to 31% of other tenants.