📚 Green Book Review

Westminster Hall

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

In a passionate debate, MPs from various regions criticized the current Green Book framework for unfairly favoring London and the south-east, arguing it perpetuates regional inequalities by prioritizing short-term economic returns over long-term benefits and needs of less affluent areas. They urged for a comprehensive reform to ensure fair investment across the UK, highlighting specific local projects like the Middlewich bypass and the A50/A500 corridor that could transform their communities if properly funded. The Treasury Minister acknowledged the frustrations and confirmed that the ongoing Green Book review aims to address these issues, promising increased investment and a more equitable approach in the upcoming 10-year infrastructure strategy. The debate underscored a collective demand for a system that values the potential and needs of all regions, not just those already thriving.

Summary

  • The session focused on the review of the Green Book, the Treasury’s guidance for appraising public spending projects, and its impact on regional economic disparities.

  • MPs highlighted that the current Green Book framework has historically favored London and the southeast, leading to underinvestment in other regions like the northwest, northeast, and midlands.

  • There was a consensus that the Green Book’s methodology, particularly its reliance on cost-benefit ratios, disadvantages areas with lower wages and fails to account for the transformative effects of investment.

  • Several MPs called for the Green Book review to address the complexity of its current procedures, which often necessitates expensive consultancy, putting smaller local authorities at a disadvantage.

  • The need for a place-based approach to investment was emphasized, arguing that the Green Book must consider the unique needs and potential of different regions rather than using a one-size-fits-all model.

  • Concerns were raised about the lack of investment in transport infrastructure in regions like the northwest, with examples such as the Middlewich bypass and Northern Powerhouse Rail mentioned.

  • MPs urged a shift in investment strategy to support long-term regional development and stressed the importance of empowering local leaders in decision-making.

  • The government announced a commitment to increased public investment and a 10-year infrastructure strategy to be published in June, aimed at supporting growth across the UK.

  • The debate concluded with a call for the Green Book review to lead to real, tangible changes that would rebalance the economy and ensure fair public spending across all regions.

Divisiveness

The session on the Green Book review displays a very low level of disagreement among the participants. The primary focus of the debate is on the need for reform and the shared frustration with the current state of regional investment and the application of the Green Book. All speakers, predominantly from the Labour Party, express a unified call for change, emphasizing the need to address regional inequalities and improve the framework for public investment decisions. There are no significant points of contention or opposing views presented throughout the session.

Examples of the lack of disagreement include: - Mrs Sarah Russell (Congleton) (Lab) and Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP) both agree on the necessity for the Green Book review to consider each area of the UK equally, not just focusing on London and the south-east. - Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab) and Sarah Hall (Warrington South) (Lab/Co-op) both criticize the current Green Book for favoring London and call for a methodology that accounts for dynamic effects and regional potential. - Emma Foody (Cramlington and Killingworth) (Lab/Co-op) and Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab) both highlight the need for fair investment in the north and criticize past government failures, without any disagreement on the approach needed. - Jo Platt (Leigh and Atherton) (Lab/Co-op) and Kirith Entwistle (Bolton North East) (Lab) both emphasize the need for a strategic, place-based approach to investment, with no conflicting views. - Connor Naismith (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab) and Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab) both advocate for addressing place-based inequality and improving investment in their regions, showing a consensus on the issue. - Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD) from the Liberal Democrats also supports the need for reform, aligning with the Labour MPs’ views. - Richard Fuller (North Bedfordshire) (Con) from the Conservative Party, while providing some counterpoints on the effectiveness of past reviews and regional investment statistics, does not fundamentally disagree with the need for a review and reform, but rather emphasizes the complexity and ongoing efforts. - The Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury (Torsten Bell) acknowledges the concerns raised and reaffirms the government’s commitment to the review, indicating a willingness to address the issues raised by the speakers.

Overall, the session is characterized by a strong consensus on the need for reform and a shared vision for addressing regional inequalities, resulting in a very low level of disagreement.