Is the government's Rural Productivity Plan focusing on the right issues? Jessica Sellick investigates.

The government says its Rural Productivity Plan reaffirms its commitment to rural communities. But is it focusing on the right issues? And will it be supporting all rural communities? Jessica Sellick investigates.

Back in September 2012 and under the strap line ‘new contract to give rural communities power to hold Government to account on rural growth’, the Rural Statement 2012 was launched by then Environment Secretary Owen Paterson. This eagerly awaited document was intended to reaffirm a then Coalition Government commitment to rural England. Positioned as the ‘Government’s Rural Statement’ not ‘Defra’s Rural Statement’, it described existing projects and policy commitments (with some new initiatives too). However, the ‘rural contract’ in it was never binding; it was unclear where responsibility would lay for its implementation and evidence submitted to the EFRA Select Committee revealed there was no intention to update it.

During summer recess 2015 two documents have been published which again seek to reaffirm the Government’s commitment to rural communities: (1) the Rural Productivity Plan and (2) ‘what will rural communities look like in the future’ roundtable paper.

On 20 August, the Rural Productivity Plan was launched. This sets out government action for strengthening productivity in England’s rural areas. Described by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs as “focusing on ten specific areas we believe could make a real difference to productivity. It is wide-ranging and will require efforts across government, as well as close working with others outside of government, to deliver. It is central to our offer and ambition for England’s rural areas. We will monitor progress closely”. The ten points cover broadband, mobile communications, transport, education and training, apprenticeships, enterprise zones, planning, housing, availability of childcare and devolution.

In a previous analysis examining how a productivity plan might invest in all rural places, I signalled the need to take a broader economic development agenda: one that helps people to find a job where they live (retaining rather than losing young people, provides local opportunities to undertake training and skills development); improves access to services (health, adult social care, transport, leisure and entertainment) and leads to 100% mobile and broadband connectivity. While the ten points touch upon these issues, in many instances the Plan re-presents existing announcements and initiatives – schools becoming academies, neighbourhood plans etc. While the Plan recognises the role rural areas play in the national economy, and how rural and urban England have a similar sectoral structure, it does not explore the impact of place on the operation of rural businesses. Indeed, some of the ten points hinge on decisions to be taken in the Spending Review (due in November).

The Plan has certainly opened up dialogue and debate among rural dwellers and organisations. On housing, there is uncertainty if the Plan will help provide homes for all who need them in rural places. How many landowners, for example, will actually sell their land to provide affordable rented housing at £10,000 a plot when they can achieve much higher values at 80% of open market value? How many young rural residents will be able to buy a home at 80% of open market value?

The RSN is calling upon the Government to consider the wider implications of its housing proposals. Starter Homes, for example, could be built on rural 'exception sites' - sites which are usually used to provide social housing rather than houses that can be sold on the open market. Given local government’s role as local housing, planning, social care and public health authorities, is the Productivity Plan – and the spending cuts yet to come – are we limiting the ability of Local Authorities to provide social housing?

On transport, the Plan sets out a £15 billion Road Investment Strategy which includes four schemes that will better connect rural areas: the A303 expressway in the South West, upgrading of the A1, dualling sections of the A453 near Nottingham and improving traffic flow on the A11 in the East. The Department of Transport will be publishing a list of fifteen proposals for newly supported passenger air routes as part of its Regional Air Connectivity Fund (citing improvements already made to the Newquay-London route). Small airports/regional air routes aside, will the Plan help address concerns voiced by RSN members around reductions in bus services, households running a car (sometimes 2 cars) out of necessity not choice (and the associated fuel costs) and the future of initiatives such as Wheels To Work? With improvements to public transport viewed as an ‘absolute’ priority by many RSN members, does the Plan help identify transport solutions for rural communities (including buses, community transport) and make decisions about whether we should take people to services, services to people, or both?

On mobile connections, will superfast broadband of at least 24Mbps be delivered to 95% of UK households and businesses by 2017? And will access to what the Plan calls “standard broadband” (i.e., at least 2Mbps) be available to everyone by the end of 2015 through the option of satellite broadband? The Plan also states the Government will work closely with industry to support further improvement to mobile coverage, and extend permitted development rights to taller mobile masts. Given previous Governments have failed to meet broadband targets and much of the work of the Mobile Infrastructure Project (MIP) is archived, will the Plan “fully connect” rural areas to the wider economy? It would have been good to highlight examples where communities have successfully taken action themselves and delivered broadband in their area, with the Plan then setting out what Government will do (finance, technical skills and resources) to help other communities take action.

The second document to emerge from Government during recess is ‘what will rural communities look like in the future?’ This paper was prepared following a Cabinet Office roundtable which took place under Chatham House rules. Defra has therefore been unable to provide the names/organisations of those “leading industry, academic, voluntary sector, permanent secretaries and chief scientific advisors” in attendance. The ‘visions for rural communities’ put forward by attendees include: how rural areas are simply the commuter belt for cities; that rural areas should focus on environmental sustainability and/or that rural areas ought to be competitive and diverse economies. RSN members have individually contacted Defra querying the research from which this short paper and visions were drawn with one practitioner-researcher describing it as having “one saving grace: that it is not a statement of Government policy”.

In terms of where next for Government rural policy, Defra has appointed a global financial advisory firm to look at where/how they can make 25-40% cuts called for by the Treasury. This work will include proposals to consolidate several executive non-departmental public bodies sponsored by Defra into the Department itself. At its most extreme this could be a wider reaching consolidation than that in Wales where a single and separate body to manage natural resources was established to replace the Countryside Council for Wales, Environment Agency Wales and Forestry Commission for Wales. Defra is also currently working on the Government's response to Lord Cameron's review on rural proofing, which they are aiming to publish in September 2015.

What do the Plan, Roundtable, 25-40% cuts and rural proofing response mean for rural communities?

Firstly, I wonder if the OECD Rural Policy Review of England and associated New Rural Paradigm (NRP) are more relevant than ever. The Review was carried out by Professor David Freshwater (University of Kentucky) back in 2011. He found England had a highly centralised government structure and had adopted ‘evidence based policy making’ where quantitative data was favoured but not readily available at a local level for rural communities to use. Freshwater identified policy implementation issues around defining the role of Defra, unpacking the relationship between mainstreaming and rural proofing, and persuading other Government departments to “follow through” on their responsibilities. In 2011 the OECD Review suggested Defra had too few staff and too limited a budget to monitor agencies and influence decision making. The Review contained five main recommendations: (1) introduce a distinct rural component to the Regional Cities strategy, (2) enhance mainstreaming to ensure better service delivery, (3) strengthen the rural economy by joining up housing, planning and economic strategies, (4) expand rural connectivity by strengthening networks, and (5) continue efforts to strengthen governance networks. How can the Rural Productivity Plan and Cabinet Office horizon scanning take up these recommendations?

Secondly, all of these documents in some way speak to transparency. If the Government want the public to assess the effects of policies and reforms, how can we ensure communities and their views inform their development? For the measurable points in the Rural Productivity Plan, how will implementation be monitored, when and by whom?

Thirdly, Government priorities mean that Defra is not alone in relooking at where/how it spends its money. Asked for savings of 25-40% will undoubtedly present challenges for rural people and places: will future cuts lead to rurally considered policies and championing or centralised policies imposed from Whitehall?

Above all, I wonder if there is enough “thinking rurally” among policy and decision makers. If we want the countryside to be somewhere people can live and work is a positive ‘new’ agenda for change emerging or are we failing to address the opportunities, barriers and priorities that rural communities face? Reading the OECD Review back in 2011 left me with a sense that England was lacking a long term coherent rural strategy, four years on perhaps it is time to address this and make rural voices heard.

Jessica is a researcher/project manager at Rose Regeneration; an economic development business working with communities, Government and business to help them achieve their full potential. She is currently preparing an economic baseline for a Local Authority; supporting the Big Lottery Fund to deliver Village SOS; involved in projects to help older people remain independent and in their homes for as long as possible; and completing a European project on ‘social value’. Jessica’s public services work includes research for Defra on alternative service delivery and local level rural proofing. She can be contacted by email jessica.sellick@roseregeneration.co.uk or telephone 01522 521211. Website: http://www.roseregeneration.co.uk/ Twitter: @RoseRegen