Some would have us believe Manchester has been Labours bitch(not my quote) over the last decade. Receiving gift after gift, handout after handout. Then came the 'it will all come to end once the Conservative's win the next general election and come to power' statements.

Well. If this report has anything to go by, that statement ^^ may be a little premature. Perhaps the leaders of Manchester and Gtr Manchester are far closer to the Conservatives than some would have us believe, think or want.

Me, I have always believed and stated that the leaders of Manchester City Council and AGMA will and can work with any political party. Let's look at the wider issue. (And yes I have noted the last paragarph of the Crains report and Katie Allsopp in the PRW report) There's no smoke without fire, as they say)

Crains.

Sir Howard Bernstein ‘lined up for peerage by Tories'

Sir Howard Bernstein, chief executive of Manchester City Council, is being lined up for a life peerage by the Conservative Party, according to a report in trade publication PR Week.

The report said senior lobbyists within the party were aware of “advanced discussions” regarding a list of 20 potential life peers.

A public affairs agency, Mandate Communications, claims it obtained the information through discussions with Tory MPs and advisers at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester last week.

PR Week said Mandate's list included former Tory Prime Minister Sir John Major, Marks & Spencer chairman Stuart Rose and TV presenter Kirstie Allsopp.

Mandate's public affairs managing director Fiona Mason told PR Week: “David Cameron is keen to bring to the fore a range of policy and technical experts who have stronger knowledge of the wider world than many of his MPs. Some of the new Tory peers are poised to take on ministerial posts; others will be even more influential, sitting at the back of the red benches.

Manchester CIty Council declined to comment although a source close to Sir Howard said the story had caused "much amusement" within the Town Hall.

PR Week.

Lobbyists obtain details of secret Conservative Party peerage scheme

Senior lobbyists told PRWeek they were aware of 'advanced discussions' regarding the elevation of the 20 individuals. Some of them are tipped for ministerial roles.

One leading public affairs agency, Mandate Communications, said it had obtained the information through discussions with Tory MPs and advisers at the Conservative Party conference last week.

Mandate is now looking to strengthen its relationships with the 20 potential peers, many of whom could be set for ministerial posts in a Conservative government.

A detailed list of names provided to Mandate has been obtained by PRWeek and is published in full below. Other names in the frame include government efficiency expert Sir Peter Gershon and environmental campaigner Jonathan Porrit.

Mandate's public affairs managing director Fiona Mason told PRWeek: 'Through a number of discussions with senior Conservatives, Mandate has a clear view of the Conservative leadership's plans to create a large number of new peers at the start of a new Tory government.'

She added: 'The Conservatives are planning to use Lords' appointments to sprinkle some star dust on their front bench. David Cameron is keen to bring to the fore a range of policy and technical experts who have stronger knowledge of the wider world than many of his MPs... Some of the new Tory peers are poised to take on ministerial posts; others will be even more influential, sitting at the back of the red benches.

'My advice to anyone in public affairs is to think about your relationship with these new figures. With the possibility of a hung Parliament still strong, the influence and role of the House of Lords after the election will be more significant than ever.'

Mandate is headed by CEO Sacha Deshmukh. Its team of consultants includes Bill Morgan, former special adviser to shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley.

The full list of names provided to Mandate:

1. Sir Peter Gershon - Government efficiency expert. Being considered for a Ministerial role making some of the toughest spending-cuts decisions facing an incoming Conservative administration.

2. Stuart Rose - Marks & Spencer Chairman whom the Tories plan to recognise for both his business acumen and his profile amongst the corporate responsibility community thanks to Marks & Spencer's "Plan A".

3. Jonathan Porritt - Friend of the Prince of Wales and environmental campaigner. Being considered for post Copenhagen summit roving "Green Envoy" role.

4. Michael Spencer - Critical lynchpin of Conservative election planning, leading party "ambassador" to the City and responsible for restoring Conservative financial health in his role as Party Treasurer. Cameron wants to keep those relationships friendly in the first few tough years of a new Government.

5. DeAnne Julius - Chair of Chatham House and former member of the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee, will add significant gravitas - and gender balance - to the Conservatives in the House of Lords.

6. Angela Knight - Former Conservative MP and current head of the British Bankers' Association. Her appointment will send a signal to the banking sector that the Conservatives plan to work with banks to encourage recovery and seek to avoid demonising them. But it also shows that the Conservatives want a banking "insider" to help sell their vision for the new regulatory regime.

7. Ann Widdecombe - A reward for years of service in the Commons and also a symbol to the right wing of the Conservative Party that David Cameron has not forgotten that they helped his rise to the leadership.

8. Sir Howard Bernstein - Chief Executive of Manchester City Council, host to this year's Conservative Party Conference.

9. Sir Richard Dannatt - Former Chief of the Defence Staff. Respected for his independence; David Cameron hopes to rebuild bridges between government and the military brass that have strained under Labour.

10. Sir John Tusa - Not a natural Tory, but as the leader of the Conservative Taskforce on the Arts in 2007, Tusa is an ambassador between the Conservative Party and the naturally left-leaning arts establishment.

11. Bill Emmott - Former editor of the Economist and commentator on the growth of Chinese economic and political power. Being considered to advise the Conservative frontbench foreign policy team.

12. Sir Alan Haselhurst - Recognition that there is a continued role for this respected Conservative Parliamentarian who had, until just a few months ago, been considered the favourite to become Speaker of the House of Commons.

13. Sir John Major - Previously refused a peerage when offered. Now being convinced to take the position to give "elder statesman" support to a young new Prime Minister.

14. Harpal Kumar - Whilst the Cancer Research UK CEO will be at pains to retain his independence, the Conservatives are keen to make a strong gesture to the campaigning community by elevating this leading charity sector figure.

15. Jill Kirby - Director of the Centre for Policy Studies and responsible for advancing Conservative thinking across a range of policy areas.

16. Robin Wight - Advertising industry legend (and President of Mandate's parent communications group, Engine). A former Conservative Parliamentary candidate. Mooted as a link to the creative industries and symbol that the new Conservative Party is not afraid to include a man whose wardrobe includes purple and pink Oswald Boateng suits.

17. Sir Simon Milton - Central figure of the new Conservative local government establishment.

18. David Ross - co-founder of the Carphone Warehouse and another senior business figure who has been close to the Conservative leadership.

19. Tim Berners-Lee - The man behind the World Wide Web contributed to Labour's Digital Britain, but the Conservatives want his credibility behind their policies to implement the next stage in the country's digital development.

20. Kirsty Allsopp - Presenter of Location, Location, Location, famed for her pashminas, Allsopp has already been advising the Conservatives on housing matters. The daughter of a Peer, the Lords should hold no fear for the famous property developer, and her elevation would add a populist touch to proceedings.

The Tories will not be focusing their attention on northern urban areas.

But then again, the current lot have not exactly looked further than the M25 so who knows.

We were never favoured by Labour, so a change of government is not going to affect us any more than any other northern city.

We were never favoured by Labour, so a change of government is not going to affect us any more than any other northern city.

what about the ignoring of the cost benefits for a HSR east coast mainline being higher than for WCML, followed by proposing a second HSR line for WCML. for the second line, they even have it traveling accross the country so it can hook up edinburgh to make it viable.

A "Whitehall of the north" is probably dead in the water. It doesn't sit well with "small government"

The TDA which is about to or has already moved to Manchester will probably be abolished too.

Just in case anyone wants to attend, free event @ COMS next week:
Free ticket to next week's Northern Regeneration Exhibition
http://www.regen.net/news/ByDiscipline/Economic-Development/945919/Free-ticket-next-weeks-Northern-Regeneration-Exhibition/
Regen.net, 15 October 2009
...
To obtain your free pass to the forum, exhibition and sponsored workshops, visit: www.northern.regen.net
...
Session 4 (15:45-16:30) - How the Conservatives would approach northern regeneration and economic development
- How the Conservative party envisages regeneration and economic development would progress in the event of a change of government
- The implications for investors and developers

Speaker: Stewart Jackson MP, shadow minister for communities and local government
...

Well there are a fair few Greater Manchester MPs in the government (and around the Cabinet table) at present. That will no longer be the case come May 2010.

I'd say the biggest threats are...

Greater Manchester's political cohesion (Tories don't like metropolitan counties and have already said they want a Mayor for the City of Manchester, but not for Greater Manchester).
The 'Manchester rail hub' idea which won't get the funding.
Any future Metrolink expansions beyond Phase 3b.
The new Northern base for the Royal Opera House (won't get the funding).
The Whitehall of the North (no chance of that).
Job losses at the BBC, which may affect Media City.
...and I can't see any new HS Rail link being approved under the next Tory government, and even if it was, I doubt it would go any further than Birmingham.

comdot - the Tories are planning on coming to Manchester after Brum - just like Labour.

Does where they go north of us really matter (to us)?

You confuse CBR with reason to build, the main reason for HSR2 is not great CBR but rather capacity relief on over full tracks.

Well there are a fair few Greater Manchester MPs in the government (and around the Cabinet table) at present. That will no longer be the case come May 2010.

I'd say the biggest threats are...

Greater Manchester's political cohesion (Tories don't like metropolitan counties and have already said they want a Mayor for the City of Manchester, but not for Greater Manchester).
The 'Manchester rail hub' idea which won't get the funding.
Any future Metrolink expansions beyond Phase 3b.
The new Northern base for the Royal Opera House (won't get the funding).
The Whitehall of the North (no chance of that).
Job losses at the BBC, which may affect Media City.
...and I can't see any new HS Rail link being approved under the next Tory government, and even if it was, I doubt it would go any further than Birmingham.

Pretty much agree with all of that - BBC will rightfully get a good kicking and licence fee will either be severely restricted or scrapped to enable competition from the private media sector...namely News International given the Sun's new found loyalty to the Conservatives. Ofcom will be scrapped and i'm not sure the Tories will be quite as supportive of a large section of the BBC being located in a staunch labour heartland, so Media City is likely to feel the pinch.

Good thing the BBC has an independant board of governors then. Cant do anything about the license fee but they should be able to resist politico decisions like that.

I think given the huge investment in Manchester by the BBC, if they are going to start cutting back on costs, even if it is only to save face those cuts will not be at such an enormously high profile location as Media:City.

In fact, it could be possible that any Tory restrictions on the license fee - which I actually doubt given what their Media spokesman has said about funding of the Beeb - may in a perverse way help out Manchester as now the buildings are there, the up front costs have been spent, it will almost certainly be cheaper for them to move staff out of the London offices (which they want to sell as it is) up to Media:City which will have massive capacity.

Anyone having a perverse desire to see the BBC suffer which will in turn lead to Manchester suffering is going to be very sadly let down by the Tory government as their perverse desires will not be met, in fact, it is quite likely as time goes on the BBC presence in Media:City will grow no matter which political party is running Whitehall.

Well there are a fair few Greater Manchester MPs in the government (and around the Cabinet table) at present. That will no longer be the case come May 2010.

The election will be on June 3rd 2010

I'd say the biggest threats are...

Greater Manchester's political cohesion (Tories don't like metropolitan counties and have already said they want a Mayor for the City of Manchester, but not for Greater Manchester).

The Tories have said they want a referendum on the matter, they have specifically not rules out a Greater Manchester wide referendum. By June next year we will have as many Tory councils as Labour Councils in Greater Manchester, chances are a Greater Manchester mayor, if elected in the next 2 years or so would be a Tory. People like Susan Williams (ex-Trafford Tory leader, soon to be Bolton West MP) is / has been working on Tory policy in this area, she is very in favour of Greater Manchester wide powers, not powers at localauthority level when it does not make sense. The Tories will almost certainly devolve powers locally to councils, but given we have a very strong AGMA, with legally binding powers they will simply pool those powers at AGMA level.

Really nothing to be concerned about there.


The 'Manchester rail hub' idea which won't get the funding.

It won't under Labour either. However, and it is a very big however. The Labour party are ONLY committing to HSR to Brum, the Tories are committing to Manchester, much to Rob's dislike a Tory government are actually promising stuff to Manchester that the Labour party are not. Now, have a read of all the stuff coming out from GMPTE and even a little from the DfT, the PTE are heavily linking hub to HSR. Given 'hub' plans are not really known, if / when HSR gets to Manchester, as the Tories are planning, the objectives of hub will almost surely be met - after all, that is the aim of HSR on the whole - relieve track capacity.


Any future Metrolink expansions beyond Phase 3b.

Greater Manchester Transport Fund is done and dusted. Not a chance the Tories would bin this. Of all your predictions this is by far the least likely to happen. As the money is raised locally, and nothing comes from Whitehall the Tories will love this plan. As I said above, they will want to devolve powers locally to councils. On the whole this is because some tricky, unpopular decisions need to be made, they would rather a council made them than th Tories in London. They will be able to point to Greater Manchester as a model for delivering infrastructure projects with limited funding from Whitehall when other cities come begging for cash.


The new Northern base for the Royal Opera House (won't get the funding).

Maybe, but have Labour committed to funding this? Which pot was the money to come from anyway? If non governmental, e.g. lottery, the colour of the government will not make the slightest difference.


The Whitehall of the North (no chance of that).

No chance of it with Labour, the plans are already scrapped and only involved moving departments already in Manchester to a campus location. Was a bonkers idea anyway and saw no new extra jobs coming. Funding was local so the Tories being in power will make no difference.


Job losses at the BBC, which may affect Media City.
As I said above no chance. The license fee is settled for the next 5 years as it is and Media:City is so high profile they are not going to abandon it, in fact, the exact opposite could be true, it will be a cheaper base than London.


...and I can't see any new HS Rail link being approved under the next Tory government, and even if it was, I doubt it would go any further than Birmingham.

and the Labour policy is?
At least the Tories are committing to coming to Manchester. Anyway, no one is saying anything will start in the next parliament are they? The work on the ground is nearly 10 years away and as studies have shown, HSR only to Brum simply does not work, it would require huge subsidy since too few passengers would transfer for minial time savings, if HSR is to be built it would need to progress passed Brum to be viable, the Tories have made it VERY clear the next stop on the line under their plans will be Manchester.


I may sound like I am bigging up the Tories here, I ain't. I just think you have picked on some 'high profile' schemes that people on this forum love to focus on, in my view you are well off beam to be so pessimistic.

In my view, the Tories big danger is the damage they will do to very poor areas with high unemployment (rob may want to look a lot closer to home for the highest unemployment in the country). In my view it will be the cutting of dozens of schemes like 'Sure Start' that will do most long term damage to the Northern cities. However, since 'Sure Start' is not sexy it gets very little discussion on here.

As has been said before, the Tories are not bad at delivering infrastructure projects, they are just absolutley terrible at looking after the less advantaged in society, those that tend to live in the inner city areas of northern cities.

out of interest, I wonder in 5 years when Manchester is continuing to steam ahead of the other non-London English cities with regards inward investment and economical growth, what the likes of rob and our scouse cousins are going to blame?

We are in a very well position at the moment. Recession ending and we have lots of spare capacity in areas that businesses want immediately available, and areas that we are lagging (transport) we are the ONLY non-London city to be doing anything about it.

Whether it is the grade A office space in the city, the vast airport or the ever expanding Metrolink, the prospects for Manchester coming out of the recession stronger than other English cities are very strong.

In case anyyone thinks I have taken a Tory giddy pill, I haven't.

I see very real threats to the prosperity of urban England from the Tories.

Just as Labour have failed miserably to fix the divided society I fear that this divide could grow, massively, which could lead to those with plenty of cash, and plenty of chose where to spend that cash, will venture out into our cities less and less, fearing anti-social behaviour. Instead those with the choice will spend their cash in sterile environments like out of town developments where the 'riff raff' are not allowed into.

oh yes.
and the public sector grew less in Greater Manchester than any other core city in the last decade or so, significantly less than some others.

When the Tories cut that back we are much less exposed.

We were never favoured by Labour, so a change of government is not going to affect us any more than any other northern city.

So why have the tories been spouting about CHANGE at every opportunity? If nothing's going to change then what's the point? Why should people bother to vote for them? Manchester hasn't done too badly under Labour all things considered and I'm old enough to remember the last tory government and what they did the 'the north'. I hope to god they don't win the election next year.

Because people on here are focusing on the high profile infrastructure projects.

In reality what makes a city tick is not Media:City, it is not the ROH moving to Manchester it is education, it is crime, it is unemployment, it is social divides.

What we talk about on these forums are in reality irrelevent to the vast majority of the Manchester population.

My biggest concern with the Tories is that the social divide will grow wider an wider. The part of society that does not join in, does not have a job, does not obey the law, does not value education etc has been growing in recent years - Labour has failed this part of society.

If the Tories make it a lot worse - which I fear may well happen, no matter what trams, opera houses, BBC relocations occur the city will go right down hill.

So yes, I do fear the Tories and what they will do to the country north of Watford, however, no for the reasons provided above. I do not fear the infrastructure projects will be binned, rather the poor in society will be even more left behind.

and no, I am not saying that Labour have done a good job in looking after that part of society either.

Because people on here are focusing on the high profile infrastructure projects.

In reality what makes a city tick is not Media:City, it is not the ROH moving to Manchester it is education, it is crime, it is unemployment, it is social divides.

What we talk about on these forums are in reality irrelevent to the vast majority of the Manchester population.

My biggest concern with the Tories is that the social divide will grow wider an wider. The part of society that does not join in, does not have a job, does not obey the law, does not value education etc has been growing in recent years - Labour has failed this part of society.

If the Tories make it a lot worse - which I fear may well happen, no matter what trams, opera houses, BBC relocations occur the city will go right down hill.

So yes, I do fear the Tories and what they will do to the country north of Watford, however, no for the reasons provided above. I do not fear the infrastructure projects will be binned, rather the poor in society will be even more left behind.

and no, I am not saying that Labour have done a good job in looking after that part of society either.

Everything you say applies to the poor south of Watford as well. No amount of infrastructure will get someone who is institutionally poor off their backs.

Labour have quietly pushed them to one side whilst relying on immigrants to fuel the low wage economy.

The Tories have little room to move here, they haven't advocated any move away from the low wage, flexible labour market and in our consumer driven economy, it is this sector that buys the crap they sell in the shops they work in.

http://www.centreforcities.org/index.php?id=902 is what I see as the Tory threat, not the cancellation of ROH etc.

Kurt's right. Those golden elephants never turned up.

Everything you say applies to the poor south of Watford as well. No amount of infrastructure will get someone who is institutionally poor off their backs.

Labour have quietly pushed them to one side whilst relying on immigrants to fuel the low wage economy.

The Tories have little room to move here, they haven't advocated any move away from the low wage, flexible labour market and in our consumer driven economy, it is this sector that buys the crap they sell in the shops they work in.

Indeed, Labour have very much failed the poor. The risk in my view is that the Tories may actually make that worse.

The reason I draw the line at Watford is because there is an imaginary line somewhere that the rich of London will no live north of. The wealthy will have little to worry themselves about with a Tory government, the rich tend to be in the south east.

There will be plenty in the SE that are poor that could also suffer from a Tory government, but more will benefit from a Tory government down here.

Moving public sector jobs out of London and selling off the office space could in theory make billions, but at the moment there is no market for this land so it would indeed appear that the public sector outside London will be hardest hit.

I wouldn't class public sector workers as poor though, although they will be when they lose their jobs.

The problem is we cannot subsidise the private sector too much as it breaks EU rules and the only way we seem to be able to compete is on wages and conditions.

There is no easy answer here. The Tories as yet have no policies other than to cut public debt. The real problem in this country is personal debt.

Recovery requires a lowering of personal debt. Low wages or no wages are not going to contribute to this.

In fact the plan from all parties seems to be to get the banks out of debt so they can keep their customers in debt.

Madness

The Centre for Cities study that I linked in this thread earlier has a good write up on relocations and those possibilities and each cities dependence on the public sector.

Does not meet up with what many from other cities have claimed.

Too much attention on the high profile projects on here, very little notice is taken of the less sexy parts of the economy.

Because people on here are focusing on the high profile infrastructure projects.

In reality what makes a city tick is not Media:City, it is not the ROH moving to Manchester it is education, it is crime, it is unemployment, it is social divides.

What we talk about on these forums are in reality irrelevent to the vast majority of the Manchester population.

My biggest concern with the Tories is that the social divide will grow wider an wider. The part of society that does not join in, does not have a job, does not obey the law, does not value education etc has been growing in recent years - Labour has failed this part of society.

If the Tories make it a lot worse - which I fear may well happen, no matter what trams, opera houses, BBC relocations occur the city will go right down hill.

So yes, I do fear the Tories and what they will do to the country north of Watford, however, no for the reasons provided above. I do not fear the infrastructure projects will be binned, rather the poor in society will be even more left behind.

and no, I am not saying that Labour have done a good job in looking after that part of society either.

Well I agree with you there, I can't see any major changes in policy as far as infrastructure is concerned, most of the projects underway are signed and sealed, but I also don't or can't see anything new being announced under the tories. I do agree that the poor will become poorer under them though, that's a given. Labour haven't or couldn't do everything they wanted to do for the poorer classes but lets not forget the minimum wage has been a god send to many, and the tories voted against that at every ballot. That's just one example of the difference in ethics between the two if you ask me.

The election will be on June 3rd 2010

Well I think that's unlikely Metro. The 3rd June is the latest the general election can be held, but it's not likely to be then. The local elections are scheduled for the 6th May and it's probable that a general election will be tied to that date. There have been reports in the media that Brown is preparing for that date too.

The Tories have said they want a referendum on the matter, they have specifically not rules out a Greater Manchester wide referendum.

Well I'm afraid they have! In this MEN article (http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/special_reports/conservative_conference/s/1157899_mayoral_referendum_could_see_bernstein_booted_out), referring to Caroline Spelman (Tory Local Govt spokeswoman) it says "But she ruled out the idea of a Greater Manchester mayor - telling the M.E.N. she wasn't 'about to redraw the lines of local government'."

By June next year we will have as many Tory councils as Labour Councils in Greater Manchester, chances are a Greater Manchester mayor, if elected in the next 2 years or so would be a Tory.

There's no chance that Greater Manchester would elect a Tory Mayor whilst the Tories are in government. I doubt they'll even manage to hold on to London in 2012.

The Labour party are ONLY committing to HSR to Brum, the Tories are committing to Manchester

Under either party, I can't see any progress being made on HSR in the next parliament. There just isn't the money. But given the Conservatives 'enjoy' cutting transport spending more than Labour (see Boris Johnson), we can assume that there's even less of a chance of it happening under a Tory government.

However, Labour's plans haven't been fully drawn yet but it's widely expected that they'll opt for London-Birmingham-Manchester-Glasgow where as the Tories will go for London-Birmingham-Manchester-Leeds.

Greater Manchester Transport Fund is done and dusted. Not a chance the Tories would bin this.

But I said that there'll be no Metrolink extensions beyond Phase 3b, I didn't say Phase 3b itself would be cancelled (although I wouldn't bet the house on that going ahead in full either. There are still a few hurdles to go).

Again as before, Tories enjoy cutting public transport spending more than Labour, so expect very little more once Phase 3 is out of the way.

I may sound like I am bigging up the Tories here, I ain't. I just think you have picked on some 'high profile' schemes that people on this forum love to focus on, in my view you are well off beam to be so pessimistic.

And I think you're being far too optimistic!

There's big spending cuts ahead, and nobody will relish that more than a Conservative government. Urban areas like Manchester will always suffer more because of that.

Greater Manchester will have nowhere near the amount of influence in a Tory government than it does in the current Labour government. Primarily this is because even after the election, the Tories will only have less than a handful of seats in Gtr. Manchester.

5Live and BBC Breakfast Nes are carrying a story today about how the education divide is getting bigger.

Those in prosperous areas are getting more and more qualifications, those in poor areas fewer and fewer qualifications.

Forget Media:City, Metrolink etc etc. Unless we improve, dramatically, our educational achivements in Greater Manchester we will never fully achieve our potential - if the Tories fix this then they will have helped the region - if it gets worse then they will make it much worse.

http://blogs.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/politics/2009/10/post_839.html