Jennifer Williams
@jenwilliamsft.bsky.social
Northern correspondent, Financial Times
📍Manchester
📍Manchester
It was a niche interest among both govts wasn’t it, arguably stronger under thatcher, but did it ever become urgent? Osborne concluded it was important but even then I’m not sure it was classed urgent
November 23, 2025 at 2:00 AM
It was a niche interest among both govts wasn’t it, arguably stronger under thatcher, but did it ever become urgent? Osborne concluded it was important but even then I’m not sure it was classed urgent
ie, k don’t strongly remember it in the 90s but I also don’t think it started with Brexit
November 23, 2025 at 1:47 AM
ie, k don’t strongly remember it in the 90s but I also don’t think it started with Brexit
Politically, though, from this end of the country, it is a question that’s asked all the time. It wasn’t when I was growing up, and it’s not something that can be put down to any (?) increase salience of London vs everywhere in recent years, because it was there already
November 23, 2025 at 1:45 AM
Politically, though, from this end of the country, it is a question that’s asked all the time. It wasn’t when I was growing up, and it’s not something that can be put down to any (?) increase salience of London vs everywhere in recent years, because it was there already
As in, look at this nice thing London has, why can’t we have it
November 23, 2025 at 1:39 AM
As in, look at this nice thing London has, why can’t we have it
That’s not, incidentally, me saying I’m ok with that. Governments have the ability to change those odds if they can be bothered and they had a role in changing Manchester’s.
November 23, 2025 at 1:37 AM
That’s not, incidentally, me saying I’m ok with that. Governments have the ability to change those odds if they can be bothered and they had a role in changing Manchester’s.
Has anyone here argued (Burnham?) that it’s what London *wants*? The sensible argument is surely that it has happened by economic, and by extension political, default. To back not-the-south-east has been long odds, and so you end up where we are.
November 23, 2025 at 1:35 AM
Has anyone here argued (Burnham?) that it’s what London *wants*? The sensible argument is surely that it has happened by economic, and by extension political, default. To back not-the-south-east has been long odds, and so you end up where we are.
A footnote: Burnham has always seemed, to me, uneasy with the politics of the skyline in particular. Sometimes celebratory, sometimes critical, depending on the audience. And there *is* a tension between the politics and the economics: always has been. This narrative is intended to square that.
November 22, 2025 at 9:28 AM
A footnote: Burnham has always seemed, to me, uneasy with the politics of the skyline in particular. Sometimes celebratory, sometimes critical, depending on the audience. And there *is* a tension between the politics and the economics: always has been. This narrative is intended to square that.
Yep the core of GM is moving very fast indeed
November 22, 2025 at 9:21 AM
Yep the core of GM is moving very fast indeed
Short term, will be interesting to see whether people in those towns notice what’s been proposed, given the number of levelling up cap ex projects promised over the years. Also, whether people will approve of £44m being put into the refurb of Kendals
November 22, 2025 at 9:19 AM
Short term, will be interesting to see whether people in those towns notice what’s been proposed, given the number of levelling up cap ex projects promised over the years. Also, whether people will approve of £44m being put into the refurb of Kendals
There is a second political strategy imho. GM is not as robust as it looks. One or two Reform led councils could completely disrupt the entire show, which is predicated on everyone largely moving as one. This is partly intended to futureproof a collective investment strategy and its principle
November 22, 2025 at 9:18 AM
There is a second political strategy imho. GM is not as robust as it looks. One or two Reform led councils could completely disrupt the entire show, which is predicated on everyone largely moving as one. This is partly intended to futureproof a collective investment strategy and its principle
Yes but they’re not in GM. This is the politics of GM
November 22, 2025 at 9:16 AM
Yes but they’re not in GM. This is the politics of GM
But it will at least give Labour cllrs in outlying areas something to brandish at the locals: look, we ARE getting something from the GM project
November 22, 2025 at 9:16 AM
But it will at least give Labour cllrs in outlying areas something to brandish at the locals: look, we ARE getting something from the GM project
The new/reframed investment fund is an attempt to square that circle, although the economics still shine through: the most detailed and immediate of its schemes are still - inevitably from an investment point of view - where the returns are higher: the city centre, and its vicinity
November 22, 2025 at 9:15 AM
The new/reframed investment fund is an attempt to square that circle, although the economics still shine through: the most detailed and immediate of its schemes are still - inevitably from an investment point of view - where the returns are higher: the city centre, and its vicinity
But agglomeration economics has not kept pace with post Brexit politics. Labour are now looking over their shoulders at Reform in towns where the city centre growth message is a harder sell
November 22, 2025 at 9:13 AM
But agglomeration economics has not kept pace with post Brexit politics. Labour are now looking over their shoulders at Reform in towns where the city centre growth message is a harder sell
When the GM “project” was really coming into public view 10 years ago, the politics could just about withstand the idea that you start with the city centre, economically, and that rising tide will lift all boats. In some cases that process has indeed begun: eg the agglomeration effects in Stockport
November 22, 2025 at 9:09 AM
When the GM “project” was really coming into public view 10 years ago, the politics could just about withstand the idea that you start with the city centre, economically, and that rising tide will lift all boats. In some cases that process has indeed begun: eg the agglomeration effects in Stockport
I’d suggest the more significant element may be the politics of reframing this as being about “good growth” (read: the outlying towns)
November 22, 2025 at 9:07 AM
I’d suggest the more significant element may be the politics of reframing this as being about “good growth” (read: the outlying towns)
But the HIF was itself the product of devolution. So like I say, it’s definitely something made possible by that
November 22, 2025 at 9:05 AM
But the HIF was itself the product of devolution. So like I say, it’s definitely something made possible by that
Is it over hyped? Well let’s say GM has not lost the ability to talk itself up. Really it is the expansion of an approach that has previously included the Housing Investment Fund, which led to the skyscrapers. In policy terms it’s now bigger and broader in scope, with new devo £
November 22, 2025 at 9:04 AM
Is it over hyped? Well let’s say GM has not lost the ability to talk itself up. Really it is the expansion of an approach that has previously included the Housing Investment Fund, which led to the skyscrapers. In policy terms it’s now bigger and broader in scope, with new devo £
Yes, I’ve not looked at it too closely but it seems to be based on the fact they’ll be taller than the former DWP building. The thing that makes me sad personally isn’t the scale but the loss of the genuinely socially mixed retail use in the precinct, but that ship has sailed
November 20, 2025 at 7:07 PM
Yes, I’ve not looked at it too closely but it seems to be based on the fact they’ll be taller than the former DWP building. The thing that makes me sad personally isn’t the scale but the loss of the genuinely socially mixed retail use in the precinct, but that ship has sailed
Well, it’s not new - it’s already been in the works for at least eight years and that’s in a city that loves to build. Which shows how long this stuff takes
November 20, 2025 at 7:05 PM
Well, it’s not new - it’s already been in the works for at least eight years and that’s in a city that loves to build. Which shows how long this stuff takes
It was one of the points made to me when I walked around Collyhurst for this piece, about a huge new development aimed at rectifying that (now shortlisted as a new town). So much space doing nothing that could be sensibly occupied
on.ft.com/47TTmER
on.ft.com/47TTmER
Lessons from Manchester for Labour’s new town agenda
[FREE TO READ] Plus, rumblings about a levy on international student fees
on.ft.com
November 20, 2025 at 7:04 PM
It was one of the points made to me when I walked around Collyhurst for this piece, about a huge new development aimed at rectifying that (now shortlisted as a new town). So much space doing nothing that could be sensibly occupied
on.ft.com/47TTmER
on.ft.com/47TTmER