Andy Burnham is mayor of Greater Manchester – so what should his priorities be?

The obligatory tram picture. Image: Getty.

What can Greater Manchester’s new mayor do to re-energise its outer towns and boroughs?

Andy Burnham’s victory in the city-region’s first mayoral election was in part a result of his appeal to the ‘Metrolink towns’: places like Rochdale, Ashton and Eccles, that sit at the ends of Greater Manchester’s transport network. He received more Constituency Labour Party nominations from outside Manchester and Salford than his party rivals Tony Lloyd and Ivan Lewis. And during the election campaign emphasised the need to spread the prosperity of Manchester’s booming city centre to its outer towns.

Rhetorically at least, this marks a shift from the Manchester model of recent years, which has focused on driving investment, jobs and population into the urban core. There is increasing awareness that economic growth in the city centre has not ‘spilled over’ to many parts of the city region, despite improved connectivity.

Low pay and poor productivity, scourges of the UK economy since the 2008-09 recession, are evident in all ten Greater Manchester districts. But they’re particularly prominent in the northern boroughs of Rochdale, Oldham and Wigan, and the idea of a more spatially inclusive economic model for Greater Manchester is gaining traction. Here are a few steps Mr Burnham could take to promote the outer reaches of our city-region.

Invest in Post-19 education

Unemployment in Greater Manchester, whilst above the national average, is not particularly high by historic standards. A bigger problem in many parts of the city-region is underemployment – residents in Oldham, Rochdale, Wigan, Bolton and Tameside are more likely to have jobs that are seasonal, temporary or part-time, and many have few prospects of progression.

Research shows the majority of those employed in sectors such as care, catering and retail have no or very few qualifications. The social and economic cost of people stuck in low-paid jobs, not fulfilling their potential, is significant. With the post-19 skills budget set to be fully devolved to Greater Manchester from 2018, the new mayor should provide more opportunities for adults to upskill, retrain and progress to more secure work.

Improve orbital transport links

Despite extensions to the Metrolink over recent years, a surprisingly high percentage of Greater Manchester journeys are still done by road – almost 50 per cent in total, with 41 per cent by car.

A key reason for the car’s continuing dominance is the poor public transport links between local authority areas. Despite 48 per cent of commuting trips crossing council boundaries, the Metrolink is overly focused on bringing people into the city centre. Put simply, if you want to travel from Rochdale to Bury via Metrolink, you’ll need to go into Victoria Station then back out again.

The de-regulation of buses since the 1980s has led to chaotic and disorganised networks across England. In Greater Manchester, commuters in Bolton, Wigan and Salford see services cut, whilst the Wilmslow Road corridor – dubbed Europe’s busiest bus route – sees 60 buses an hour trundle down its narrow roads.

Using his newly devolved powers to re-regulate the bus network, the Mayor should prioritise links between M60 towns like Rochdale, Oldham and Bury. In the longer term, a Metrolink circle line running around the city-region would better reflect the jobs geography of Greater Manchester than the current city-centric network.

Develop a mix of new housing

The emerging Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF), a new and comprehensive plan to guide development across the city-region, proved controversial during the election campaign. The GMSF includes proposals to develop new housing on parts of the Green Belt, particularly in Stockport and Rochdale, and is opposed by well-organised local resident groups. Some candidates, including the Liberal Democrats’ Jane Brophy, pledged to scrap the plan, whilst Mr Burnham called for a “radical rewrite”.

The reality is that Greater Manchester needs to build at least 11,000 new homes a year to keep up with a rising population, and there aren’t enough brownfield sites alone to meet this need. City centre apartments will meet some of the demand, but there is a desperate need for more homes for families and first-time buyers in the places people most want to live.

That means building out, as well as up. Mr Burnham should resist the urge to cave in to political pressure, and embrace the GMSF as the best option to solve Greater Manchester’s looming housing shortage.

Re-energise the high street

Many town centres still haven’t recovered from the last recession. With dearly-loved brands like Woolworths and BHS departing, high streets are increasingly reliant on bargain stores and charity shops to drive footfall, and the retail-led regeneration which transformed many British towns through the 1990s and 2000s looks unlikely to be replicated.

The success of Altrincham’s Market Hall shows what can be achieved by a different model of regeneration. A decade ago, the town had rising levels of high street vacancies and was struggling to compete with the nearby Trafford Centre. Now, thanks to a dedicated team of local business leaders and backing from the local council, the Market Hall hosts local traders, street food and craft stalls, drawing in customers from across South Manchester.

Replicating Altrincham’s strategy won’t be possible for all towns – its position near some of Cheshire’s most affluent towns gives it a distinct advantage – but the mayor should use his leverage to support local initiatives that improve town centre footfall, like Rochdale’s efforts to attract more small businesses.

Bridging the divide 

Last year’s EU Referendum laid bare the stark divide between the gleaming towers, professional jobs and street food markets of England’s largest city centres, and the smaller towns which surround them. In few places is this cleavage more apparent than Greater Manchester, where the jobs-heavy districts of Manchester, Stockport and Trafford had majority Remain votes, whilst the other seven boroughs voted to Leave.

Bridging these ‘Two Englands’ is a task not only for Westminster, but for our regional politicians. For Greater Manchester’s new mayor, Brexit should be a warning of what happens when the margins feel marginalised.

Tom Arnold is a PhD researcher at the University of Manchester's School of Planning & Environmental Management. His research assesses the application of economic geography and territorial governance models in Northern England. This article previously appeared on the Manchester Policy Blog.

Want more of this stuff? Follow CityMetric on Twitter or Facebook

 
 
 
 

Everything you ever wanted to know about the Seoul Metro System but were too afraid to ask

Gwanghwamoon subway station on line 5 in Seoul, 2010. Image: Getty.

Seoul’s metro system carries 7m passengers a day across 1,000 miles of track. The system is as much a regional commuter railway as an urban subway system. Without technically leaving the network, one can travel from Asan over 50 miles to the south of central Seoul, all the way up to the North Korean border 20 miles north of the city.

Fares are incredibly low for a developed country. A basic fare of 1,250 won (about £1) will allow you to travel 10km; it’s only an extra 100 won (about 7p) to travel every additional 5km on most lines.

The trains are reasonably quick: maximum speeds of 62mph and average operating speeds of around 20mph make them comparable to London Underground. But the trains are much more spacious, air conditioned and have wi-fi access. Every station also has protective fences, between platform and track, to prevent suicides and accidents.

The network

The  service has a complex system of ownership and operation. The Seoul Metro Company (owned by Seoul City council) operates lines 5-8 on its own, but lines 1-4 are operated jointly with Korail, the state-owned national rail company. Meanwhile, Line 9 is operated jointly between Trans-Dev (a French company which operates many buses in northern England) and RATP (The Parisian version of TfL).

Then there’s Neotrans, owned by the Korean conglomerate Doosan, which owns and operates the driverless Sinbundang line. The Incheon city government, which borders Seoul to the west, owns and operates Incheon Line 1 and Line 2.

The Airport Express was originally built and owned by a corporation jointly owned by 11 large Korean firms, but is now mostly owned by Korail. The Uijeongbu light railway is currently being taken over by the Uijeongbu city council (that one’s north of Seoul) after the operating company went bankrupt. And the Everline people mover is operated by a joint venture owned by Bombardier and a variety of Korean companies.

Seoul’s subway map. Click to expand. Image: Wikimedia Commons.

The rest of the lines are operated by the national rail operator Korail. The fare structure is either identical or very similar for all of these lines. All buses and trains in the region are accessible with a T-money card, similar to London’s Oyster card. Fares are collected centrally and then distributed back to operators based on levels of usage.

Funding

The Korean government spends around £27bn on transport every year: that works out at 10 per cent more per person than the British government spends.  The Seoul subway’s annual loss of around £200m is covered by this budget.

The main reason the loss is much lower than TfL’s £458m is that, despite Seoul’s lower fares, it also has much lower maintenance costs. The oldest line, Line 1 is only 44 years old.


Higher levels of automation and lower crime rates also mean there are fewer staff. Workers pay is also lower: a newly qualified driver will be paid around £27,000 a year compared to £49,000 in London.

New infrastructure is paid for by central government. However, investment in the capital does not cause the same regional rivalries as it does in the UK for a variety of reasons. Firstly, investment is not so heavily concentrated in the capital. Five other cities have subways; the second city of Busan has an extensive five-line network.

What’s more, while investment is still skewed towards Seoul, it’s a much bigger city than London, and South Korea is physically a much smaller country than the UK (about the size of Scotland and Wales combined). Some 40 per cent of the national population lives on the Seoul network – and everyone else who lives on the mainland can be in Seoul within 3 hours.

Finally, politically the biggest divide in South Korea is between the south-west and the south-east (the recently ousted President Park Geun-Hye won just 11 per cent of the vote in the south west, while winning 69 per cent in the south-east). Seoul is seen as neutral territory.  

Problems

A driverless train on the Shinbundang Line. Image: Wikicommons.

The system is far from perfect. Seoul’s network is highly radial. It’s incredibly cheap and easy to travel from outer lying areas to the centre, and around the centre itself. But travelling from one of Seoul’s satellite cities to another by public transport is often difficult. A journey from central Goyang (population: 1m) to central Incheon (population: 3m) is around 30 minutes by car. By public transport, it takes around 2 hours. There is no real equivalent of the London Overground.

There is also a lack of fast commuter services. The four-track Seoul Line 1 offers express services to Incheon and Cheonan, and some commuter towns south of the city are covered by intercity services. But most large cities of hundreds of thousands of people within commuting distance (places comparable to Reading or Milton Keynes) are reliant on the subway network, and do not have a fast rail link that takes commuters directly to the city centre.

This is changing however with the construction of a system modelled on the Paris RER and London’s Crossrail. The GTX will operate at maximum speed of 110Mph. The first line (of three planned) is scheduled to open in 2023, and will extend from the new town of Ilsan on the North Korean border to the new town of Dongtan about 25km south of the city centre.

The system will stop much less regularly than Crossrail or the RER resulting in drastic cuts in journey times. For example, the time from llsan to Gangnam (of Gangnam Style fame) will be cut from around 1hr30 to just 17 minutes. When the three-line network is complete most of the major cities in the region will have a direct fast link to Seoul Station, the focal point of the GTX as well as the national rail network. A very good public transport network is going to get even better.