Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Levelling-up Fund

Monday 19 April 2021 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • The levelling-up fund will be allocated competitively based on an index that categorizes areas into three categories based on their need for economic recovery and growth.
  • Richard Thomson questioned the fairness of the index, noting that some Tory target areas in England have received significant funding while areas in Scotland have not.
  • Stephen Flynn criticized the placement of Aberdeen in pot 2, arguing that this decision bypasses the needs of the area and unfairly limits its access to funding.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Stephen Flynn SNP Aberdeen South
Economy Local Government
Context

The levelling-up fund is intended to support areas in economic recovery, transport connectivity, and regeneration. The question addresses the criteria used by the government for prioritising areas.

Question

What criteria the Government used to determine the prioritisation of areas for the allocation of levelling-up funding?

Answer from Luke Hall

The levelling-up fund will be allocated competitively and is open to all local areas. As we set out in the prospectus published at Budget, the index used for the levelling-up fund places areas in category 1, 2 or 3 based on their need for economic recovery and growth, improved transport connectivity, and regeneration.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific criteria for prioritisation were not detailed; only a general statement was provided.

How: General Statement

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Richard Thomson
Scotland Brexit Local Government
Context

The question follows from the initial query about levelling-up fund criteria and addresses specific concerns regarding how Scottish areas are being prioritised compared to others.

Question

If the Minister does not mind my saying so, that index seems to be working in a rather curious way. It has not escaped anyone's attention that some Tory target areas in England seem to have done extraordinarily well out of this fund, yet areas such as mine in the north-east of Scotland—Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council—are languishing in levels 2 and 3 of the fund, despite being forecast to be hit hardest by Brexit. We know there was a power grab with the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020. Is not the truth that we are now seeing a corresponding cash grab, because the Conservative Government know that not even all the rhetoric in the world about shared prosperity and precious Unions can spare their party from the hiding it is set to get from Scottish voters on 6 May?

Answer from Luke Hall

It is hard to see how the £150,000 per local authority that we have already committed to is a cash grab from Scottish communities. We are investing directly in Scottish communities, with £125,000 in capacity funding already. This is a bidding process, and rightly so, but we are providing that capacity funding, and for the first round of funding at least 9% of the UK allocations will be in Scotland. As I said earlier, we are hugely excited about the opportunities we have now to work directly with communities in Scotland.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The MP's concern about bias and political influence was not directly addressed; rather, general reassurances were given.

How: Reassurance

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Stephen Flynn SNP Aberdeen South
Economy Scotland Local Government
Context

The question is a follow-up to the initial query and addresses specific concerns regarding how Aberdeen is being prioritised for levelling-up fund.

Question

I am afraid that answer simply is not good enough. Not only are the Tories seeking to bypass devolution; they are also seeking to bypass the needs of Aberdeen. One hundred and twenty-three local authorities have been placed in pot 1, yet Aberdeen has been dumped in pot 2. The consequence of that is clear for all to see: it means that we will not have access to the funding that we need at this moment in time. Aberdeen accounts for a third of all job redundancies in Scotland since the start of the pandemic. If that is not a criterion for funding, what is?

Answer from Luke Hall

It is published fully and frankly on the Government website. The hon. Gentleman can have a look at it; I would advise him to do so. Authorities are already receiving capacity funding, so it is not true in any way to infer that every single Scottish local authority will not receive support through this initiative. We are hugely excited about the opportunities this presents us with.

Not addressed: The specific issue of why Aberdeen was placed in pot 2 was completely avoided, redirecting the MP to look at the published criteria on the website instead of providing a direct answer.

How: Redirect

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)