Sunderland and northern powerhouse

[citybythesea]

Why has Sunderland been singled out as the main disrupters of the north east devolution deal? It was initially GATESHEAD that protested against it, then along with Durham, South Tyneside and Sunderland.
We all know Sunderland is a marginalised city in the north east.....the Tory minister did nothing to dispel this by referring to the "Wear" crossing as a crossing over the "Tyne"
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/...arrassing-sunderland-bridge-blunder-1-8713947

Sunderland aren't the prime architect for stopping the NE devolution deal going through even though it is constantly marginalised. The other so-called "South of the Tyne" authorities rightly see the gamble not worth the risk. I think if the government want participation across the North East they need to address the disparity, that's caused authorities to opt out.......a geography book for the Tory minister might be a good start!

The chronicle seem keen to pin the blame on Sunderland.......
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news...powerhouse-minister-warns-devolution-13514927

No mention of their neighbours in Gateshead or South Tynside?

 

[10 Gary Rowells]

Why has Sunderland been singled out as the main disrupters of the north east devolution deal? It was initially GATESHEAD that protested against it, then along with Durham, South Tyneside and Sunderland.
We all know Sunderland is a marginalised city in the north east.....the Tory minister did nothing to dispel this by referring to the "Wear" crossing as a crossing over the "Tyne"
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/...arrassing-sunderland-bridge-blunder-1-8713947

Sunderland aren't the prime architect for stopping the NE devolution deal going through even though it is constantly marginalised. The other so-called "South of the Tyne" authorities rightly see the gamble not worth the risk. I think if the government want participation across the North East they need to address the disparity, that's caused authorities to opt out.......a geography book for the Tory minister might be a good start!

It looks like the North of the Tyne 3 are going for a deal, Tees Valley has a deal. Is it not a much bigger risk to be left behind in the middle? In the meeting I was at Paul Watson said the deal was not good enough. Fair enough. Then Nick Forbes said that Manchester were on their 4th deal - in other words the deal offered may not be perfect but its just a start. I dont care who is to blame - South Tyneside, Sunderland, Gateshead or Durham - but I feel that the 4 being 'left behind' need to explain exactly what their alternative plan is because its quite clear if we are 'sandwiched' by groups of counties who have devolution deals there is a very big risk that we will be left behind.

 

[Deleted User 2893]

It looks like the North of the Tyne 3 are going for a deal, Tees Valley has a deal. Is it not a much bigger risk to be left behind in the middle? In the meeting I was at Paul Watson said the deal was not good enough. Fair enough. Then Nick Forbes said that Manchester were on their 4th deal - in other words the deal offered may not be perfect but its just a start. I dont care who is to blame - South Tyneside, Sunderland, Gateshead or Durham - but I feel that the 4 being 'left behind' need to explain exactly what their alternative plan is because its quite clear if we are 'sandwiched' by groups of counties who have devolution deals there is a very big risk that we will be left behind.

The alternative plan is to do nothing. People in Sunderland don't like change when it comes to politics

 

[super-niall]

I suspect it's because of the Newcastle/Sunderland battle.

Everyone knows Newcastle will benefit the most like they did with the TWDC, Newcastle benefited massively through investment in the Metro system from TWDC yet it wasn't even extended to Sunderland until after the TWDC was shut down.

Of course Newcastle will blame Sunderland for the devolution deal collapsing, why wouldn't they? They wont keep the inbred locals happy by saying Gateshead was to blame.

 

[Butcher's Coat]

The North East voted against devolution years ago when we had a referendum on it under Labour.

The Tories seem to think that they can get a devolved North East through the back door by not involving the voting public, but trying to slip it in by getting regional councils to adopt it.

To the best of my knowledge, there has been no other such public vote, and going via the council route, is in my opinion, against democracy. The council do not have a mandate by us to do this.
Various councils were indeed asked about this, and your man Simon Henig of Durham County Council was pushing for devolution. He got rewarded by Cameron with a CBE for this.
The other councils involved knocked this back - and yes "Stabber" went on record to say that the deal was quite rightly not good enough.

The alternative plan is to do nothing. People in Sunderland don't like change when it comes to politics

We were asked years back for this, and we voted no.

 

[Cockney Mackem]

The chronicle

Is the answer

 

[Paddy O'Dors]

It looks like the North of the Tyne 3 are going for a deal, Tees Valley has a deal. Is it not a much bigger risk to be left behind in the middle? In the meeting I was at Paul Watson said the deal was not good enough. Fair enough. Then Nick Forbes said that Manchester were on their 4th deal - in other words the deal offered may not be perfect but its just a start. I dont care who is to blame - South Tyneside, Sunderland, Gateshead or Durham - but I feel that the 4 being 'left behind' need to explain exactly what their alternative plan is because its quite clear if we are 'sandwiched' by groups of counties who have devolution deals there is a very big risk that we will be left behind.

Have you read the article (I don't blame you for not clicking on those two awful websites mind)?

Pressed on whether that would mean the North East risked being left behind by Government efforts to boost the wider region, the minister struck a more conciliatory tone than his predecessor.

He said: “Devolution is not the only game in town and what we’ve seen with the Tees Valley and hopefully with the north of the Tyne deal, if and when that is completed, is that all the areas around those devolved mayors and mayoralities get the benefit of it.”

His pledge represented a marked shift in emphasis from ministers under David Cameron , who presented an unshakeable insistence on devolution deals across the regions.

Saying yes with someone twisting your arm behind your back isn't really saying yes.

The days of One NE are still fresh in the memories of some. The ripple effect from Leamington where it was based used to stop at Newcastle Quayside. It's no coincidence regeneration in Sunderland has moved quicker since we went our own way.

 

[Boris Bear]

Why has Sunderland been singled out as the main disrupters of the north east devolution deal? It was initially GATESHEAD that protested against it, then along with Durham, South Tyneside and Sunderland.
We all know Sunderland is a marginalised city in the north east.....the Tory minister did nothing to dispel this by referring to the "Wear" crossing as a crossing over the "Tyne"
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/...arrassing-sunderland-bridge-blunder-1-8713947

Sunderland aren't the prime architect for stopping the NE devolution deal going through even though it is constantly marginalised. The other so-called "South of the Tyne" authorities rightly see the gamble not worth the risk. I think if the government want participation across the North East they need to address the disparity, that's caused authorities to opt out.......a geography book for the Tory minister might be a good start!

The chronicle seem keen to pin the blame on Sunderland.......
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news...powerhouse-minister-warns-devolution-13514927

No mention of their neighbours in Gateshead or South Tynside?

Gateshead council leadership were recommending the devolution deal but got voted down. But it is fair to say that they were the first to say 'No'.

Sunderland, South Tyneside and Durham gave a 'we need more clarity' type answer and when it wasn't forthcoming they simply said 'we are unable to vote in favour without this clarity'.

We all move on and it would be very much in our interests to partner more with Durham. We are in bed with Gateshead and South Tyneside in many ways but we have little shared infrastructure with Durham and that needs to change if we are to exert more influence on a national stage.

Newcastle can fuck right off

 

[Le Chuck]

Have they been singled out or is it just the Chronical or the usual anti council knackers on the echo using it as another stick to beat the council with whilst ignoring that Gateshead were the main ones for stopping it.

 

[10 Gary Rowells]

Have you read the article (I don't blame you for not clicking on those two awful websites mind)?

Pressed on whether that would mean the North East risked being left behind by Government efforts to boost the wider region, the minister struck a more conciliatory tone than his predecessor.

He said: “Devolution is not the only game in town and what we’ve seen with the Tees Valley and hopefully with the north of the Tyne deal, if and when that is completed, is that all the areas around those devolved mayors and mayoralities get the benefit of it.”

His pledge represented a marked shift in emphasis from ministers under David Cameron , who presented an unshakeable insistence on devolution deals across the regions.

Saying yes with someone twisting your arm behind your back isn't really saying yes.

The days of One NE are still fresh in the memories of some. The ripple effect from Leamington where it was based used to stop at Newcastle Quayside. It's no coincidence regeneration in Sunderland has moved quicker since we went our own way.

I take on board what you are saying. However, we now have 5 Boroughs in Tees Valley who have a Devolution Deal and we will have 3 Borough's North of the Tyne who will likely have a Devolution Deal. The Government want to work with Devolved Authorities and, as I say, Manchester is absolutely flying on its 4th deal. Even if the deal was not right there is a danger of those with a deal leaving the others behind. All I am saying is that the 4 being 'left behind' need to clearly articulate what their strategy is. In the meeting I was at the Businesses who were in the remaining 4 areas all expressed real concern and nothing was said to alleviate that concern.

 

[Paddy O'Dors]

Have they been singled out or is it just the Chronical or the usual anti council knackers on the echo using it as another stick to beat the council with whilst ignoring that Gateshead were the main ones for stopping it.

Nobody has been singled out. The Ronnie Gill article isn't even critical of any of the four councils. It only mentions Sunderland cos that's where the interview took place. The Tory bloke has even said it's up to the people of the NE to decide what they want and it's not a deal breaker for devolution etc. Dunno what the OP is getting upset about tbh.

 

[f.t.metro]

Im sure ive mentioned this before but there is a view that the plan was a bit of a tory trap for labour in the north east. Henig, Forbes and one or two others are a bit carried away with the prospect of being mayor of the north east. The 'independent' guy who was touting himself about is a former tory general election candidate. I imagine he would have magically had no tory opposition in a mayoral election and we may well have ended up with 7 councils under a tory mayor in all but name

 

[Le Chuck]

Nobody has been singled out. The Ronnie Gill article isn't even critical of any of the four councils. It only mentions Sunderland cos that's where the interview took place. The Tory bloke has even said it's up to the people of the NE to decide what they want and it's not a deal breaker for devolution etc. Dunno what the OP is getting upset about tbh.

so probably just taking the echos comments section too seriously then

 

[Butcher's Coat]

I take on board what you are saying. However, we now have 5 Boroughs in Tees Valley who have a Devolution Deal and we will have 3 Borough's North of the Tyne who will likely have a Devolution Deal. The Government want to work with Devolved Authorities and, as I say, Manchester is absolutely flying on its 4th deal. Even if the deal was not right there is a danger of those with a deal leaving the others behind. All I am saying is that the 4 being 'left behind' need to clearly articulate what their strategy is. In the meeting I was at the Businesses who were in the remaining 4 areas all expressed real concern and nothing was said to alleviate that concern.

I don't know if you were around to vote for the North East devolution back in 2004,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_East_England_devolution_referendum,_2004
- but back then, we had another business led quango called One North East who were pushing for this.
They were in-elected business men & women who only had their own interests at heart and not the people's.
They were sussed out, and the people said a resounding no.

One of the outcomes of the projected devolution was that the old Teesside Airport was re-named Durham Tees Valley - as they thought that the H.Q. for this was going to be in Durham, and that would be the preferred airport for them.

 

[citybythesea]

Ive been watching the NE devolution developments for a while and the local media, (certainly the chronicle) seem keen to push the narrative that it's Sunderland who caused this!
It's kind of like they're trying to alienate the people of Gateshead, Durham and South Tyneside - despite these areas also suffering from bias in favour of Newcastle.
If we didn't have years of unfair regional decisions from likes of "One North East" or "Tyne and wear development Corp" there maybe more enthusiasm from people across the north east

 

[10 Gary Rowells]

I don't know if you were around to vote for the North East devolution back in 2004,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_East_England_devolution_referendum,_2004
- but back then, we had another business led quango called One North East who were pushing for this.
They were in-elected business men & women who only had their own interests at heart and not the people's.
They were sussed out, and the people said a resounding no.

One of the outcomes of the projected devolution was that the old Teesside Airport was re-named Durham Tees Valley - as they thought that the H.Q. for this was going to be in Durham, and that would be the preferred airport for them.

I was around then and was against it - yet another layer of Government. However, things change. In the North East our economy is threatened by Scottish Devolution. In the North it seems undeniable that Devolution is working for Manchester - having Andy Burnham there battling for them at every opportunity. Talk to anyone in Tees Valley and they will talk about their vision and the positivity of the area post-Devolution Deal. In the North East we are squabbling. With the North of the Tyne three going for a Devolution deal there is a danger that we in the middle of this sandwich could lose out badly (again!).

I'm not saying Devolution is the right answer but out of 12 Boroughs in the NE 7 will have devolution deals and 4 will not. My question is what is the strategy for prosperity for the 4 who are potentially being left behind because listening to the Tees Valley and North of the Tyne 3 they are full of positivity.

Ive been watching the NE devolution developments for a while and the local media, (certainly the chronicle) seem keen to push the narrative that it's Sunderland who caused this!
It's kind of like they're trying to alienate the people of Gateshead, Durham and South Tyneside - despite these areas also suffering from bias in favour of Newcastle.
If we didn't have years of unfair regional decisions from likes of "One North East" or "Tyne and wear development Corp" there maybe more enthusiasm from people across the north east

I get all that but as I say 7 of the 12 Boroughs in the NE will have Devolution Deals and I think its correct for us in the 4 who don't to be concerned about being left behind. Regardless of which party is in power Devolution isn't going away and it is undeniable that the NE hasn't got its act together.

 

[Butcher's Coat]

I was around then and was against it - yet another layer of Government. However, things change. In the North East our economy is threatened by Scottish Devolution. In the North it seems undeniable that Devolution is working for Manchester - having Andy Burnham there battling for them at every opportunity. Talk to anyone in Tees Valley and they will talk about their vision and the positivity of the area post-Devolution Deal. In the North East we are squabbling. With the North of the Tyne three going for a Devolution deal there is a danger that we in the middle of this sandwich could lose out badly (again!).

I'm not saying Devolution is the right answer but out of 12 Boroughs in the NE 7 will have devolution deals and 4 will not. My question is what is the strategy for prosperity for the 4 who are potentially being left behind because listening to the Tees Valley and North of the Tyne 3 they are full of positivity.

Hmm, well you are certainly positive on the business side of things by the looks of it, good luck with that.
But Manchester is a totally different animal to us in the forgotten wilderness of the North East.
This Tory Government want sweet FA to do with us, and Gideon was on the news yesterday on about this Northern Powerhouse again.
His and "Call me Dave"s Government just simply left the Redcar blast furnace to die out, and the workers were left to rot - so much for the powerhouse. (They stepped in to help Port Talbot by the way).

Manchester will thrive, as will a lot of Northern cities - but anything North of Leeds will be left out. It is plain as the nose on your face. The supposed high speed train lines will not even get past Leeds for instance, and the Tories are attempting to wriggle out of this already.
Grayling will knock anything else back.

We still cannot get a dual carriageway A1 upgrade/motorway to Scotland and it's capital for fucks sake.!!

So what do we do??
Any Tory Government will want to wash their hands of us here, just palm us off with a few billion quid a year to be divvied out amongst us, (and we all know where the bulk of it will go to Tyneside - Newcastle/Gateshead) and when that is gone, they won't give us any more.

So I think that I will put the tin hat on here and say we should be realistic and stay put with funding from Westminster - better the devil you know (they are cants) - but at least you know that.

 

[10 Gary Rowells]

Hmm, well you are certainly positive on the business side of things by the looks of it, good luck with that.
But Manchester is a totally different animal to us in the forgotten wilderness of the North East.
This Tory Government want sweet FA to do with us, and Gideon was on the news yesterday on about this Northern Powerhouse again.
His and "Call me Dave"s Government just simply left the Redcar blast furnace to die out, and the workers were left to rot - so much for the powerhouse. (They stepped in to help Port Talbot by the way).

Manchester will thrive, as will a lot of Northern cities - but anything North of Leeds will be left out. It is plain as the nose on your face. The supposed high speed train lines will not even get past Leeds for instance, and the Tories are attempting to wriggle out of this already.
Grayling will knock anything else back.

We still cannot get a dual carriageway A1 upgrade/motorway to Scotland and it's capital for fucks sake.!!

So what do we do??
Any Tory Government will want to wash their hands of us here, just palm us off with a few billion quid a year to be divvied out amongst us, (and we all know where the bulk of it will go to Tyneside - Newcastle/Gateshead) and when that is gone, they won't give us any more.

So I think that I will put the tin hat on here and say we should be realistic and stay put with funding from Westminster - better the devil you know (they are cants) - but at least you know that.

I don't disagree with much of what you are saying. However, we do suffer from not presenting a united front (and yes, I accept all the Newcastle/Gateshead argument). If many areas are profiting from Devolution we need to know what our strategy is outside this process. Are Gateshead/Sunderland/South Tyneside/Durham going to be having a common strategy. To be honest its seems to be an utter mess at the moment and we need some idea of what the way forward is. There are currently 9 areas with Devolution Deals in England, in a few years there will be loads more.

 

[ID101]

I think the main issue whenever you start talking about authorities working together is that the big gains are not from more financial resource being made available but from a re-allocation of existing resource.

This usually leads to a favourable deal for the larger partners at the expense of the smaller ones.

You only need to look at what is currently going on with the "Strategic Alliance" in the NHS between Sunderland and South Tyneside. All you have is resource being diverted to make Sunderland sustainable at the expense of providing services in South Tyneside.

Generally I would be wary of getting involved in anything like this unless you were the lead authority

 

[Wearside Wanderer II]

WDSC & Stabbsy a proper Wearside man for the people.