Tristram Hunt MP: "We must improve skills if the Potteries is to prosper again"
HERE is a tale of three towns. In 1901, Blackburn, Burnley and Preston all shared common characteristics, with populations somewhere between 170,000 and 200,000, located within 20 miles of each other to the north of Manchester.
The trio had come of age as cotton towns during the Industrial Revolution, but their trajectory during the 20th century revealed the impact of very different political choices.
-
GOOD OLD DAYS: An archive picture from the heyday of Royal Doulton.
Historically, Blackburn and Burnley had the more concentrated weaving trade, with textiles accounting for more than 35 per cent of employment in 1901. Preston, by contrast, had just over 20 per cent in the cotton business.
But then, from the early 1900s, decline in imperial trade and the rise of international competition began to affect the economies of all three towns. The First World War impacted heavily on cotton production, while Lancashire was hit a second time in the inter-war years by the 'Indian Cotton Boycott' which saw the subcontinent resist British imports.
Would you like a professional to review your CV and give you some constructive feedback?
contact BlueSky CVs for an honest review
Terms: 1 per person
Contact: 01538 710408
Valid until: Friday, May 24 2013
Industrial decline accelerated in the post-war years – and here the towns started to pursue competing paths.
Blackburn and Burnley failed to respond effectively to economic change and experienced mass out-migration and sustained falls in private sector employment.
Preston, on the other hand, decided to diversify. It reinvented itself as a regional service centre, attracted the University of Central Lancaster, secured infrastructure upgrades (the first British motorway was the Preston by-pass of 1958), and broadened its industrial offer to attract engineering and companies manufacturing electrical goods.
The 50s and 70s also saw the growth of aerospace industry in South Ribble, just south of Preston. All of which managed to produce a new economic future for the city.
Between 1998 and 2008, Preston saw the third highest rate of private sector jobs growth.
This cotton town case study comes from a fascinating new report by the Centre for Cities think-tank, looking at the state of our towns and cities in 1901 and how they have fared since.
And the authors are adamant that while policy decisions can change the fate of a city, its historic inheritance can also shape its future.
One hundred years on, towns are still battling with their inheritance of engrained legacies.
Even in 1901 a North-South divide was emerging, with cities in the South tending to be more affluent, with higher skills, higher wages and greater wealth. Alongside this accelerating north to south shift, the 20th century also witnessed a move from coastal to inland as changing trading patterns saw the likes of Hull, Liverpool and Dundee left high and dry.
So, what of Stoke-on-Trent? As you might imagine, in 1901 it was doing pretty well. But there were already some warning signals: our skills levels and property values were too low, and our over-dependence upon manufacturing (most noticeably in ceramics, which employed 30 per cent of the workforce) too high.
In short, we faced similar problems to Blackburn and Burnley – and failed to follow the path of Preston.
We lacked a diverse enough commercial base, so when industrial decline took hold, the Potteries was badly exposed.
Thankfully, this report is more than just a history lesson. It also offers some practical policy advice for the present.
First of all, skills are the biggest determinant of success for cities, and are critical for the life chances of individuals. Those cities with high skills levels in 1901 continued to outshine the competition over the succeeding century.
And there is no doubt that in Stoke-on-Trent, we need to redouble our efforts to improve educational attainment and skills provision in schools, colleges and workplaces.
Secondly, targeted investment in infrastructure can have a significant impact upon the economic prospects of a place. The early prosperity of the Potteries was intimately linked to the canal network and then turnpike system. We have done well out of the M6 and West Coast Main Line, and now we need to make sure any High Speed 2 line has a stop in North Staffordshire.
But the lesson of these three cotton towns is that the future is not pre-determined: choices can be made and better prospects realised.
Now, more than ever, we need to follow the path of Preston: focus on skills, support private enterprise, diversify our economy, and invest in infrastructure.
History always works best as a source of inspiration, not a counsel of despair.
Comments
by stokeace
Tuesday, July 17 2012, 11:55PM
“you only have to look at the ''prime industrial land''' that is trentham lakes..that is within 5 minutes drive of the a50 and a 10 minutes drive to the m6..there are maybe a dozen companies on that site..there is still land there to be built on..what is being built on the remaining land???...a couple of large companies that will provide well paid jobs attracted to stoke on trent by this ''forward looking'' city council,the same council that is banging the drum on their ''mandate for change''..attracting companies to the area...no the land is going to be used for housing..what does that tell you???...it tells me that the council is failing to attract ANY new business to the area...if they cant attract businesses to that piece of major geographical land..so close to 1 of the main arterial motorways in the land then they wont get companies to re-locate ANYWHERE in stoke-on-trent...”
by stevebatkin
Tuesday, July 17 2012, 11:12PM
“Stoke central Labour Party MP Dr Hunt and his party have been telling us for many years Stoke-on-Trent must diversify and create service jobs -- we have been trying that for twenty years! Take a walk around Stoke-on-Trent and see how many public houses have been boarded up or bulldozed -- devastation! Wedgwoods didn't help by making financial cool calculated decisions to relocate factories in cheap labour countries for bigger profits; they are nothing short of an utter disgrace!
http://tinyurl.com/c5fch56”
by Dizzy1960
Tuesday, July 17 2012, 12:00PM
“This manipulative misrepresenting representative is supposed to be an historian, so when is he going to demonstrate his knowledge and tell us about our city or what Stoke-upon-Trent is?
Or does he know nothing and completely oblivious to the identity of Stoc/God-Stoke/Stoke St. Milburg, like the majority of this city's occupants?
I've got GUMPTION Tristram #unt, so lets do battle.... lol
Apark@Stoke4LUZ
honi soit qui mal y pense”
by Jeff1531
Tuesday, July 17 2012, 11:47AM
“Thank you Mr Hunt for taking the time to read up on our City
The rest of us know the history has we were born here. You tell us about skills and school's
Why are we losing a business Greenhouse 2ooo which School children use, which is putting Three highly skilled people on the dole
ANSWER
Because its making a profit
On about the new train
The station is in Stoke not forgetting the M6, A50 A500 and A34 so why move everything up to Hanley.
Perhaps when you have lived in our City longer you will not have to read about it.”
by Proud_Potter
Tuesday, July 17 2012, 11:08AM
“Would the Council please note: nowhere does the historical record teach us that the key to regeneration is to move the Council offices from one building to another!”
by papalazaroo
Tuesday, July 17 2012, 8:29AM
“Tristram says:
"Thankfully, this report is more than just a history lesson. It also offers some practical policy advice for the present."
Well, as usual, an overflow of history, a drip of advice for the future.
I have to say that, Mr Hunt, you sound increasingly like the benevolent "lord of the manor" here to educate the semi-illiterate masses. In your historical essays it is like you're brushing up on your industrial history.
From the quote above, and from your previous articles, you obviously feel that it is important that the people of this area know their own area's history; instead of proselytizing with a conflated poilitical agenda, why don't you list the relevant courses on offer from September. I think many people would find that less pejorative than these articles.
In fact, perhaps in your next article you could list your weak subjects (economics, marketing, industrial relations, etc) and qualified individuals from this pool of plebs can help you (in a reciprocal manner) so that we can, together, concentrate on the future too.
Finally, we really need to know what our three MPs think about the locally seizmic issue concerning the seemingly crass civic move to Hanley from Stoke, which could potentially bankrupt the city. Why didn't you use the article to jsutify your support or opposition to that?”
by stokeace
Tuesday, July 17 2012, 12:38AM
“the decline of stoke-on-trent was started firstly by the closure of the pits,shelton bar,michelin and the outsourcing of the pottery industry to the far east,the majority of the workforce of these industries were not of an age to pussyfoot around on ''re-training'' schemes they had homes to pay for and children to feed so they took whatever work they could...ill challenge tristram hunt to name 10 companies that the city council have attracted to stoke- on- trent in the last 5 years..that offer full time employment and pay above the national wage limit..city council officers went to the u.s.a last year with the staffordshire hoard saying that the visit would attract new companies from the u.s to invest in the area i havent read of 1...not 1....u.s company coming to the area on the back of that visit..the city council continue to pour millions of pounds into their ''golden chalice'' [hanley]...to the detriment of the rest of stoke on trent...infrastructure investment should include all of stoke-on-trent not just hanley...and then maybe the area will prosper as a whole and not turn the rest of the area into ghost towns.”
by ripleydad
Tuesday, July 17 2012, 12:15AM
“selective historical perspectives, he appears to be revisiting his university days . History cannot teach us about todays problems because there is no way to factor in the increased competitiveness of other economies, the increased social costs , masses of employment law , planning restrictions on new developments ,absence of venture capital, patent abuse on innovation, the power of advertising and the media . None of these factors were present in the 1900s ,so taking a historical perspective on todays problems is frankly a bit silly .
What the city needs is investment infrastructure and a favourable business environment .”
by penniner
Monday, July 16 2012, 11:21PM
“Blackburn Preston and Burnley had no Asian immigrants in 1901 but go there now and they are swamped with them.”
by strandedhere
Monday, July 16 2012, 10:38PM
“Hristram Tunt just about sums him up.
A shining example of the Labour Party.But not in a good way.”