Some Random Thoughts on Levelling Up

The British are a funny lot.  And the food is terrible.  I mean, “black pudding” and “offal,” with a side helping of beans and toads?  Yeeesh, and that’s just for breakfast.  If I want to eat the very innards of an animal, I can just eat a big ol bowl of chitlins for breakfast.  My mother loved them but I never ate those either.  Nope, no thanks.  I’ll just have the fish and chips.  They talk funny too.  They don’t speak American.  Once you get the gist of what they are talking about, though, you suddenly realize that maybe these people know better the precise meaning of words and phrases than we do.  

So a UK think tank recently issued a fairly detailed report concluding that UK civil society is strongest where it is needed least, and weakest where it is needed most.  One has to take into account cultural differences but sometimes comparative law holds a mirror by which to judge ourselves.  The report highlights what might be a common problem across borders  — the inefficient allocation of charitable resources.  Waste, in other words.  In our heart of hearts we all acknowledge, or at least suspect, that donors donate to the things that make life — art, museums, symphonies — but often to things that cannot sustain life — like art, museums, symphonies — all with our encouragement and subsidy.  Besides, there is plenty of commercial incentive for art museums and symphonies– the Supreme Court just recently acted to protect that incentive, narrowing the fair use exception according to some IP folks.  Why subsidize those things?  But that is all debatable and I haven’t resolved it in my own mind.  I have a starving artist daughter living in NY.  She might think her art is more important than food sometimes.  

A second random thought that occurred to me is weather the absence of charitable effort in our poorest and most neediest areas contributes to or results from poverty.  Does its absence cause poverty, or is the absence the result of poverty.  Because if the latter is true, it seems government must eliminate abject poverty before even self help charity can germinate.  And maybe that initial charitable impulse, of the sort the Pilgrims necessarily practiced and were assisted in by Native Americans, is a necessary precondition to capitalism — think micro-loans, which begin as charity but only to spur capitalism.  In its absence or eradication from the most abject areas, maybe capitalism can’t even get a foothold because there is no charitable precursor.   Just a random thought, I am not even sure I’m asking the right question.  Maybe the answer would help better allocate charitable finance or subsidy.  Anyway, take a look at how the think tank described the results:     

Civil society is weakest in Levelling Up priority areas – with a third less local charitable activity than in the lowest priority areas. Worse, our data suggests the gap has grown – with local charitable activity falling between 5% and 6% since 2018 (compared to less than 1% drop in wealthier places). This matters because the evidence shows civil society can make people and places healthier and improve their education and skills – key building blocks of the local economic growth at the heart of the Levelling Up agenda.

Civil society brings three unique advantages to tackling inequalities:

• • Preventing issues
  • Connecting communities
  • Targeting services to where they’re most needed

But civil society remains weakest in the poorest parts of Britain – and our new data suggests it’s getting weaker still. A key asset for growing local economies is therefore struggling precisely where it’s most needed.  We need greater support for civil society as an engine of growth if we are to truly tackle regional inequalities across the UK – such as through new targeted social investment zones, a social investment fund and better evaluation of what programmes work

The British don’t even spell right, doggonit.  Turns out “Levelling Up” is the King’s English way of acknowledging systemic injustices in British society and socio-economic initiatives designed to eliminate those injustices.  Here is how Wiki describes it:

“Levelling up” is a political policy first articulated in the 2019 Conservative Party manifesto that aims to reduce the imbalances, primarily economic, between areas and social groups across the United Kingdom. It seeks to do so without acting to the detriment of prosperous areas, such as much of South East England. A white paper for the policy was published by Boris Johnson’s government on 2 February 2022, and has been continued by Rishi Sunak’s government. The policy is overseen by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, and the incumbent Secretary of State is Michael Gove.

No kidding.  The British have a whole cabinet level Department of Social Justice.  Here is its self-declared raison d’etre:

The United Kingdom is an unparalleled success story – a multi-cultural, multi-national, multi-ethnic state with the world’s best broadcaster; a vibrantly creative arts sector; a National Health Service which guarantees care for every citizen; charities and voluntary groups which perform a million acts of kindness daily; globally renowned scientists extending the boundaries of knowledge every year; entrepreneurs developing the products and services which bring joy and jobs to so many; and millions of citizens whose kindness and compassion has been so powerfully displayed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

But not everyone shares equally in the UK’s success. While talent is spread equally across our country, opportunity is not. Levelling up is a mission to challenge, and change, that unfairness. Levelling up means giving everyone the opportunity to flourish. It means people everywhere living longer and more fulfilling lives, and benefitting from sustained rises in living standards and well-being.

This requires us to end the geographical inequality which is such a striking feature of the UK. It needs to begin by improving economic dynamism and innovation to drive growth across the whole country, unleashing the power of the private sector to unlock jobs and opportunity for all. While there are world-leading and enterprising businesses and innovators right across the UK, economic growth and the higher productivity which drives it has been over-concentrated in specific areas, particularly the south east of England. A long tail of low-productivity businesses and places explain why UK productivity growth is too low compared to competitors.

It is vital that we preserve and enhance the economic, academic and cultural success stories of the UK’s most productive counties, towns and cities. But it is equally critical that we improve productivity, boost economic growth, encourage innovation, create good jobs, enhance educational attainment and renovate the social and cultural fabric of those parts of the UK that have stalled and not – so far – shared equally in our nation’s success.

darryll jones