Manchester in the Year 2027, World City or over-developed Mill Town?

I hope you enjoyed listening to my presentation earlier today (4th July 2007).

This is my first attempt at a Blog so please forgive any technical shortcomings.

I would welcome your thoughts on today's presentation and will try and add relevant material and links, in response to your comments.

If you would prefer to email me please do so.

Here is a reminder of the main points covered in my presentation.

Manchester is growing fast but what is the long term vision for the City and will it ever be "World Class"? Will the proposed improvements to the public transport system meet our needs for the next 20 years? Is the city being developed in a way that will safeguard our future prosperity?

Can lessons be learnt from high rise cities such as Shanghai and Hong Kong to explain how Manchester can realise its full potential? How much ground does Manchester really have to make up in order to secure "World Class" or "Global City" status?

Of course, some would argue that Manchester is already a "World Class" city. True, it may possess a global brand, some excellent sports venues and some great academic institutions. But can it really be compared to London or New York? Probably not, but does this really matter? I think it does, but before I explain why, let's establish first of all what makes a city truly "World Class". That way, we can be objective about where Manchester is positioned in the World.

The simplest qualifier I have come across reads as follows. If a city wants to refer to itself as "World Class", it needs to attract, not just host, the global headquarters of at least one major international company. If it manages to do this it will have achieved "World Class" city status.

Let's face it, British Petroleum is unlikely to move its global headquarters to the village of Chipping Norton in the Cotswolds. The reason is that like the vast majority of global companies, BP needs access to the international money markets, a talented labour pool together with top quality transport, housing, cultural, retail and leisure amenities appropriate to its workforce. Unfortunately, against these measures Chipping Norton simply doesn't tick enough boxes.

Now ask yourself how many Fortune 500 companies have relocated their global headquarters to Manchester. The answer is None. As a matter of fact, there isn’t even one UK FTSE 100 company headquartered here. Let’s face facts. Manchester will never compete with the likes of London or New York. That doesn't mean to say however, that we should not strive to attain as many elements of a World Class city as we possibly can. Indeed, I would argue that it is vital for all our futures that it does so.

If we want Manchester to realise its full potential, I feel we need to set ourselves far more ambitious targets, particularly in relation to transport and city planning. If we don't, other cities in the UK and in Europe will overtake us and that would be bad news for everyone in this room.

I believe the key to our future is an inspiring, long term vision. In other words, a clear idea of what Manchester should ideally look and feel like in say, 20 years time. Unless we have such as vision, we could easily lose our most successful local businesses let alone be in a position to attract international ones.

Let me give you an example. Imagine you are sitting here in this room in the Year 2027. Are you going to be happy to be relying on slow, cramped and rickety trams and diesel buses to get you home this evening whilst Leeds is operating a magnetic levitation light rail system that allows its commuters to travel from one end of the city to the other at an average speed of 100 miles per hour, door to door? I think not.

The fact is that we live in an increasingly competitive global marketplace. Manchester needs to drastically improve its physical infrastructure otherwise it will simply lag behind. Worse still, if it doesn’t address fundamental issues such as public transport, it could even take a step back. Indeed, I would argue that as time goes by, the task of realising any long term vision becomes increasingly difficult as resources are wasted on short term fixes. The Congestion Charge I fear, may be a case in point as it ties us to already outdated technologies for the next 30 years.

It is true that our public transport system compares favourably with other UK regional cities. However, measured by international standards it is quite frankly, an embarrassment. Our competitors are fast appreciating this and they will not be standing still forever. Meanwhile, businesses just like people, are becoming increasingly mobile. Who knows, your next office move might not be to Salford Quays, it might be to Stockholm!

In my view, the key to Manchester's future success is effective, integrated, public and private transport systems that employ cutting edge technolgies that are combined with high quality, high density land use. If we get these fundementals right, both people and business will thrive in Manchester for many decades to come.

The question is though, do we have a long term vision and are we tackling the challenges it poses here and now? Hands up those of you that have seen a 20 year masterplan for Manchester? Does anyone know what technology will replace 'Supertram'? Would it make sense for us to develop an underground system? Should we have a city centre luggage check-in desk for our airport?

The greatest challenge we face in tackling these issues is not land use planning, technology or funding, it is politics.

For example, I would question whether the 10 local authorities that make up our system of local government in Greater Manchester have the capability to agree and implement a Vision for a 21st Century, "World Class" city.

We all witnessed the fierce competition between Salford and Manchester councils in their bids for the BBC relocation. We are witnessing something similar with ITV in recent months. But what if we were faced with the opportunity to bid for the relocation of Microsoft's European headquarters, what then? Would our parochial approach ensure that Manchester or Salford achieved its long term development goals? Surely the time has come for us all to think about the Bigger Picture?

Would a Manchester Mayor be the answer? If it is good enough for London and New York, maybe Manchester should have one too? Would it not be better for our city wide planning and transport issues to be controlled by a unitary body?

Certainly, planning major infrastructure is a long term process often involving many unpopular short term policies. Whether 10 independent, vote sensitive administrations with a maximum tenure of 5 years is the right delivery mechanism to lead and deliver such strategic changes is questionable, in my view.

Why not let me know how you think Manchester should look and feel like in 20 years' time and whether high rise buildings and hi-tech transport solutions are what you want for your children.