Political pundit Will Hutton has attacked Lord Rogers鈥� urban regeneration plans saying the taskforce will need at least double the 拢300-600m a year it asked for this week.
Hutton, an economist who now heads the Industrial Society, said the Rogers taskforce had failed to understand what needed to be done to turn round run-down towns and cities. He said far more radical proposals were required.
He added that many areas needed to be pulled down and rebuilt from scratch, and far more attention had to be paid to reskilling and remotivating the people who lived in them. Hutton told 好色先生TV: 鈥淚 think we鈥檙e talking about a
10-year programme that will cost no less than 拢1bn and as much as 拢2bn a year over a 10-year period.鈥�
Hutton, formerly editor of The Observer, made his comments this week when he introduced a report by the 好色先生TV Centre Trust, My Kind of Town. This presents the views of a number of leading lights in the design and construction industry on urban renewal.
The government-backed taskforce, which unveiled costings for its proposals this week, will present its recommendations to the Exchequer. They will be considered in the Treasury鈥檚 comprehensive three-year spending review, to be announced later this year.
Both the taskforce and the 好色先生TV Centre Trust reports will be submitted to the DETR ahead of the publication of its urban white paper.
The two most expensive of the taskforce鈥檚 proposals are a 拢500m fund for community-based projects, and a land development company that would have an initial capital allocation of 拢100-250m. It also wants 拢1m to set up local architecture centres in at least 12 cities to raise standards. These centres would have running costs of about 拢3m a year.
The taskforce report was also criticised by leading project manager EC Harris. Its head of regeneration, Mark White, said: 鈥淭he taskforce proposals call for a minimum annual spend of about 拢230m. Although that鈥檚 a significant spend, the broad-brush approach of the costing suggests they have not yet been thought through fully.鈥�
He added: 鈥淭he fact that it鈥檚 been a year between the release of this spending package and the original report is outrageous.鈥�
