Reindustrialisation is back on the political agenda
In the early years of David Cameron’s premiership, he told a client of mine that their project could help his government reindustrialise the north.
More than a decade later, Andy Burnham is using the same language again – and the question is whether this time it can become more than a political ambition. For me, that question is not only about the north, but also about what reindustrialisation should mean for the Midlands too.
A renewed focus on reindustrialisation is for very good reason.
With summer recess about to begin, we can only speculate about what Burnham’s vision might really look like – and what is realistically achievable.
We’re in the same boat as Labour MPs waiting for the promised 10-year plan who also don’t have any certainty about what his tenure will really look like.
Perhaps the starting point for reindustrialisation is to tackle deindustrialisation, because that is the immediate threat facing many parts of the foundational economy that are central to our economy and way of life.
Production is now an economic and electoral test
The newly formed Labour Reindustrialisation Group is framing reindustrialisation through the lens of production: not just whether Britain grows, but what it makes, where it is made and who gets to participate in that economy. It is calling for one million new jobs in production over the next decade and says that this is both an economic argument and an electoral one.
Economically, it is about rebuilding the capacity, skills and supply chains that allow places to generate secure, well-paid work. Politically, it speaks directly to communities where the legacy of deindustrialisation is still visible, and where voters are more likely to judge growth by whether new factories, apprenticeships and skilled jobs are appearing locally rather than by national GDP figures alone.
Reindustrialisation, in that sense, is not nostalgia; it is a test of whether Labour can make growth feel tangible in the places it needs to win and govern for.
The West Midlands still has an industrial base worth protecting
In the West Midlands, that story is especially stark. Manufacturing is no longer the dominant employer it once was, but neither has it disappeared.
The region still has around 260,000 manufacturing workforce jobs – making up 8.7 per cent of all jobs, compared with 6.7 per cent across the UK – and manufacturing accounts for a larger share of regional output than the national average.
Stopping deindustrialisation should come first
Foundational sectors and many manufacturers are struggling with some of the highest energy costs in the world, so a Burnham government can only in my view stem this tide by tackling these or reducing some levies.
That makes the challenge less about starting from scratch and more about stopping further erosion of an industrial base that still matters.
There have been some promising comments about government using its power to buy British. Sovereign defence manufacturing is likely to feature, alongside more support for steel.
Knowledge-intensive services are part of the modern industrial base
I also think Burnham’s definition of reindustrialisation matters. My view is that it’s likely to include tradeable sectors, incorporating manufacturing as well as knowledge-intensive business services.
The reality is that these services are now part of the modern industrial base. According to the Centre for Cities, they are the UK’s largest tradeable sector in 42 of the UK’s 63 cities.
For the West Midlands, that means reindustrialisation cannot only be measured in factories, production lines or logistics, important though those are. It should also recognise the design, engineering, legal, finance, consultancy, communications, data and professional expertise that help manufacturers, infrastructure providers, developers and exporters compete.
That should not dilute support for the foundational economy. If anything, it strengthens the case for it.
The region’s industrial and everyday economies depend on one another: manufacturers, utilities, logistics operators and construction businesses need skilled advisory, financial, technical and communications support, while knowledge-intensive firms need strong places, reliable infrastructure and real, productive activity around them.
Reindustrialisation should therefore be about connection rather than hierarchy: backing the sectors that keep places working, while also growing the specialist services that help them move up the value chain.
Good growth depends on people, skills and places
Of course the other test for reindustrialisation is what it means for people and places.
“Good growth in every postcode” will need more than a slogan. It will require a greater appreciation of industry from politicians at both local and national level.
Too often, the wishlists of jobs and businesses they want to attract is a long way from reality.
Instead there needs to be a consideration of the skills of the existing workforce, what needs to happen to help people seize new opportunities, and the housing, infrastructure and wider cultural offer that all combine to make a place people want to live and work.
This is a personal blog post. Any opinions, findings, and conclusion or recommendations expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Centre for the New Midlands or any of our associated organisations/individuals.
ABOUT OUR AUTHOR:
Matt has over 20 years’ experience developing corporate communications campaigns and stakeholder engagement programmes for a broad church of clients including Tarmac, Turner & Townsend and IM Properties.
He has devised and executed integrated campaigns for B2B and professional services clients and delivered on major economic infrastructure projects in the mining, quarrying and energy sectors.
