I couldn't bear to listen to the discussion about this on the radio this morning; my blood boiled from the first word. They even negate their own thinking here:
It was time to be "realistic about the ability of cities such as Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle to regenerate struggling nearby towns such as Liverpool, Bradford and Sunderland.
Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle are examples of how regeneration
can work*, and there is no reason why Liverpool, Bradford and Sunderland cannot emulate them. Oh, and Liverpool, Bradford and Sunderland are cities, not towns, you ignorant fucks.
I'll admit to being shocked on a recent visit to Liverpool when driving through the Kensington district to see the main road lined by derelict terrace houses slated for demolition. The area is on its arse, no doubt. But it is madness to suggest that the solution is to transport everybody to Oxford and Cambridge.
Of course, what they're really saying here is not that regeneration doesn't work, but that it costs too much money. And the North isn't worth it.
*to a point. There's a whole can of worms about the changes in Northern towns and cities over the last thirty years...