Blogs
9 February 2012
Exceptional Sign Off
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
In their reaction to Mary Portas's review of the high street, the large retailers and their representatives have ranged from superficial flattery to outright cynicism. It is therefore unsurprising and telling to see that the BRC are lobbying against one of Mary Portas's most important recommendations. The Government must not listen to them.
Mary Portas made her recommendation that out of town developments should be subject to ‘exceptional sign-off’ because she understands the most fundamental problem faced by our high streets – retailers are not investing there. For example, CBRE figures show that of the 40 million square feet of new grocery retail development in the pipeline, 80% will be built out of town.
‘Exceptional sign off’ means Ministers actively using existing powers to make national planning policies effective. The reason why Mary Portas recommended it is because we need a new focus on the use of call-in powers from Ministers. Calling in big developments to make sure that local politics hasn't undermined planning policy is nothing new, and it's an important part of any workable planning system.
Unfortunately, since the last election these powers haven't been used: only one of the 146 out of town developments that could be considered against national policy has been called in.
Here's the background. Up to 2006 we had a planning framework that made developers think ‘town centre first’ when suggesting new retail developments. This established national planning policy was understood by local authorities. There were examples of schemes brought forward that were not consistent with ‘town centre first,’ but developers knew that even if they could get the development through the Council there was a likelihood that central Government would step in to uphold national policy.
The result was that the tide turned towards councils and retailers working together to invest in existing centres and the proportion of new retail space in the development pipeline for town centres reached a high point of 40% of all development.
Once Labour Ministers started tinkering with policy in 2006 uncertainty crept in, the confidence of retail investors in town centre schemes started to wane and the development trend shifted alarmingly rapidly back to out of town schemes.
Of course the big retailers, with their multi-million pound investment war chests, don’t want to build in town centres if they don’t have to. Compared to out of town it’s more expensive, less accessible and less flexible.
Coalition Ministers have yet to act to reintroduce the necessary clarity, but the National Planning Policy Framework, set to be published within weeks, can do this. But this much-simplified set of town centre first planning rules will only work if the Government backs them up, and the single most effective way to do this is to scrutinise all out of town developments to make sure they are truly exceptional.
Mary Portas's recommendation should be bang in line with the policy of a Government wanting to promote a town centre first planning policy. The big retailers opposing this are swimming against the tide of public and political opinion.
5 February 2012
Building Relationships
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
Last week, I found myself speaking at a conference of environmental health officers and trading standards officers. Not my usual audience, but an important one for both ACS and our members. When I speak to retailers, it’s often the local enforcement of legislation that matters more than the national political debate, so staying close to the people who are visiting members’ stores is an important part of what we do – hence my appearance on two panel sessions at this event.
What always strikes me when I get face to face with enforcement officers is how the often polarized positions I see from national lobby groups get overtaken by a desire to come to a sensible practical outcome. I didn’t hear much talk of high principles in the conference, just a very pragmatic view of the best way to help businesses and to ensure the spirit and the letter of the law is enforced. These enforcement officers see themselves as advisors.
Of we also hear the horror stories of over-zealous test purchasing or jobsworth enforcement bringing costs and hassle for retailers. These examples are real and too frequent, but I came away from the conference with some ideas about how to make sure your business experiences the best enforcement.
It all starts with forming a long-term relationship. Don’t expect your trading standards officer to know what training and systems you have in place. For example, you have to show them your refusals logs, till prompts and other processes to stop underage sales.
Secondly, see yourself as at the centre of a network of enforcement officers, including the police. You can either view this as a hostile pincer movement threatening your business, or a support structure to help you run your business. Try to get into the mentality of working with this network.
Thirdly, make a virtue of your localness. National chains spend huge amounts of time trying to get consistency in enforcement, but independent retailers should find this easier because they are likely to have one (or a few) councils and police forces to deal with. That should be an advantage for you, so make the most of it. The most practical example of this is neighbourhood policing where your first port of call for advice has to be your local officer and your next beat meeting – let the multiples focus on the more complex structures and partnerships.
Finally, try to focus on the vast majority of officials who want to do a good job, rather than allowing your mindset to be dominated by the handful who either over-step their brief or fail to engage properly. Approach officers with an open mind and a positive attitude.
Sometimes at our events, we get members of the enforcement community to share their views – the Safer Trading Conference on 24 May will be an example of that. It was good to be able to play the inverse role last week, and hopefully over time we will be able to grow understanding and empathy with one another’s roles.
24 January 2012
Job "Creation"
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
At a time of high unemployment it is no surprise that the government welcomes wholeheartedly news of job creation, including Number 10 even issuing their own press release about Asda's announcement of 5,000 new jobs.
I don't want to rubbish these claims, but I do want to make sure that they are properly scrutinised. I hope that the national media and politicians study what new jobs are really being created here, but more importantly I hope that local councils look into the claims of new jobs when supermarket planning applications are submitted. It's here that the rhetoric translates into the cold hard facts of new stores and a long-term impact on communities, so planners need to know what they are signing up to.
Here are some areas they should look in scrutinising these claims. Firstly, over what period of time are the people to be employed? A typical period stated in planning applications is three years, which is worth bearing in mind if the application refers to the numbers of people joining the company, but omits to count the number of people leaving the store. As it stands, job claims might be for seasonal staff joining for a handful of weeks, and this shouldn't be allowed to count as a new job created when it's so temporary. Similarly, staff leaving and being replaced should count as one job, not one for each time the role is filled, as often happens now.
Secondly, councils need to be clear about the full time equivalent number. Many retail jobs are part time, and there's nothing wrong with that, but what is the true figure when taken as an equivalent to full time jobs?
Thirdly, how many staff are transferred from other stores? As a rule of thumb, one third of the total number of staff claimed will already be working elsewhere in the business, one third will be temporary or seasonal, and one third will be genuine new long term recruits.
Finally, the potential lost jobs elsewhere need to be taken into account. In truth, the data on this is old and sketchy, but it's obvious to anyone who has seen their local high street sliced and diced by out of town developments that the empty stores (currently 15% of units) bring job losses when they close down. Attributing these directly to the opening or extension of a supermarket is of course difficult, hence the poor data available, but councils do have to come to a judgement about this, and crucially they need to take Mary Portas's advice and consult more fully with local traders to understand the impact of a new development.
I suspect I'm past the point of not sounding churlish, but regardless of your views on supermarkets, these have to be issues considered by local planners who are all too often seduced by headlines about new jobs. The truth is a little more complex than that.
12 January 2012
If You Build It, Will they Come?
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
I suspect many independent retailers will be allowing themselves to feel a touch of Schadenfreude on hearing the Tesco Christmas trading statement today. Tesco has come to symbolise massive buying power, ruthless local competition, and a juggernaut approach to getting their stores built. I have lost count of the number of retailers who have contacted ACS over the years complaining of what they see as unfair pricing tactics, poaching of staff and simply unequal competition. Many retailers will be feeling that the karma is finally coming full circle on the big beast.
But there are serious questions that these trading figures raise, and all that really matters is what happens next. With their organic growth stalled, and shareholders to satisfy, we have to expect Tesco to try to build more floor space to prop up overall sales. I'm aware that the official Tesco version of the future is that they will focus on existing stores rather than new space, but I can't be the only one to find this implausible. What about their pipeline of new stores, and their land bank ripe for development? Tesco have always been about growing floor space, and I don't think they know another way out of this. Also note that their internet development is actually pretty slow in the context of their bricks and mortar market share, so are they really well-placed to drive growth from on line?
Despite some of the PR about Tesco supporting town centres, in reality they are leading the charge out of town. Over 80% of new retail space is currently being built out of town, which goes against evidence (not least from Tesco's last detailed trading statement - this one doesn't break down performance in town and out of town) that customer preferences are moving away from out of town sheds. ONS data shows that for food shopping, customers are favouring local options, perhaps due to higher fuel prices, and by smaller households wanting to shop little and often.
In other words, we are already seeing evidence that the major multiples are responding not to customer demand but to the urge to build more space quickly and cheaply. These figures will intensify the desire for new space, and while their rivals may be feeling smug today, the fact is that with Tesco so clearly the biggest player in the market we have to expect others to follow, particularly if they see a window of opportunity to close the gap in market share.
So, bizarrely, Tesco's strategy of out of town development has been shown today to be failing, yet these results may well prompt even more out of town development that customers don't want. Perhaps I'll never truly understand investors and financial markets, but this gives me more sympathy for the recent statements of all three party leaders about the limitations of capitalism, and its potential to deliver outcomes against the public interest.
In fact, I think the answer here lies with the politicians, both locally and nationally. If the City is going to drive over-provision in out of town retail space, then it's up to Government to step in. That means effective planning law that allows local people to stand up to supermarket developers and challenge them to build where customers want, rather than where it's cheapest. The new National Planning Policy Framework is the opportunity to do this, and we have been encouraged to see the Government listening carefully to our arguments for strengthening guidance against bad out of town development.
I hope that our members don't look back on today as the start of a new rush out of town, when they should see it as the day customers asserted themselves against out of town sheds.
6 January 2012
METAL THEFT or (retail crime)?
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
The first thing I heard on the radio this morning was a story about metal theft. Churches, town halls, other public buildings, and railway tracks, are reporting a spike in theft of metal. This causes an immediate financial cost, damages old and socially important facilities, and in the case of transport can cause severe disruption for passengers. Clearly this is a big issue.
However, the average consumer of the UK media could be forgiven for forgetting other types of crime that, year on year, cost the economy more. Metal theft is estimated to cost £1bn per year, while retail crime costs £1.1bn per year according to the BRC. In addition, the human cost of retail crime is potentially much greater. Every member of staff abused or intimidated would not register as a financial cost but would cause personal distress to that individual and others who feel less safe while working or shopping at that store.
To some extent, retail crime, particularly when directed at local shops, is a crime against the whole community. Where public spaces are few, and where social facilities are limited, the local shop is a totem of the community as well as being a valuable source of products. I would argue that more than any other type of crime, retail crime blights communities and forms the public’s impressions of how safe they are in the area they live.
Our job is not to play down metal theft – as I say this is a serious issue – but to make sure government policy recognizes how serious retail crime is. We’ve been encouraged that Home Office ministers have assured our members at recent ACS events that their policies will not allow retail crime to be perceived as victimless or secondary. This needs to be backed by a framework of police support, partnership activity and an effective criminal justice system that helps retailers and effectively targets criminals.
I think we’re making progress, but I hope that the Government won’t get distracted by the media clamour over metal theft, and will give the right proportion of time and effort to all types of crime.
29 December 2011
Facing up to 2012
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
Predictions are a fraught business, particularly when they concern politics. Who would have predicted a year ago the Arab Spring, the death of Osama bin Laden, the pressures on the Euro, a further re-definition of Britain’s role in Europe, riots across England, the demise of the News of the World, and so many other stories in what has, by any comparison, been a pretty eventful year? Maybe some of you did call some of those events, but in truth most of politics is reactive, and Harold MacMillan’s analysis that responding to “events, dear boy, events” shape politics holds true today.
So with that all-encompassing caveat, here’s my view on what our sector can expect to dominate the political agenda in 2012.
The first milestone of the year is the publication of the government’s Alcohol Strategy. We’ve seen an indication of two of the things that might form part of that. Firstly, the David Cameron appears to have made up his mind that he will be a cheerleader for the introduction of minimum pricing, so we can expect that to feature somewhere in the strategy. Secondly, we know that the Government is looking at whether the number of premises selling alcohol in an area has a bearing on alcohol-related harm. We should expect the strategy to make some reference to this issue, too.
Both of these policy levers are mixed blessings for convenience stores. Most of the retailers I know are pretty relaxed about the idea of minimum pricing. But as the debate unfolds, a whole host of arguments start to play out. For example, is alcohol harm all about price then, in which case should we also be tackling promotional mechanics, or introducing higher taxation? Similarly, tackling the number of licences in an area might seem like a good idea if a competitor is circling but might be denied their licence. But the argument that the number of licences causes alcohol harm is flawed and not backed by any compelling evidence.
Either way, these issues, and the potential for further changes to the Licensing Act 2003 to give local people more powers over licensing decisions, are bound to be a huge policy priority in 2012. And don’t forget the Responsibility Deal – the government’s plan to get industry to do more to regulate itself instead of piling on more regulations. If highly interventionist measures such as minimum pricing and limits on licences do come forward, do these voluntary measures become redundant, or more important than ever?
The second huge policy area is planning. The National Planning Policy Framework is due for publication in the Spring, and the detail of this document – the national rules by which developers and local authorities will have to play – are going to have a huge impact on whether convenience stores get a new competitor close by, and what that competitor might look like. Planning policy is fundamentally about where things get built, but there is also the possibility that there will be more scope for local people to determine what type of outlets form part of the high street, and what mix of multiples and independents they want to see.
This idea, along with recommendations for the Secretary of State to call in for review all out of town developments, were both included in Mary Portas’s recent review. I have to say that of everything we did in 2011, our work on planning gave me the most pride. In every part of this debate, with Government, in Parliament, in Select Committee inquiries, at party conferences, in the Portas Review, in the media, and in our Heart of the Community seminar, we behaved as a passionate and responsible voice for the sector, and I firmly believe we have influenced that debate. 2012 will see a greater emphasis not on the national politicians, but on local debates to form the plans that will dictate planning decisions. We need to help members to influence these plans, form alliances, and be pro-active civic leaders bringing traders together with local people.
The third issue I expect to take up significant time will be tobacco. The government have announced their plans to consult on whether to introduce generic packaging for tobacco products. This would have a negative impact on retailers, notably by increasing service time and playing into the hands of the black market. We will be representing these views in the consultation, and don’t forget that this is an untried measure – the success of generic packaging in reducing smoking is at best unproven.
Of course we also await the introduction of the tobacco display ban from April for stores over 3,000 square feet. That’s a huge issue for members over that size, and a chance to look and learn for smaller stores. I’m pleased that the regulations we’ve been working with the government on are far less restrictive than originally conceived, but make no mistake, this will still be a cost burden for the retailers affected.
The fourth issue I want to touch on is energy, and the rules that govern how businesses are treated by their energy suppliers. We have been working with Ofgem to try and get a fairer deal, notably an end to back-billing which can hit a business with an unexpected cost because of the supplier’s errors. 2011 was a year in which Ofgem really came around to what we, and colleagues like the FSB and Consumer Focus, were saying about back-billing. 2012 has to be the year of delivery. I’m encouraged that British Gas have taken the first step and committed to limit back-billing to one year, but we need far more action from all the energy suppliers in this area.
Our fifth issue concerns not the democratic institutions of Government, but the Office of Fair Trading, which is currently considering whether to refer the news and magazine industry to the Competition Commission. The monopoly supply of these products is inefficient and outdated. Very early in the New Year we should learn whether the OFT is going to allow the current waste and abuse of the news and magazine supply chain to continue, or whether they are willing to entertain real change.
And finally, like all lobby groups, we will be looking forward to the Spring budget with great interest. Of course the nation will be focused on whether the Chancellor can juggle growth and public borrowing, in what really could be a crossroads for the UK economy. I’ll be looking for two specifics. Firstly, will the Chancellor give any help to business in respect of the scheduled 5.6% rates increase. He has already offered the opportunity for businesses to defer this payment, but a bottom line reduction in the level of rates payable is what’s really needed. Our big campaign for the next few months is to put pressure on the Chancellor to understand why retailers need this support now.
It has also become the norm for the National Minimum Wage rate applicable from 1 October to be announced at or around Budget time. The Low Pay Commission will report early in 2012, and we hope they will have taken on the views and experiences of retailers from their visits around the country and from our evidence to them and focus group in September. The message that came through that evidence was very clear: minimum wage increases are met with a reduction in staff hours and ultimately in redundancies. This is the last thing individual businesses and the economy as a whole needs now, and in terms of pure bottom line benefit, this announcement could be the most important of 2012.
There are a host of other key issues lining up: the future of the Post Office, crime policy and the much-vaunted deregulation agenda. It promises to be another busy year – and who knows what else might come round the corner to surprise us?
13 December 2011
Portas Review - The Substance Behind the Style
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
So Mary Portas has spoken forth, her report is published and the media, retail industry and blogosphere are passing their judgement. Here's my take. I should say that anyone who feels I may have been flattered by my personal mention in the acknowledgements in the report - to the point where I'm not completely objective - would be absolutely right, so take this with whatever quantity of salt you like.There is a great deal in the report that focuses on how retailers, market traders, landlords, councils and local people can work together to make their high streets more attractive and viable. There are lots of specific ideas, some of which such as using high street stores as collection points for Internet shopping orders are particularly relevant to convenience stores. ACS is committed to supporting these initiatives, and I'll write on them further in due course, but for now I want to focus on some of the harder edged policy issues addressed in the report.
Go to recommendations 14 and 15 and you'll see how this report is crucial for local shops. The National Planning Policy Framework needs amending to be a stronger town centre first strategy, and Mary has firmly identified this policy as central to the future of the high street. Her backing should be welcomed by local shops.
Even more importantly, she has identified a stronger role for central government in stopping bad out of town development. Using "exceptional sign-off" powers for all out of town developments would focus the mind of councils and developers to ensure that new stores really are in keeping with a town centre first policy. This is a big shift of emphasis that really will make a difference to a position where successive governments have abdicated responsibility for assessing new developments.
Add to this recommendation 25 which covers neighbourhood plans and retail mix. What this means is that communities who want to favour independents or certain specialist retailers should be allowed to define this. That's absolutely in line with the principles of localism and a new tool against the unfettered growth of superstores' smaller formats.
Then you have the desire to consult better on new development, specifically with local traders. ACS pulled together for the Portas Review a case study from Ely where traders have been thwarted every time they have wanted to make their voice heard on parking charges and development plans. Mary has addressed this issue by calling for traders to be at the heart of retail plans.
I dare say there will be some fashionably cynical responses to the Portas Review, and frankly anyone expecting a silver bullet was deluded. But this is a valuable contribution to the debate. Now it's up to the Government to respond - in the Spring - to take forward the recommendations. They cannot and should not ignore Mary's vision for high streets.
7 December 2011
ACS - Heart of the Community Event
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
We have a bit of a mantra here at ACS: lobbying, advice and networking. It’s important for us to keep focused on these three things that we feel add most value to members, and everything we do should be about at least one of these priorities.
Our recent Heart of the Community conference captured for me quite nicely how we can do all of these things for members, and how the Association is made so powerful by your involvement. Over 130 retailers and other colleagues from the industry attended the event at Methodist Central Hall, Westminster.
The first objective of the day was lobbying. We wanted to give a show of strength to the politicians and our two political speakers at the conference, Bob Neill and Hilary Benn, will have left in no doubt about the value of local shops and the passion of ACS members to see a fair planning system.
The detail of Bob Neill’s contribution, in particular, gave us hope. It’s clear that the Government is listening, and it’s also clear that they understand how national planning policy needs to promote high streets and local shops, not big out of town parks. The Heart of the Community seminar was a step forward in terms of getting our message across.
Of course this message was backed up by our reception in the Houses of Parliament, attended by many MPs who took the opportunity to meet up with retailers operating in their constituency. It was great to see relationships being formed, and these can be built on by asking your MP to your store and writing to them on key issues.
So we clearly delivered in terms of lobbying impact and also in terms of advice. We tried to explain how retailers can influence the planning system, and the message from the experts came through loud and clear: get involved in formulating your local plan if you want to make a difference. We want to help retailers take the step from being great community retailers to being civic leaders, shaping their local environment.
But perhaps the biggest win for the retailers was the networking value of the day. Think about where your best ideas come from, where you get support, and how you take your business forward, and its your fellow retailers who have most of the answers you need. The contacts made at this event can add so much value to the business, because if you have a challenge to face it’s pretty likely that someone else has had to meet this before you. Why not learn from one another’s experience?
If you missed Heart of the Community you don’t have to wait until next November for a chance to support our lobbying, get advice, or make contacts. 2012 is packed with ACS events, with our main conference on 27th March as well as forums and seminars throughout the year. Most of our events are free to attend, and we take them around the country so that you can get to them easily. Give us a call to find out more.
Finally, thanks for all your support over the past year, and best wishes for a merry (and prosperous) Christmas and New Year for you and your business.
24 October 2011
A Fairer Deal on Energy
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
Chris Huhne’s announcement last week about energy supply was generally poorly-received. His rhetoric at the Liberal Democrat party conference had raised expectations for a big intervention to curb the power of the energy companies. But in reality, there was little to re-assure businesses and customers who don’t understand why their bills go up and the service they receive is variable, while at the same time the big energy companies record huge profits.
Behind the Ministerial announcements there is a body of work going on to try to bring about fairer practices that would stop the sort of nightmare stories you read about most weeks in our trade press. Retailers getting back-bills covering a span of several years, bullying tactics and bailiffs being deployed for payments still under dispute, and non-communicative energy suppliers all need to be stopped, and ACS is working to achieve this.
Firstly, there’s the prospect of a Code of Practice to extend some of the protections available to domestic customers to businesses as well. It’s good that this is on the agenda, but the key issue here is back-billing. If businesses don’t get protection for bills going back more than a year, I can’t see their representatives going along with it and ACS certainly couldn’t support such a Code. Ofgem needs to make sure that any Code is meaningful and if it’s not we need them to intervene to make the energy companies treat businesses fairly.
Secondly, there’s the surprisingly complex issue of who is covered by a Code or by statutory protections. In essence, I see this as being about whether a business is likely to have the scale and skills to manage energy supply differently to a normal domestic customer. Very small “micro-businesses” – those with under 10 staff – are unlikely to have energy buying skills greater than most households, so clearly they need protection. Large businesses probably don’t need the same level of protection – although my own view would be that good practice should be universal.
That leaves small and medium sized businesses as a grey area for energy regulation. I don’t know a single retailer with, say, half a dozen shops who employs specialist resource to manage energy, and who doesn’t deserve the same protection as a household or micro-business. That leaves the medium sized concerns, those with maybe twenty stores, who have a bit more clout to look after themselves but who are going to be running a tight ship at head office. It’s a tricky discussion, but I think the onus is on the energy companies to argue why certain businesses shouldn’t receive the same protections as domestic customers. Regardless of the big announcements, this is the detailed debate that will affect retailers.
I should also make clear that ACS can help members with inquiries about energy contracts. There are too many pitfalls in the current system and we need to remove them, but while they exist at least let us help you to navigate around them. If you want to get involved with our campaign, visit the lobbying section of the website to send a pro-forma letter to your MP.
30 September 2011
Red Ed and Local Shops
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
So the media have decided that Ed Miliband’s speech to the Labour party conference was anti-business and a lurch to the left. Maybe they’re right, and business organisations like the Institute of Directors and the British Chambers of Commerce have rounded on Labour’s leader. But look at what he actually said, and the debate is much more nuanced.
Where Ed Miliband got himself into trouble was with his attempt to distinguish between “good” and “bad business. But look at David Cameron’s rhetoric on business responsibility and Government policies like the Responsibility Deal, and there are similarities. The potential for business to be a force for good isn’t in question, what challenges policy-makers is how to create incentives for good practice and penalties for bad behavior.
I think it’s here that business mis-trusts Ed Miliband. There’s a sense that, unlike the current Government’s “nudge” approach to bringing about behaviour change, Labour’s instincts would be to regulate. And we know that regulation in these areas often catches out the wrong businesses or creates perverse incentives. Faced with these complexities, and having raised expectations of more government regulation of business, would a Labour government revert to expensive and ineffective blunt instruments to tackle complex problems?
You could see Ed Miliband’s speech, one year into a likely five year term in opposition, as pretty irrelevant outside the party. But the tone he sets will influence how party members, including councilors who influence decisions on issues as diverse as policing, alcohol licensing and planning, view business. Given that, the imperative to position your business as responsible has become even more relevant. It’s the basic stuff we’ve been talking about for ages and you can find lots more about it on this web site: attending police beat meetings, getting trading standards officers into your business to talk about how you stop countless under age sales, and taking part in developing the local plans for what gets built and where in your area.
The good news is that on the evidence of our fringe meeting in Liverpool, there is strong support for local shops and the role they play in high streets and communities. Perhaps the audience was to some degree self-selecting given the event title: Can Localism Save the High Street?. Nevertheless, the grassroots of the Labour party, and indeed the Liberal Democrats who we ran a similar meeting with the week before, see local shops as firmly in the “good” business camp.
Don’t get hung up on the Westminster village interpretations of Ed Miliband’s view of business – focus locally on the people who can make a difference to your business.
23 September 2011
Party Conference Season
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
My colleagues in the public affairs industry treat the party conference season in a variety of ways. For some, it's an invaluable opportunity to talk policy with key politicians. For others it's a place to be seen. For some it's an extended stag do conducted in hotel bars with fellow politicos.
For me, it's a time of year always greeted with some cynicism. I've never been convinced that these annual bunfights really represent the best chance further policy discussions, and because everyone's there it means little to just be another lobbyist shaking another hand. Even the late nights have waning appeal, but that's probably due to me getting old. Given all this, I think ACS needs a really good reason to spend time and money at these events, and this year I think the stars are aligned for us to really have an impact.
Certainly the evidence of the first 2011 Autumn conference - the Lib Dems' event in Birmingham - suggests that our message about needing robust planning laws to support local shops is getting traction. As with everything in politics, timing is everything, and with the National Planning Policy Framework currently under consultation and the Mary Portas high streets review in full swing there is no more relevant time to be talking about planning policy.
As I'm saying at our fringe meeting at these events, the debate on planning has become - unhelpfully I think - polarised, with groups like the National Trust arguing that the Government's plans with damage the green belt, while the Government vehemently argues that their intentions are the opposite. In respect of retail development, the truth is more nuanced. As it currently stands, the National Planning Policy Framework includes too many potential loopholes for supermarket developers to exploit to get permission for out of town stores that the community don't want. But we absolutely think that we can improve the NPPF to reduce this risk and help communities to plan for strong high streets and secondary areas.
The key to this is the inclusion of two strong tests to put pressure on developers to go in town rather than out of town. A sequential test would be far stronger than the currently drafted advice for planners to "prefer" town centres, and an impact test, based on independent evidence, would make sure that the true effects of out of town development were considered. Alongside this, we need a shift of tone to make clear that if it comes to a shoot out, the principle of town centre first development beats the principle of sustainable development.
We can achieve these outcomes and by taking the debate forward at all party conferences we are trying to build a consensus on what communities really want. That's a big task and a crucial one that will impact upon local shops and high streets for decades to come.
9 September 2011
Portas: Sizzle or Substance?
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
As you will know, retail guru and TV star Mary Portas has been asked by the Prime Minister to come up with ideas to boost the high street. Perhaps your own local area includes some of the 15% of retail properties now vacant in Britain’s high streets, and if so you will understand that Mary’s review is urgent. Saving high streets now is a far better option that having to build them from scratch when they become ghost-towns.
I met with Mary and her team to discuss the review, and I can re-assure local retailers that they are looking to produce a hard-hitting and relevant report that gets to the heart of the issues. She understands that out of town development is a key factor in high street decline, so planning policy is a big part of the equation.
What that really means is making it harder for new out of town developments to get built and bleed the life out of town centres and secondary parades. This Government rightly wants to give more power to local people to make planning decisions, but there is a danger that this will create loopholes for more superstore development.
We’ll have to wait and see how Mary addresses the complex issues around planning, but it’s pleasing that she understands that without the right planning policy, high streets will always be vulnerable to soul-less out of town retail parks with their free parking and cheaper rates.
As well as being pleased that Mary’s review has the right agenda, we should be encouraged it is taking place at exactly the right time. The Government is consulting on its National Planning Policy Framework, and the way that this document deals with out of town development will shape our retail landscape for a generation. High streets and local retailers need a champion in this debate, and we hope that Mary will be just that.
5 September 2011
Response to the Alcohol Concern Story
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
As lobbying organisations that argue strongly and clearly for our side of issues, we are all in the game of portraying data and information in the most favourable light to our case. We make our arguments using the evidence we have and it is for government, politicians and the media to absorb the arguments and make their judgements. Sometimes however claims are made that stretch the boundaries of credibility and one such example is Alcohol Concerns’ spin on their recent study on the relationship between number of off licences and hospital admissions by under-18s.
The report seen here is a comparison between the number of off licences per 100,000 of the population and the number of hospital admissions of under-18s. The report does not seek to establish any form of causal link between this definition of ‘availability’ and harmful drinking. It merely reports what it calls a ‘moderate but statistically significant’ link between the density of off licences and hospital admissions. The report excludes London (the press release suggests this is because of the different ‘ethnic makeup’ of London youth, the report is more candid stating that the results in London don’t support their conclusion and hence they were excluded.)
The report itself is inoffensive because it does not seek to over claim its conclusions. However in the press release spin of the report Alcohol Concern definitely goes a step too far. Here is Don Shenker’s quote:
“It is a sobering thought that the numbers of off-licences in any one area has an impact on under-18s drinking and ending up in hospital. It is a failing of the current system that so many licences are being granted without due consideration to young people’s health.”
The fact is Alcohol Concern has set upon the idea that there should be fewer places selling alcohol and they will make these points even if the evidence they use to back it up isn’t really telling them what they want to hear.
This would be a claim that we would ignore but the problem is that if the idea of limiting the number of licences on such suggested harms could see councils preventing new retail businesses from opening up or taking away trade from existing operators. The businesses that would suffer are most likely to be the independents and small businesses that don’t have the resources to navigate the licensing system.
The only determinant of whether you should have or keep a licence to sell alcohol is the management standards you hold in your premises. If you fall short of these you quite rightly face sanction and ultimately the prospect of losing your licence.
I hope very much that Ministers will look at more evidence than just this; in particular I would point them to the figures on underage drinking for their own young person’s survey – the number of under 15s drinking has declined from 26% in 2001, to 13% in 2010, also for the population as a whole UK alcohol consumption declined by 6% in 2010.
There are significant alcohol related problems and we need to find ways to bear down further upon them.
However Alcohol Concern should start from the point of view of clear, logical and robust evidence of where the problem lies, not come up with policy conclusions first and seek to backfill the necessary evidence from there.
26 August 2011
Where Do You Stand in the Obesity Debate?
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
On this morning’s BBC Breakfast, new projections about obesity levels in the UK knocked Libya off the top billing. You’ll have your own view on editorial priorities there, but what this does tell us is that the nation’s health matters to the media and therefore, to at least some degree, to the public.
Alongside the projections of an obesity “epidemic” came calls for more stringent Government intervention. Fat taxes were one specific idea put forward, and alongside this there was a much more general accusation that the food industry needed to do more and was unduly influencing Government policy.
The Government’s strategy in this policy area is pretty clear: work with industry to improve information to customers, to re-formulate products where possible, and to encourage healthier options. ACS is involved in two initiatives in this space: as Change4Life partners and as signatories to the Responsibility Deal. Through this, we want to help retailers to offer fruit and veg and other healthy options, and our Change4Life-branded fruit and veg scheme is well on track to having 1,000 stores on board by the end of next year.
So how do retailers respond to the debate taking place today? To me, it’s not about what’s written in Lancet, or what’s said within the Department of Health or in the media. It’s very practically about what you do for your customers. Doesn’t it just make sense commercially and in terms of your community role to offer healthier products as part of a choice to your customers? The worst thing that could happen is for our sector to get distracted by the threat of (highly unlikely) fat taxes or draconian regulation against retailers. Instead, we should focus on the positive opportunity to make a contribution to the fight against obesity through what we sell.
Of course I’m keen to promote our scheme and make sure we over-deliver on our pledge to Government, but having seen how the Change4Life fruit & veg initiative actually works in stores – for example a fantastic event I attended in Hackney with the Sunstar Group and a local primary school – it’s such an obvious win for everyone. We’ve got lots of experience to share and we’re making it as easy as possible for you to deliver this in store.
Sorry if that ended up like a bit of an advert for an ACS initiative, but it’s the right thing for our sector right now. Contact chris.noice@acs.org.uk for more details.
9 August 2011
Riots
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
Can you imagine the horror of your shop, your home, your livelihood being taken away from you for the sake of a bit of light entertainment for some local youths in your community? The physical fear, the violence, the disregard for you and your business, and the painful irony of your own community rounding on itself. Convenience store owners in a number of London communities must be waking up (in the unlikely event they have actually slept) this morning wishing that this was indeed a nightmare, not a horrific reality.
There are enough amateur sociologists trying to explain the violence on the streets of London (and elsewhere of course) this morning, and I’m not going to add my voice to this debate, other than to say that whatever the conditions in some areas of the country, there has to be personal responsibility for acts of violence like this. We can look for reasons, but we cannot excuse the rioters.
What I would like to look at is the role that local shops can play in the aftermath of the riots. Of course they may not yet be over and we are all braced for another night of disorder, but where communities have been attacked, how can local shops play a role in re-building them? There is an immediate priority in the clean up operation. Go to www.twitter.com/riotcleanup for details of how you can help, and maybe there are ways you can support this effort by providing bags, gloves and other materials. Can you put yourself at the hub of your community’s response?
Longer-term, there is a role for local shops in helping to promote community cohesion. This may sound a bit broad, so here are two things that retailers can do, whether they have been affected by the riots or not. Firstly, hold regular meetings with your police. If you have intelligence on local problems, recent events are a pretty direct illustration of why it’s in everyone’s interests to share this.
Secondly, as well as talking to the police, form relationships with other groups in the community. Other businesses, schools, youth groups, sports clubs and religious centres all make up – along with you – the fabric of the local community. By talking with one another, you can identify problems early and try to find solutions. Of course that doesn’t mean that incidents won’t happen, but if the rioters are apparently using effective communications, why can’t the law abiding majority communicate better themselves?
I don’t know about you, but there’s nothing more irritating when watching coverage of events like this than hearing the usually incoherent views of self-appointed “community leaders” who purport to speak for local people. Local shops earn their status in their community not by what they say but by what they do. Support one another to get through the this terrible crisis, and be part of shaping your communities in the future.
1 August 2011
Parking up the Wrong Tree
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
Today’s announcement by Communities Secretary Eric Pickles on car parking illustrates well the tension between policy direction and policy positioning in the localism debate. In his announcement the Secretary of State tells us that the national planning policy framework will lead to cheaper car parking in town centres (actually the statement says ‘may lead’ to cheaper town centre parking but I’m not sure journalists are supposed to dwell on that).
The fact is that what Ministers have done on car parking is remove from national policy rules setting out the maximum number of car parking spaces for large non-residential developments. The nationally prescribed maximum is designed to prevent too much development land being given over to car parking spaces. In line with their localism agenda Ministers have taken the view that there should no longer be a one size fits all approach imposed from the centre. Instead the new policy encourages local councils to set their own standards for car parking if they wish.
Given that Ministers are essentially removing any rules - it is only conjecture for Eric Pickles to claim that this change will lead to more and cheaper town centre parking. It assumes that:
- local authorities will not impose their own parking limits, also
- that there will be developers wanting to acquire land and build more car parking and
- that as a result of this new influx of car parking development councils or private car park owners will charge less.
By any reckoning that’s a lot of assumptions.
In fact given that by the same stroke Ministers have removed the restriction on the size of car parks in out of town developments then it is just as likely, if not more so, that developers will be able to exploit the policy to build larger car parks at out of town retail parks. There is more cheap land around these developments and they rely more on car borne customers. If Ministers have decided that councils should decide for themselves they can’t really by the same token claim to know what they are going to do as a result.
28 July 2011
Good News on Youth Drinking
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
It probably won’t get much media coverage, but I wanted to try to tell you that the proportion of 11-15 year olds drinking has declined from 51% to 45%. While this number is still too high, this is a good news story which is relevant to local shops.
So much of our work as ACS takes place against the backdrop of finding solutions to complex and intractable problems. The images of kids drinking and chaos on our town centres make people angry and lead to calls for more stringent regulation, but they also make people feel like giving up. I’m very proud that ACS and its members haven’t given up but have taken these issues on. Today’s figures suggest we might be getting some traction.
Our biggest focus in this area is on Community Alcohol Partnerships. This involves getting all the people who have an interest in tackling youth drinking together in a local area to tackle this problem. The police, local authorities and retailers will go into schools, educate children, confiscate alcohol, enforce penalties against proxy purchasers, and look at all the causes of alcohol misuse by young people rather than just enforcing the law on under age sales.
Whether there is a Community Alcohol Partnership in place or not, the most important thing for retailers is to make sure stopping under age sales is at the top of the agenda for everyone working in store. One mistake can be critical, and policies like Challenge25 are there to give some support to staff and to try to change the culture around young people buying alcohol.
It would be glib of me to suggest that the efforts of CAPs and retailers are the only factors behind today’s improved figures on youth drinking, and the figures are still too high. However, there is compelling evidence that our work (and that of the whole industry) is starting to have an impact on our drinking culture. There’s a long way to go, and complacency is the enemy, but responsible retailers should be giving themselves a bat on the back this week.
11 July 2011
Relaunching the Store
Paul Cheema, Costcutter Retailer
On Saturday, after an extensive refit, we relaunched the store and invited our customers to join us in celebrating. We had a fantastic turnout and incredible support from suppliers, who provided food and drink for the whole event. Below are a selection of photos chronicling the day, along with some pictures that show just how far we've come since the store opened in the 1980s.
Suppliers set up stands outside the store to show their support and reward our customers for their continued loyalty.
The Lord Mayor was on hand to officially reopen the store along with the whole family
The store refit brought back a lot of memories of how far we've come since we set up here in the 1980s. Check out the photos below to see just how much the store has changed!
Then...
And now. Costcutter have done a great job in modernising their branding and we're proud to be a member.
Then...
And now. Spotlights and wood panel flooring give the aisle a welcoming, warming atmosphere.
Then...
And now. A new occasion fridge and revitalised alcohol lines will be great for customers looking for a big night in!
The Truth Behind Ed Miliband's Comments on Planning
James Lowman, ACS Chief Executive
5 July 2011
You wait all month for a blog on planning, then two come along all at once. I've been forced back to the keyboard because I noticed some recent comments in the blogosphere that are a perfect illustration of how the debate on planning and high streets can get skewed and polarised.
Columnist, academic and biographer of Tony Blair, John Rentoul, wrote that Labour party policy should be in favour of Tesco running schools and other public services, rather than what he saw as the current leadership's aversion to Britain's biggest supermarket chain. John Rentoul, and other commentators, have been responding to what they perceive as Ed Miliband's anti-Tesco comments about local diversity and high streets.
But if you actually read Ed Miliband's comments about high streets, this is what he said: "We do want local people to have more of a say about local retail developments because sometimes another local supermarket chain isn't what people want." What on earth is wrong with that? Do John Rentoul and other commentators anywhere across the political spectrum really believe local people shouldn't have a say? When did the left start backing major corporations instead of local people?
This is the problem when the debate gets falsely polarised into pro- and anti-Tesco views. We are unashamedly a partisan lobby group for local shops, but even we wouldn't claim that every single multiple development is necessarily a bad thing. It's all about the specific circumstances of the development, the town, and the views of local people. Simplifying these issues might be tempting in an age where so much communication has to be in less than 140 characters, but too many commentators are just being lazy.
We have to make sure the this important issue is considered in the right terms, and we'll be taking the debate to the party conferences and our own Heart of the Community seminar this Autumn. Let's see if we can help politicians, local activists, councillors, and of course retailers, to take seriously the real planning issues facing communities.