Want the best Nottingham news by 9am every day? Sign up to our newsletter! Subscribe Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

It is deeply depressing that Nottingham, for the third year running, has the lowest gross disposable household income. (GDHI) in the UK.

The latest figure of £12,445 in 2017 was itself a fall from £12,477 a year earlier. In simple language, it means those who live in the city of Nottingham are on average poorer than anywhere else.

Households living in conurbations that we used to think of as places which had suffered from the loss of traditional industries such as Stoke-on-Trent, Blackburn, Wolverhamton and Walsall today are all, on average, better off than Nottingham.

These figures should serve as a wake up call to those who make up the newly elected city council, their new leader David Mellen and his chief officers led by chief executive Ian Curryer.

Nottingham may not be in freefall but its position is desperate and calls for some urgent and radical action by its political leaders whether city councillors, MPs or Whitehall.

There is no room for complacency or insularity. Something has clearly gone wrong despite an ambitious 2012 Nottingham Growth Plan.

It makes a nonsense of political logos sprawled across council owned sites and vehicles: “Ambitious for Nottingham”. They are a testament to failure and ought to be binned, the sooner the better.

The Office for National Statistics in 2017 compares Nottingham’s £12,445 with the national average GDHI of £19,514. At the other end of the scale, Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham enjoy the highest at £60,343.

The figures are based on where people live, not work. So it is a resident-based measure.

According to researchers at Nottingham Business School, part of Nottingham Trent University, the city has one of the lowest rates of productivity in the country in terms of GVA (a measure of economic output) per hour worked and one of the lowest rates of earnings from paid employment.

This is despite significant improvements in the skills of the city’s residents.

Over the last decade, however, second only to Bristol, Nottingham has seen the biggest increase in residents qualified to higher level skills, and the biggest fall in residents with low level skills (lacking the equivalent of five good GCSEs) based on residents in employment, so again, not hugely affected by students.

According to NTU’s Chris Lawton, the big difference with other cities – which goes some way to explaining Nottingham’s low income, low earnings and low productivity – is its industrial structure.

Almost a quarter of all jobs are in business administration and support service activities – which significantly exceeds all other similar-sized cities.

The sector includes ‘services for services’ – from out-sourced HR and finance, to call centres and cleaning services plus recruitment and temporary agency work, much of which is associated with lower pay, lower skills and relatively precarious service-sector employment.

Those with higher skills and qualifications may need to look further afield to pursue their ambitions and search for higher pay.

The city council has often interpreted Nottingham’s apparent poor economic performance on the number of students living in the city (who are less likely to be in full time or well-paid employment) which dilute the figures and that individuals who are in well paid, highly-skilled jobs live in more prosperous adjoining boroughs.

Rushcliffe adds large swathes of affluent, mainly rural areas, up to Radcliffe-on-Trent and Bingham to the East, and Keyworth to the south. Many Rushcliffe residents work in Nottingham.

Adding the prosperous outlying suburbs to the city’s statistical picture obscures the experience of people who live in areas such as St Ann’s, Sneinton, Lenton, Clifton, Basford and Bulwell.

The data points to the labour market and economy not working for residents of Nottingham.

However, ONS earnings data also shows that commuters, from more affluent areas like West Bridgford, suffer a so-called “Nottingham penalty,” if they come into the city to work because they experience lower than average earnings growth, even compared to those working in other parts of the county.

Mr Lawton suggests this may adversely affect the self-reported wellbeing, happiness and anxiety levels of the people of Nottingham.

According to the ONS, the first two have deteriorated while the latter has increased at a time when all have improved in the UK as a whole.

Nottingham seems to have lost its confidence and there are no simple solutions.

The city council should prepare an ambitious and optimistic narrative for Nottingham’s future, ensuring a buy-in from central Government once a new prime minister is in place.

The city council has to confront realities. A tendency either to dispute statistics, blame students or blame boundaries, is understandable but fails to move Nottingham towards anything positive.

And there are some positive stories to tell. For example, in their final year projects, NTU economics students observed that Nottingham was outperforming other cities environmentally, with levels of harmful emissions falling in the city while the size of the economy has expanded, with increasingly green transport being a big reason for this.

What can be done about the problem?

A first step would be to pass a resolution at full council committing the authority to realistic growth targets, based on a range of measures that more closely reflect residents’ experience of the city’s economy, jobs market, natural and built environment, by which its success or failure can be measured.

It will need to ensure the council is fit for purpose in trying to achieve these goals. A report should be presented to full council annually setting out its economic performance for discussion.

Secondly, a revised economic strategy should be put in place that is ambitious but, again, realistic. The council needs to show it really is business friendly and establish good relationships with employers.

Thirdly, as a matter of some urgency, a strategy for the survival of the city centre needs to be put in place showing the city is nimble, can think on its feet and is imaginative.

Nottingham is not alone in seeing the decline of retailing, which has lost 2,000 jobs between 2015 and 2017. Does the council have the ability to think big and “outside the box”?

Fourthly, it is vital the politicians establish a close relationship with new Government ministers when in place.

Many may represent southern constituencies for whom the Midlands Engine and Northern Powerhouse are secondary priorities. For instance, the survival of HS2 to Toton and beyond is crucial to the creation of well paid jobs. Improving journey times by train to London, Birmingham, Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester are fundamental.

Finally, Nottingham might take a leaf out of the book of truly ambitious cities which are turning themselves around such as Manchester and feel comfortable building strong relationships with London investors and countries such as China, India and America. Nottingham has to demonstrate it is Brexit ready and resilient to any possible economic contraction.

The new city council administration faces a daunting task.

With the right skills and determination, it should be able to re-establish economic growth worthy of its place as one of the country’s Core Cities.

*Figures researched and extracted by Chris Lawton, senior lecturer in economics, Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University.