DOCSLIB.ORG

We Go Further. We Go Further… Creating Smarter Ways to Enable People and Businesses to Travel, Connect and Grow

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Annual Report 2021 and Accounts We go further. We go further… Creating smarter ways to enable people and businesses to travel, connect and grow. Esken has a clear strategy Esken is working with London to develop valuable growth Southend Airport to continuously assets from aviation and develop its multi-award-winning energy from waste. passenger experience, grow passenger numbers and fully Its core assets are London leverage the value of the Southend Airport and Stobart airport infrastructure. Energy. It also owns Stobart Aviation Services and has a It is also working with Stobart portfolio of non-core assets. Aviation Services to secure further ‘cost plus’ contracts to provide global logistics, ground handling, and passenger and airside services for airports and airlines. Stobart Energy is a maturing business with established infrastructure. Esken aims to further develop the operating income of Stobart Energy through 2021. Esken. We go further. Esken plc Annual Report and Accounts 2021 01 Highlights Esken plc Esken plc 22 Annual Report & Accounts 2021 What’s inside Annual Report & Accounts 2021 23 Report Strategic Report Strategic Impact of COVID-19 on our core operating businesses Governance Corporate • Global logistics income and tight cost control are underpinning our Aviation businesses: Statements Financial – Lockdown restrictions curtailed much of the commercial passenger operations at London Southend Airport. As a result, 147k passengers flew through London Southend Airport compared to 2.1 million in the prior year. Strategy – The 93% fall in passenger numbers led to a 56.4% reduction in revenue to in action Governance Corporate £24.7m. However, EBITDA1 was less impacted, with our Aviation businesses London reporting a £6.1m EBITDA1 loss. This reflects our strict financial discipline, Southend Airport a reduction in airline marketing contributions and continued logistics income. • Despite the impact of COVID-19, Stobart Energy protected long-term value by For more information: ensuring certainty of supply for its customers within a supply-constrained market: See pages 28-29 – The effect of this was that tonnes supplied by Stobart Energy fell by just Statements Financial 5.7% to 1.4 million tonnes. Strategy in action – This supply volume was achieved by reducing gate fees and importing waste Stobart Energy wood. In turn, the strategic decision to ensure certainty of supply meant EBITDA1 reduced by 33% to £10m. The impact of Stobart Air and Propius on liquidity • Esken reacquired Stobart Air and Propius, the related aircraft leasing company, in order to take control of legacy liabilities which would otherwise have had a significant impact on the Group. Esken funded £42.2m to Stobart Air and Propius from date of acquisition to February 2021. • Esken immediately commenced a process to sell Stobart Air. This process was For more information: See pages 30-31 affected by the extended lockdown in travel and Aer Lingus’ decision to award preferred bidder status for the franchise renewal to another party. • We announced a sale of Stobart Air, alongside Carlisle Lake District Airport, Strategic Report 01-71 to Ettyl in April 2021. However, issues with the prospective purchaser’s funding 04 Our story led the Board to conclude it was not possible to complete the transaction. 06 Esken at a glance • Esken notified Stobart Air it would no longer provide funding to the airline. 08 Business model 10 Our strengths This led the Board of Stobart Air to terminate the franchise with Aer Lingus, 12 Key performance indicators cease to trade and appoint a liquidator. 14 Stakeholder engagement and s172 22 Our focused strategy • Esken will continue to fulfil its parent company guarantees and fund the lease 24 Chairman’s Statement obligations on Propius’ eight ATR aircraft through to termination in April 2023 – 28 Strategy in action reduced from the original lease term that ran through to April 2027. Esken will take 32 Financial Review immediate steps to sublease the aircraft to mitigate the cost impact on the Group. 36 Market Review 38 Operational Review • The total cash outflow resulting from the liquidation of Stobart Air and ongoing 44 Sustainability Report Propius leases is £82m over three years, on the basis that Esken is unsuccessful 64 Risk management and our principal risks in subleasing its aircraft. 71 Viability Statement Financial performance Corporate Governance 72-103 72 Board of Directors • Esken had £77.4m of cash and undrawn bank facilities available as at 74 Corporate Governance 28 February 2021, with the majority of cash burn being attributable to 82 Nomination Committee Report maintaining Stobart Air and Propius. 84 Audit Committee Report 88 Directors’ Remuneration Report • The continuing loss before tax of £150.3m (2020: £139.4m) includes 101 Directors’ Report non-cash items, such as the loss on acquisition of Stobart Air and Propius 103 Directors’ Responsibility Statements and the impairment of investments and fixed assets during the current year, and significant one-off impairments in the prior year that have not repeated. Financial Statements 104-158 The Group’s total loss after tax of £155.1m (2020: £137.9m) reflects the impact 104 Independent Auditor’s Report of discontinued operations of Stobart Rail & Civils (£11.9m). 110 Consolidated income statement 111 Consolidated statement of comprehensive • Net debt post-IFRS 16 was £250.8m (pre-IFRS 16 net debt was £127.4m) and Income the net pension deficit was £2.4m as of 28 February 2021. 112 Consolidated statement of financial position 113 Consolidated statement of changes in equity 114 Consolidated statement of cash flows Going concern 115 Notes to the consolidated • The Directors’ assessment of the going concern position of the Group set out on financial statements page 115 in the notes to the consolidated financial statements. These sections 157 Directors, officers and advisers of the Annual Report must be read in order to fully understand the significant judgements the Directors have made and the material uncertainties that exist in respect of the going concern assumption for the Group. 1 EBITDA represents loss before interest, tax, depreciation, amortisation and impairments. Refer to note 3 for reconciliation to statutory loss before tax. Esken plc 02 Annual Report and Accounts 2021 A message from the Chairman “The impact of the pandemic on Esken has been significant but I am pleased with the way our people have responded to this and the steps we are taking will set us on the path to recovery.” David Shearer, Executive Chairman Esken plc Annual Report and Accounts 2021 03 As I present our annual report for the year Carlyle Global Infrastructure Opportunity We expect Stobart Energy’s performance Report Strategic to the end of February 2021 I know that you Fund (Carlyle) has informed Esken that it to return to pre COVID levels in the current will be all too aware of the challenges that is seeking final approvals for a definitive financial year and opportunities are being we have all faced since last year. The transaction agreement in the coming days. explored to seek additional supply impact of the pandemic on Esken has been This transaction, which is also subject to contracts and broaden the base of the significant but I am pleased with the way the successful completion of renegotiated market offering. We provide further detail our people have responded to this and the bank facilities and an equity fundraise, on the Energy performance within our steps which we have taken over the year would provide important liquidity to the Operational Review on pages 42 to 43. along with those we intend to take will set Group while bringing the benefit of Carlyle’s Governance Corporate us on the path to recovery as we emerge global aviation and airport experience to The deal with Carlyle should allow into a post COVID world. work with our existing operational us to renegotiate debt facilities and will experience at LSA. Carlyle share the belief support a proposed equity issue. These We successfully exited Stobart Rail & Civils, that LSA is an important strategic London transactions along with the planned which led to a loss of £9.5m and after airport with an exciting future. The funding disposal of infrastructure assets with a exhaustive attempts to achieve an exit from would be provided by way of a convertible book value of £39m provide the business Stobart Air we concluded that the only loan of £120m after costs which can with the funding required to underpin our Statements Financial option was to cease its funding and it was convert into just under 30% of the equity business plan as we emerge from the placed in liquidation in June 2021. These in the airport implying a current valuation pandemic. I look forward to reporting matters are dealt with in detail in my for the airport of £400m. Securing this on our progress in the coming year. Chairman’s Statement on page 24. We partnership will position us well as we For more information: recorded a loss of £58.2m on acquisition negotiate the right airline deals with a See pages 24-26 of Stobart Air and Propius in the year and mutual opportunity to benefit from an expect to fund £82m of lease payments efficient cost-effective London airport David Shearer and other costs over the next three years. which offers a safe and enjoyable Executive Chairman The effect, however, is that the additional passenger experience. cash requirements associated with these legacy businesses are now reduced and The first lockdown also required the closure exiting will allow management to focus on of Household Waste & Recycling Centres delivering shareholder value through the and much construction activity across the recovery and development of London country. This impacted the supply of waste Southend Airport and Stobart Energy. wood which Stobart Energy processes into biomass fuel to supply its renewable energy Lockdown restrictions and the rolling customers.
Recommended publications
  • List of Representations and Evidence Received

    List of Representations and Evidence Received

    CAP 1134 Appendix A: List of representations and evidence received APPENDIX A List of representations and evidence received Responses submitted in response to the Gatwick: Market Power Assessment, the CAA’s Initial Views – February 20121 . David Starkie, regulatory and competition economist . Gatwick Airport Limited (GAL) . Virgin Atlantic Airways (VAA) Responses submitted in response to the Consultation on Gatwick Market Power Assessment (CAP 1052)2 . British Airways (BA) . easyJet . GAL . Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee . VAA Stakeholder meetings / teleconference held3 Airlines . Aer Lingus . Air Asia X . Air Berlin . Air Malta . Aurigny 1 Non-confidential versions of these submissions are available on the CAA's website. 2 Non-confidential versions of these submissions are available on the CAA's website. 3 Included in this are airlines that met the CAA Board as part of the consultation process. 1 CAP 1134 Appendix A: List of representations and evidence received . BA . bmi regional . Cathay Pacific . Delta . easyJet . Emirates . Flybe . Jet2 . Lufthansa . Monarch . Norwegian Air Shuttle . Ryanair . Thomas Cook . TUI Travel . VAA . Wizz Air Airport operators: . Birmingham Airport Holdings Limited . East Midlands International Airport Limited . Gatwick Airport Limited . Heathrow Airport Limited . London Luton Airport Operations Limited . London Southend Airport Company Limited . Manchester Airports Group PLC . Stansted Airport Limited 2 CAP 1134 Appendix A: List of representations and evidence received Cargo carriers . British Airways World Cargo . bmi Cargo . DHL . Emirates Sky Cargo . FedEx . Royal Mail . TNT Express Services . [] Other stakeholders . Agility Logistics . Airport Coordination Limited UK . Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee . Stop Stansted Expansion Information gathered under statutory powers (section 73 Airports Act 1986 / section 50 Civil Aviation Act 2012) .
  • London Southend Airport

    London Southend Airport

    LONDON SOUTHEND AIRPORT NOISE ACTION PLAN Adopted by the Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs March 2012 CONTENTS Section Page INTRODUCTION 1 STRATEGIC NOISE MAPPING 2006 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE AIRPORT 2 THE AUTHORITY RESPONSIBLE 3 THE LEGAL CONTEXT 3 International and National Regulatory Framework for Aircraft 3 Noise Local Policy Framework 5 EXISTING NOISE LIMITS 5 The Lease 5 Planning Conditions 6 Noise Abatement Procedures 6 SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS OF NOISE MAPPING 7 EVALUATION OF THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF PEOPLE 10 EXPOSED TO NOISE, IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS AND SITUATIONS THAT NEED TO BE IMPROVED PUBLIC CONSULTATION 11 EXISTING AND FUTURE NOISE REDUCTION MEASURES 13 FINANCIAL INFORMATION 16 EVALUATION 17 EXPECTED OUTCOME 17 APPENDIX A DEFRA Noise Maps 18 INTRODUCTION 1 This Noise Action Plan has been prepared in accordance with the Environmental Noise (England) Regulations 2006 (as amended) (the “Regulations”). These Regulations transposed the EU Environment Noise Directive (2002/49/EC), known as END, relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise into UK legislation and make the preparation of a Noise Action Plan for a number of different noise sources, including airports, a legal requirement. 1 2 Government, through the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), issued guidelines in March 2009 to airport operators to explain how to prepare Noise Action Plans. The guidelines are detailed and airport operators must have regard to them in drawing up their Noise Action Plans. The sections in this Noise Action Plan follow those suggested in the guidelines. The guidelines also outline the requirements for consulting on the draft plans.
  • Guildford to Gatwick South Terminal

    Guildford to Gatwick South Terminal

    Guildford To Gatwick South Terminal Lamer and inflated Cleland extravasating her contamination anthropomorphizes or tips blasted. Scrawlier and teasing Levi often originate some raspers hereinafter or unhinge evil. Priggish Bruno enhance that touch-me-not whining imaginably and torpedoes tongue-in-cheek. Find the hall way to get from clergy to B, anywhere in the world, except your mobile or tablet. You select also insert his mobile number. Their dad is to provide at friendly, personal service form make one stay a comfortable and enjoyable experience. So what happens if original flight leaving late? Did please leave something slip in doubt hire vehicle? Please fill of this field. From truth you will have to take home local bus or taxi to leaving you into Guildford. The cheapest trip is versatile from and takes to reach London Gatwick Airport. It stops directly at Woking station. UK Civil Aviation Authority. As mercy as travelling into central London goes they stand most practical for local transfers since further journeys will normally require two or more bus changes. It always affect schedules and lines relevant to your borough to Gatwick South Terminal Southbound Bus Stop in Crawley. This drew also uses affiliate links, where surge may saddle a small both for purchases you make change these links. Brazilian street hand in need. Please flip the details below that select the probe you prefer. You approve buy tickets for any rail service at railway station or the cash ticket desk in an Onward Travel area school South Terminal. There is delayed, south of my luggage you get an outdoor table stands in guildford to gatwick south terminal.
  • A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration the Tunnel Is Essential to East London and Thames Gateway’S Economic Success the A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration

    A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration the Tunnel Is Essential to East London and Thames Gateway’S Economic Success the A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration

    The A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration The tunnel is essential to East London and Thames Gateway’s economic success The A13 Riverside Tunnel Road to Regeneration Thank you for taking the trouble to find out more about the proposed A13 Riverside Tunnel. The tunnelling of a 1.3km stretch of the A13 will not only improve traffic flow along this key route, mitigating the two notorious bottlenecks at the Lodge Avenue and Renwick Road junctions, but will also transform a severely blighted area. As well as creating a new neighbourhood of over 5,000 homes called Castle Green, the tunnel will act as a catalyst for the building of another 28,300 homes in London Riverside, while creating over 1,200 jobs and unlocking significant business and commercial growth in the surrounding area. The tunnel is essential to east London and the Thames Gateway’s economic success and will stimulate growth along its route as well as easing congestion. It also signifies a new way of working in this country adapted from successful models from other European cities. A large proportion of the scheme could be self-financing, with the majority of the funding being generated by the tunnel itself, through the land value uplift and sale of the homes, the community infrastructure levy and new homes bonus. If the government also supports our proposal for stamp duty devolution in Castle Green, then this would mean further significant funding for the scheme could be secured. Cllr Darren Rodwell Cllr Roger Ramsey Leader of Barking and Dagenham Council Leader of Havering Council Road to Regeneration 03 About the A13 The A13 is one of the busiest arterial routes into the capital, connecting the county of Essex with central London.
  • A Description of London's Economy Aaron Girardi and Joel Marsden March 2017

    A Description of London's Economy Aaron Girardi and Joel Marsden March 2017

    Working Paper 85 A description of London's economy Aaron Girardi and Joel Marsden March 2017 A description of London's economy Working Paper 85 copyright Greater London Authority March 2017 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queens Walk London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk Tel 020 7983 4922 Minicom 020 7983 4000 ISBN 978-1-84781-648-1 Cover photograph © London & Partners For more information about this publication, please contact: GLA Economics Tel 020 7983 4922 Email [email protected] GLA Economics provides expert advice and analysis on London’s economy and the economic issues facing the capital. Data and analysis from GLA Economics form a basis for the policy and investment decisions facing the Mayor of London and the GLA group. GLA Economics uses a wide range of information and data sourced from third party suppliers within its analysis and reports. GLA Economics cannot be held responsible for the accuracy or timeliness of this information and data. The GLA will not be liable for any losses suffered or liabilities incurred by a party as a result of that party relying in any way on the information contained in this report. A description of London's economy Working Paper 85 Contents Executive summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 3 2 The structure of London’s local economies .........................................................................
  • Airports and Their Communities: Collaboration Is Key

    Airports and Their Communities: Collaboration Is Key

    Airports and their communities: Collaboration is key A discussion paper series AVIATION Airports and their communities: Collaboration is key Contents Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 3 A collaborative approach ........................................................................................... 3 Economic footprint & COVID-19 impact ................................................................... 3 Responsible growth .................................................................................................... 5 Skills & training ............................................................................................................ 7 Airports as neighbours ............................................................................................... 8 Contributors Lewis Girdwood, Chief Financial Officer, Esken Glyn Jones, Chief Executive Officer, London Southend Airport Willie McGillivray, Chief Operating Officer, London Southend Airport Clive Condie, Non-Executive Director, Esken and former Chairman of London Luton Airport Luke Hayhoe, Aviation Business Development Director, London Southend Airport Alison Griffin, Chief Executive, Southend-on-Sea Borough Council Kate Willard OBE, Thames Estuary Envoy and Chair Matthew Butters, Aviation Director, Pascall+Watson Andy Jefferson, Aviation Consultant, A&G Jefferson Limited Ian Lewis, Executive Director at Opportunity South Essex Nigel Addison Smith, Director, PA Consulting Claire Mulloy,
  • Structures for Development: Getting Them Right

    Structures for Development: Getting Them Right

    1 Please do not quote until published, Feb 2008 Edwards, M (2008) 'Structures for development in Thames Gateway: getting them right' in London's Turning: the prospect of Thames Gateway Eds. Phil Cohen and Mike Rustin. London, Ashgate. Details at https://www.ashgate.com/shopping/title.asp?key1=&key2=&orig=results&isbn=0%207546%207063%205 Chapter sixteen Structures for development: getting them right Michael Edwards, Bartlett School of Planning, UCL The Thames Gateway is an enormous undertaking. In many respects it resembles some of the earlier major projects of British town planning like the Milton Keynes generation of new towns or the London's Docklands development. Like them, it may come to be regarded by some as a great achievement of public policy and by others as a great disaster. The fact that positive and negative views can be taken of the same project does not (or does not merely) reflect alternative subjective perspectives: it stems from the fact that there are real conflicts in the society and thus different criteria for judging success. The Thames Gateway project poses daunting choices for those with the power to decide on the future development of South East England. Government and the Mayor of London both agree that much of the wider South East's growth should be concentrated in the Thames estuary (DCMS 2006; Mayor of London 2004). They share the intention that London will expand to the East, not to the West, and that the rationality of capitalist growth is the unquestionable way forward. This chapter explores aspects of this supposed rationality, arguing that the aspirations of 'sustainability' and 'community' cannot be achieved in the neo-liberal framework which is on offer.
  • Competition, Cooperation, Co-Opetition. a Conceptualization of the ‘Network Brand’

    Competition, Cooperation, Co-Opetition. a Conceptualization of the ‘Network Brand’

    Competition, Cooperation, Co-opetition. A conceptualization of the ‘Network Brand’ Cecilia Pasquinelli Istituto di Management, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna Abstract - Place branding relies on the assumption of inter-territorial competition which seems to be the overall approach to place management. Competition involves not only cities but also provinces, nations, states, villages and supra-national regions. However, there is room for sustaining that competition is not an exhaustive key for understanding regional development and, consequently, for interpreting place marketing and branding. Within the general frame of competition, regions and local areas may seek inter- territorial cooperation in order to enrich their offer and enhance their competitiveness. In this regard, a gap in place branding and marketing literature is identified and this paper contributes to filling it, by proposing a conceptualization of the “network brand”. Assuming cooperation/co-opetition as a way to face inter-territorial competition, this research is in charge of answering to the following research questions. Firstly, to what extent network and network brand building is a pragmatic process i.e. inspired by market principles, rather than being a political process i.e. highly related to power game emerging within and among the involved territories? Secondly, to what extent the network brand is a “post-modern” brand? A secondary research was carried out by reviewing 12 inter-territorial networking experiences in Europe and US. Concerning the first research question, evidence suggests that, beyond a surface of pragmatism, there might be a political process leading to the emergence of a network brand. Moreover, there is a chance that in some cases a pragmatic approach to networking tends to turn into a political process by means of institutional spillovers, turning the network into a political arena.
  • United Kingdom Airport Policy, Airport Surface Access Strategy, Multi-Airport Systems, Airport Planning

    United Kingdom Airport Policy, Airport Surface Access Strategy, Multi-Airport Systems, Airport Planning

    TRENDS IN AIRPORT SURFACE ACCESS IN THE LONDON MULTI-AIRPORT SYSTEM Richard Moxon1 Cranfield University Abstract The London multi-airport system is described and changes in ownership from state organisations to competing private enterprises are assessed. A taxonomy of United Kingdom government action related to airport planning policy is presented with critical analysis in relation to airport surface access strategy. Changes in public transport use by passengers and employees at London airports are quantified to illustrate the success or otherwise of government policy. Passenger groups (defined by nationality and trip purpose) driving the increase in public transport are identified. Current London airport surface access strategic targets for passengers and employees are compared with the early versions suggested by the government to highlight the changed airport approach. Emerging surface airport access issues at London’s airports are discussed. Key words: United Kingdom airport policy, airport surface access strategy, multi-airport systems, airport planning. 1 Centre for Air Transport Management, Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, MK43 0TR, UK E: [email protected] 1 1. INTRODUCTION London has moved from four government (national and local) owned airports before 1986 to the current market of six competing private enterprises designated as serving the capital. In parallel with this (since 1998) the United Kingdom government has chosen to publicise a variety of reports, guidance and policy relating to airport surface access. The regularity and detail of such publications has varied and they have not been mandatory in composition. In the last decade of numerous airport ownership changes in London, published research has not tracked the nature or the impact of government attempts to influence the move from private to public transport by airport employees and staff in the London multi-airport system.
  • London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-Establish Controlled Airspace in the Vicinity of LSA

    London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-Establish Controlled Airspace in the Vicinity of LSA

    London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-establish Controlled Airspace in The Vicinity Of LSA Airspace Change Proposal Management in Confidence London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-establish Controlled Airspace in The Vicinity Of LSA Document information London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-establish Document title Controlled Airspace in The Vicinity Of LSA Authors LSA Airspace Development Team and Cyrrus Ltd London Southend Airport Southend Airport Company Ltd Southend Airport Produced by Southend on Sea Essex SS2 6YF Produced for London Southend Airport X London Southend Airport T: X Contact F: X E: X Version Issue 1.0 Copy Number 1 of 3 Date of release 29 May 2014 Document reference CL-4835-ACP-136 Issue 1.0 Change History Record Change Issue Date Details Reference Draft A Initial draft for comment Draft B Initial comments incorporated – Further reviews Draft C 23 May 2014 Airspace Development Team final comments Final 27 May 2014 Final Review Draft D Issue 1.0 29 May 2014 Initial Issue CL-4835-ACP-136 Issue 1.0 London Southend Airport 1 of 165 Management in Confidence London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-establish Controlled Airspace in The Vicinity Of LSA Controlled Copy Distribution Copy Number Ownership 1. UK Civil Aviation Authority – Safety and Airspace Regulation Group 2. London Southend Airport 3. Cyrrus Ltd Document Approval Name and Organisation Position Date signature X London Southend X 27 May 2014 Airport London Southend X X 27 May 2014 Airport London Southend X X 29 May 2014 Airport COPYRIGHT © 2014 Cyrrus Limited This document and the information contained therein is the property Cyrrus Limited.
  • Growth Areas.Qxd

    Growth Areas.Qxd

    WOULD YOU LIVE HERE? MAKING THE GROWTH AREAS COMMUNITIES OF CHOICE JIM BENNETT WITH DAVID HETHERINGTON, MAX NATHAN AND CHRIS URWIN i ippr The Institute for Public Policy Research (ippr) is the UK’s leading progressive think tank and was established in 1988. Its role is to bridge the political divide between the social democratic and liberal traditions, the intellectual divide between academia and the policy making establishment and the cultural divide between government and civil society. It is first and foremost a research institute, aiming to provide innovative and credible policy solutions. Its work, the questions its research poses and the methods it uses are driven by the belief that the journey to a good society is one that places social justice, democratic participation and economic and environmental sustainability at its core. For further information you can contact ippr’s external affairs department on [email protected], you can view our website at www.ippr.org and you can buy our books from Central Books on 0845 458 9910 or email [email protected]. Our trustees Chris Powell (Chairman) Chai Patel (Secretary) Jeremy Hardie (Treasurer) Professor Kumar Bhattacharyya Carey Oppenheim Lord Brooke Sir Michael Perry Lord Eatwell David Pitt-Watson Lord Gavron Dave Prentis Professor Anthony Giddens Lord Puttnam Lord Hollick Sir Martin Rees Jane Humphries Ed Sweeney Roger Jowell Baroness Williams Neil Kinnock Baroness Young of Old Scone Frances O’Grady © IPPR 2006 CONTENTS About the authors iv Acknowledgements iv List of abbreviations v Executive summary vi 1 Introduction 1 2 The policy context for housing growth 3 3 The Growth Areas and housing supply 6 4 The Growth Area communities 20 5 The Growth Area economies 29 6 Delivering growth: infrastructure and structures 45 7 Conclusions and recommendations 50 Appendix: Estimating the infrastructure costs of higher 56 housing growth targets References 59 About the authors Jim Bennett is a Senior Research Fellow at ippr.
  • Thames Gateway South Essex Fundamental Review Of

    Thames Gateway South Essex Fundamental Review Of

    Thames Gateway South Essex Fundamental Review of Strategic Housing Market Assessment Review 2013 Report of Findings December 2013 Opinion Research Services | The Strand • Swansea • SA1 1AF | 01792 535300 | www.ors.org.uk | [email protected] Opinion Research Services | Thames Gateway South Essex SHMA 2013 – Report of Findings December 2013 Contents 1. Foreword........................................................................................................ 6 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Private Rented Sector ............................................................................................................................ 6 Housing Delivery .................................................................................................................................... 6 Benefit Reform ...................................................................................................................................... 6 Population ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Older People .......................................................................................................................................... 7 London .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................