ADEPT president Simon Neilson has overseen the association's membership increase and relationships with key partners such as the Department for Transport (DfT) go from strength to strength.
Opening the ADEPT annual conference this year, he could say proudly that: 'We are continuing to grow with our corporate partners and redefining our boundaries around the regions - we now represent 50.3% of the British population.'
ADEPT president Simon Neilson
At the halfway point in his premiership, he talks to Highways about what it takes to maintain the realm.
What are the take home messages from the ADEPT conference?
As an association, I think we used to look back a little bit more; we used to winge a bit more, but we are much more future orientated now and much more concerned with how we can play a role in shaping places of the future.
The big messages for us are around our responsibilities on the issue of air quality; how we can best work with the private sector on new models of delivery; how we can reflect on uncertainty and how do we provide as much certainty as possible - and how do we use the "superpowers" that we have.
Do you think there is enough recognition of local government from central government and what are the areas you would like to see more co-operation?
We are solidifying our work with DfT in particular. We have a great relationship, which is improving all the time and started from a strong base in the first place.
A big thing for us over the next few years is to make that relationship work across BIS, DCLG and the Treasury as well, and make them understand the importance of investment in places - the way in which we can convert our current places into places of future industry and also that we want to offer solutions.
We are not just there to say give us more money, more power. We are there to say work with us, collaborate with us, we will get a better return on all our investment - time, money human resources - together than we will individually.
There is a lot of talk about commercialisation in local authorities at the moment. What do you make of that agenda?
It's a bit of a dilemma for some of us. We want to invest in our places, regenerate our places and derive a commercial income from that. So for example my own authority [Walsall Council] bought a shopping centre in the heart of our town centre to gain a commercial return, but also it's a key gateway into our town centre with the train station and we have big plans for that.
On the other hand the Government are preventing authorities from purchasing commercial investment outside of our areas. You can see that a sensible use of public money; you can see that as a way of preventing authorities from doing something potentially risky. What's the role of localism in the local political choice on how to deploy capital and derive revenue?
Because frankly if we don’t get that net revenue in, we can’t afford the people to make these things work. So we have to find the right mix of that and find a balance in the middle.
It's not all about the money. Its about a purpose-led partnership model that's where you drive improvements.
I think councils should be left to make decisions based on the democratic mandate that they have. Without the means to get new income in through charging or by diversifying investment models, we won't have the money or the people to make things happen and that will frustrate the private sector because they will be able to present people into a partnership and we might not.
You have raised concerns about councils dividing between the 'have and have nots'. What is happening there?
Metropolitan areas, combined authorities, elected mayors, city regions are showing a way of working, which in context for their places is a good way of working generally. [And we are] seeing the proceeds of that, seeing the Government backing that with funding and power.
Perhaps there should be more of that in future. The risk is that many areas are not in that place. Our national economy relies on good county economies and the interaction with different places.
The more government can show a clear path for proper devolution for other areas and different types of geographies rather than just big cities, the better.
As long as there is a clear path for everyone to tread, every one can win in time. We should see everyone rise up rather than some overtake and some fall back. It's tricky because there is not much capacity in government and Homes England to do deals at the moment. So it might take some time to get there but so long as you can see there is a route to get there, people might be prepared to wait a few years.
What are you planning to do with your time left as president?
This is the sort of the mid point of the presidency. It feels like it has only just started.
What I want to do, and I know Neil Gibson will take this up with the next presidency, is take a couple of issues and really drive them hard. Working with our corporate partners in particular and taking a different style that can build on those excellent relationships, we have to say this is the whole sector talking.
It might not always be ADEPT in the lead but I don’t really care who gets the credit as long as the outcomes are right.
I think the outcome we are looking for is certainty over time, reflecting the fact there isn’t much money, but let's use the money there is as wisely as possible.
Register now for full access
Register just once to get unrestricted, real-time coverage of the issues and challenges facing UK transport and highways engineers.
Full website content includes the latest news, exclusive commentary from leading industry figures and detailed topical analysis of the highways, transportation, environment and place-shaping sectors.
Use the link below to register your details for full, free access.
Already a registered? Login
