In my most recent article I looked at the absence of focus on the development opportunities arising from from the building of Everton’s new stadium at Bramley-Moore. A one line mention in what is described as an £11 billion investment opportunity (by gross development value) across the combined authorities of  Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton, St Helens and Wirral.

The contrast of the scale of ambition demonstrated by other authorities, notably Manchester, at MIPIM last week, in Cannes and the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority is something that can’t go by without comment.

Our city, and the surrounding authorities are, in my opinion, being shortchanged.

Nowhere more so than in the role of sports-led urban redevelopment. Both regions (Liverpool and Manchester) laid claim to the opportunities  arising from their respective new stadia developments.

Marked difference between the Trafford  development and Bramley-Moore

However, there’s a marked difference though between what Manchester are proposing with their Trafford development and the proposition put forward by Everton.

Everton’s stadium is built, is wholly funded through a combination of equity and cost effective long term debt and will open for business in less than five months. The stadium’s owners have committed funding to the club, stabilised the business with a new executive team and new board appointments whilst announcing ambitious plans to acquire further land (the next door dock, Nelson Dock) to continue their development plans.

As the current CEO, and future executive with responsibility for the ongoing stadium development, Colin Chong rightly stated:

“We are at least five years ahead of any other competitor, for my mind, any spare cash from central government should be going to support development in Liverpool, before it goes anywhere else, because it is an oven-ready opportunity for sports-led redevelopment.”

In contrast, the Manchester United plans, are at a very formative stage and Manchester United, the club, in a less stable position than they have been for decades. As with Everton previously, now on the receiving end of years of chronic mismanagement, lack of budgetary control, relative failure on the pitch and heavily indebted.

Combined with majority ownership by the Glazers, who not only have stripped cash out of Manchester United via dividend payments, funded their acquisition through expensive debt and have ceded operational control to Sir Jim Ratcliffe of Ineos. Such is Manchester United’s current position that Ratcliffe has had to provide additional capital (£200 million) to date and claimed their club would “run out of cash before Christmas” if they did not engage in some absurd cost-cutting measures, largely impacting the lowest paid staff members.

Furthermore with losses in excess of over £300 million in the last three years, Manchester United’s PSR (profitability and sustainability) position looks increasingly non-compliant.

All of the above, plus a stadium development that requires future land purchases and would require evidence of a fully funded finance package before acquiring planning approval.

Five years? That seems an extra-ordinarily optimistic timeframe in which to achieve a stadium build and therefore the corresponding redevelopment boost arising from it.

Let’s not forget that Everton first started looking at Bramley-Moore in 2017, and again, in Colin Chong’s words delivery was achieved by “ the way we approached the project from day one. We had a very simplistic, streamlined work plan.”

Manchester United with arguably many more issues to resolve than Everton had eight years ago would do well to achieve as much within the same time frame.

We are literally years ahead should we chose to take advantage of it.

The difference in approach by politicians?

There’s no doubt that Manchester, under the leadership of Andy Burnham and previous administrations, have been very successful in attracting development, in combining the economic forces of both the private and public sector. Indeed, the proposed new stadium in Manchester would require significant public funding in infrastructure and potential political assistance in requiring land.

Liverpool, its landowners, its City Council, and the Combined Authority have to step up to the challenge of achieving central government support in relation to the opportunities arising from Bramley-Moore.

There has been some success, although limited. A £56 million investment from Homes England to speed up the regeneration of the city’s  northern docks, was given final approval by HM Treasury in November of 2024 . This relates to the Central Docks, the largest of the five neighbourhoods within the  Liverpool Waters district and will see the building of approximately 2,350 new homes and a public park.

For those unfamiliar with the area it lies approximately halfway between Bramley-Moore and the Pier Head. Below is a projection of future development. Bramley-Moore is at the top of the picture in the Northern Docks. The dock adjacent to Bramley-Moore is Nelson Docks, an acquisition target of Everton’s.

Bramley-Moore is to the extreme right of the picture below, with Nelson Dock to the left of it.

The question is then, given the competitive advantage Bramley-Moore and Everton’s investment into it, and its future plan to acquire Nelson Dock, why isn’t the Northern Docks leading the way for urban regeneration, particularly in such an area between the City Centre and Sefton?

Everton’s stadium build has defied the odds.

Built despite the difficulties Everton faced, despite the macro-economic uncertainties during the build period. But also despite the absence of any significant plan for immediate urban regeneration around it and definitely despite the absence of infrastructure investment.

Everton’s fans and other  stadium event attendees need that infrastructure investment particularly in the form of public transport infrastructure. The City of Liverpool and its people need the redevelopment of this area. We need regeneration to improve the lives of the people of North Liverpool, we need it to attract further investment in many of the other redevelopment schemes (IT, knowledge and culture led) proposed elsewhere in the city.

We need local politicians to step up. We need not only to compete with Manchester, but to offer a more compelling argument to invest in Liverpool. We need more vision, we need more leadership.

At MIPIM, Andy Burnham said of the Manchester proposals  “This is the defining thing of my political career. It’s why I came into politics.”

If this is so for Andy Burnham, the question for Liverpool politicians, for our own Metro Mayor, is what we achieve around the Northern docks, the North of Liverpool, what defines your political careers and why you (individually and collectively) came into politics?

What you do nest in terms of infrastructure, development and obtaining financial support from central government will define your legacy.

Everton have provided a huge competitive advantage regarding sports led regeneration – let’s not waste it.