There has long been a debate about the relative disadvantage to those who live in the countryside compared to urban areas. This has been exacerbated by the cost of living crisis as shown by a recent report from the All Party Parliamentary Group for Rural Business and the Rural Powerhouse, which builds on a number of other recent studies.
The rural economy is 19% less productive than the national average at a cost of £43 billion each year. The report finds that this is largely due to poor public policy and a lack of political will to address it. A survey for the Federation of Small Businesses found that 30% of rural businesses cite the remote location and lack of transport as a barrier to hiring staff compared with 4% in urban areas. Rural households spend £800 a year more on fuel and pay an average of 6 pence per litre more for fuel than those in towns and cities. From 2009 to 2019, funding for rural bus services fell by 43% in real terms. Whether a subsidised bus service in rural areas is the best solution to the problem is a moot point, perhaps a more imaginative approach is needed such as dial-a-ride. During the recent delays in taking driving tests due to industrial action and lack of examiners, there were calls for those in rural areas to have priority as most had no other way to get to college or a job.
The lack of housing is a real issue everywhere but is particularly acute in the countryside. Politicians agree that we need to build vastly more houses but only if they are not in an area to upset their constituents or supporters. Getting planning consent for new houses, especially affordable homes, in the countryside is notoriously difficult whilst planning policy changes as rapidly as Prime Ministers. The average price of a house is 8.6 times average income in rural areas but 7.4 in urban areas excluding London. In some areas it is over ten times. In most rural areas private house rent is 35% of a key worker’s income after tax. No wonder rural areas have a higher proportion of older residents and rural communities are becoming increasingly older. The Office for National Statistics reports that the proportion of older people is increasing faster in rural areas and predicts that, by 2039, half of all households will contain people aged 65 and older.
Of course, there are some advantages of living in the countryside. Life expectancy is two years higher for the lucky 21% and they have greater access to open spaces and wildlife. The importance of this for mental health was brought home during the Covid pandemic when lockdown was Draconian for those who live in densely populated areas. But there is a significant cost in terms of services. 94% of people in our towns and cities live within a twenty minute walk of a GP surgery but that falls to 19% in rural areas. There have been severe shortages of staff in many surgeries but that has recently improved in some, Hungerford and Kintbury and Woolton Hill for example. All communities need a meeting place or hub but pubs have been closing at an alarming rate and many village halls cannot afford the heating bills during colder months.
Part of the lack of services is due to Government funding. Rural local authorities receive substantially less grant per head despite the higher extra costs involved. In the 2022/3 Settlement Funding Assessment, urban areas receive 59% or £105.21 per head more than their rural counterparts. Rural residents pay on average £96 per head more in Council Tax, funding 69% of local government spending compared with 57% for urban residents. With the current emphasis on social care, rural areas receive £11 per head less and 16% less of the new social care grants.
One of the critical issues in the cost of living crisis has been the price of food. Food inflation is still stubbornly high, up 19.2% in March, despite claims that global wholesale prices are falling. Indeed supermarkets have been accused of maintaining high prices to boost profit margins. The reality is that historically our food has been cheap, the cheapest in Europe, and farmers struggle to produce it at the prices they are paid, especially since the Russian invasion of Ukraine pushed up the cost of fuel, fertiliser and other inputs. In 2020 only an average of 8% of a household’s income was spent on food compared for example to India at 30%. Interestingly, the highest figure was said to be transport at 15%. Another study put the proportion spent on food at 16% in 2022, highlighting inflation, but it is not clear whether the two findings are comparable.
Country residents may be more likely to have a garden or access to an allotment and thus able to grow some of their own food. If they have difficulty getting to a large supermarket, most retailers now deliver to the door, a godsend during lockdown. But that does not help the village or farm shop which has the advantage of being local but the disadvantage of generally being more expensive.
I have lived in the countryside all my life and would not feel comfortable living in a town or city. I am also in the fortunate position that I do not have to rely on food banks or worry if I can heat my home. Yet I can fully appreciate that there are those who would like to live in the countryside yet cannot afford the cost of housing or transport, especially the young. Politicians should realise that a significant proportion of the 21% who live in rural areas feel disadvantaged and neglected by those in authority.