Governments have the power to strongly influence the shape and direction of their economy, even in this global era, for example by deciding on the distribution of investment or the industrial sectors that should receive most support (as Lord Heseltine points out this is not “picking winners” in terms of individual firms it is simply common sense planning as practiced by most advanced countries).

The distribution of our airport capacity is a classic example – with one lobby giving the impression that there is a natural inevitability that capacity should expand endlessly at Heathrow, ignoring the fact that this is a contrivance of airline and government policy (or lack of it), not a naturally ordained set of affairs. In Germany they take a very different view of the role of government in influencing these key economic drivers and ensure a range of regional hubs.

A recent major research project led by Professor Michael Parkinson (Second Tier Cities in Europe – http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/EIUA/EIUA_Docs/Second_Tier_Cities(1).pdf ) showed beyond much doubt that the European nations that have a better balance between the economic performance of their capital and second tier cities and a more devolved approach to government and investment, have a better performing economy overall. And this balance will not just occur naturally it must be managed and maintained – totally unco-ordinated free markets will instead generate ultimately inefficient imbalances.

This is not a competition between the other cities and London – of course London has a unique position as a world city and plays a vital role as a motor for the whole economy. The other cities must play an equally important but different role alongside the capital in a range of industrial sectors. But any nation that allows one city or region to develop an extreme dominance of their economy, politics, civic and cultural life will suffer both economically and socially.