Should cities be allowed to offer private companies economic incentives to relocate?

No, it's a bad policy, but central government should not provent local authorities from providing incentives if they want to.

No, introduce exchange rate controls with a fixed currency via a bretton-woods style agreement and nationalise industry.

Yes, if said companies are to adhere to official tax policies and a progressive attitude to working practises.

No, but relocation should be allowed, as long as the local environment is not compromised, but spend the money on improving infrastructure.

Communities should be involved in decisions, in the workforce, in the management and in plan implementation. Also environmental legal protections should not be ignored.

No, spend money on improving infrastructure and comunity to attract companies and punish them from movig jobs overseas.

Spend money on improving infrastructure to atract companies and punish them for moving jobs overseas.

Spend money to attract demstic and foreign investitors and punnish them from moving country overseas.

Punish them for moving jobs out of the country, don't subsidise the businesses unless the company will create new jobs for local and national industry, and the tax revenue will exceed the incentives in a short amount of time.

the government should increase incentives to relocate companies to deprived areas to help increase investment in the area

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, 35% of new jobs should go to local residents and the incentives will be re-evaluated after 3 years.

Yes, as long as the incentives are coming out of the cities already existing budget.

No, spend the money on teachers and NHS workers wages.

Yes but only if there was a tender framework and that there was public consultation. All records should also be immediately made public.

Yes, but only if it is fairly proven that this is for a good reason, and also only if everybody within the company (and the manager or managers) agree to it.

No, the large corporations that are able to take advantage of these schemes end up redistributing wealth out of the local community.

No opinion either way

Yes, but only to relocate from other countries, not from within the UK.

No, but cities should be allowed to offer non-monetary incentives to attract incoming businesses.

Yes as long as there is not a tax break incentive and the company hires local residents and boosts the local economy.

Amazon should not be punished for its success - most people are happy to benefit from its many operations. If it creates jobs and wealth for local people and doesn't adversely affect other businesses in the area then it could work

Yes, as long as the environment is not compromised and money is brought into the city's economy

No, use the money to incentives greener businesses while still maintaining or even making new jobs

private companies should be owned collectivised and owned by the workers

Yes, but only for jobs that would not be relocated domestically

Yes, because I believe it could have a positive impact on the economy

Yes, but only if local citizens and stakeholders can vote and have a say on what's to happen.

Yes but only from outside the UK, do not let it turn into a civil war offering the city to the company to outbid another city.

Yes, but they should prioritise smaller, local businesses

Abolish private business

Yes but the environment, the tax revenue and effect on local economy should be considered

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised and the tax revenue will exceed the tax incentives within 3 years

Yes only to a certain extent with competitive rules with regulatory style body to enforce them else richer towns will become richer and poorer ones will become poorer.

Yes, but only if local citizens can vote on this and only if new jobs will be created in the area.

If it won't compromise the environment, hires from the local area and the local people can vote on what incentives are offered.

No spend that money on improving Infrastructure and the community to attract companies but punish them for moving jobs out the country if necessary

yes but only if it is certain they will help the community they are relocating to

Only if they can’t take advantage economically

Yes, only if they can not economically take advantage

Don't be daft

Nationalise them if they cam provide lots of jobs if they are not willing to relocate

In principle yes,, but these deals should come under close scrutiny as it would be open to abuse and corrupt practises. Local government should encourage economic growth preferably by investing in smaller already locally based companies.

Yes but only if those private companies then become nationalised

Yes, if the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents and improve infrastructure and the community to attract companies

I will need to do more research on this topic to give a stance

confused g

This would have to be discussed and voted both nationally and in regional districts.

As long as the local population are offered jobs, the local environment is not compromised and the economic net positive benefits said area (ie. enriching economic, social, cultural, educational, etc life)—be wary as to corporate monopolies alongside moderate to thorough governance and genuinely liveable wages.

Yes provided there is evidence that the assistance will deliver net additional employment or output and doesn’t just displace from one place to another

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised and they promise to create new jobs by hiring local residence

No, they should be offering training programs to the unemployed and keeping jobs in the UK

Yes as long as existing jobs are protected and new ones are created

Yes, as long as the environment is not compromised and it creates jobs

No, but punish them for moving jobs out of the country and give them economic incentives to keep jobs in our country

Yes. But needed in east midlands too and cities with high unemployment.

Yes, but this must be closely regulated so as to ensure wealthier areas don't further absorb business at the expense of smaller, poorer areas.

i dont have much of an opinion on this matter but unnecessary moves should not be encouraged

Yes but not in the form of tax rebates/bribes

improve global regulations

Yes but only if there is a benefit to the local economy and then the entire economy as a whole and it should be a fair and open process and people should not lose money to implement these.

Stop environmental damage no matter what keep companies where they can be regulated

I don’t know enough.

No, and decrease tax on small businesses

Abolish the government and companies

Yes, but local residents should vote on the offer and local businesses and environment should be supported

Yes, but limits need to be set so that companies do not take advantage off the state.

No, lower corporate taxes for all companies.

Increasing the number of jobs outside of London is important for long term stability

Don’t Know

Yes, but don't subsidise big businesses

Yes, as long as the environment is unharmed and local jobs are created

No, but I would prefer if the companies were nationalised

No, lower corporate tax and business rates instead.

If a major corporation offered to bring 10,000 jobs to your city but requested significant tax breaks, would you support it and why?

What could your community do with the funds that are often offered to mega-corporations as incentives to relocate?

How would you feel if a large company received tax breaks to move to your town at the cost of funding for local schools and infrastructure?

Would you give up certain city services if it meant your city could attract a big tech company and potentially boost the economy?

Yes, if the company provides jobs in the local area and if the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, if the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents and but I would prefer lowering corporate taxes to benefit all local companies

If a company's arrival means a rise in your city's cost of living, is it still worth the economic incentives provided?

How might a city ensure that the benefits of hosting a giant corporation outweigh the sacrifices made in tax incentives?

In what ways could a community benefit from having a major corporation like Amazon move in, apart from job creation?

Should smaller local businesses get the same financial incentives as large corporations; why or why not?

How would the arrival of a big corporation in your town change your day-to-day life, for better or worse?

What are some potential downsides for a community when it gives large tax incentives to attract private companies?