Regeneration, if it is done right can
bring real and potentially long lasting benefits to many of our hard-pressed communities.
It is important that regeneration is a process rather than an event and that is
done for people rather than to people and does not end up simply enriching the
regeneration professionals instead of our communities. The unwritten rule should be if you are going
to spend public money then you need to work the money exceptionally hard to
ensure that every possible benefit is extracted. There is a real need to ensure
that any bodies set up to spend public money are democratically accountable and
are established after a wide ranging accessible consultation process. To most people this should
all sound pretty reasonable and sensible stuff, but it has often been to easily overlooked. The danger is that many of our local authorities simply perceive ‘regeneration’
as a means to accessing additional public monies rather than bringing
meaningful beneficial change too many of our communities. Hand in hand with
this concerning trend, in recent years there has been a disturbing tendency to
effectively marginalise any real community real involvement in the regeneration
process, something that undermines the very objective of community based regeneration.
Showing posts with label Consultation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Consultation. Show all posts
Monday, 16 June 2014
Wednesday, 23 November 2011
CYNICS ANONYMOUS...
My name if Jonathan, and I have a problem with cynicism! Perhaps I have been in the game (politics) for too long and seen too much, but, when I hear the phrase 'there will be a consultation process' I do tend to think that it has more to do with managing public opinion after a decision has been made. Hand on heart, I openly admit that I am something of a cynic and that I struggle with my cynicism.
Managing my cynicism is something that I mostly successfully. However, the way the UK Government (and many other levels of Government) treat people and they way they tend to involve people in governmental processes does not help. Certainly the after the fact nature of the process does make me speculate on why people are pretty disillusioned with politics and have a fairly developed loathing of practising professional politicians at most levels of governance.
So the UK government has confirmed that is intends to close Swansea coastguard station. The UK Transport Minister Mike Penning has stated that the station at Mumbles (which employs 28 people), would close by March 2015. I have no doubt that the loss of local expertise and expert knowledge that the closure will cause lives to be put at risk at some point, off Swansea, the Gower coast and in the Bristol Channel. News that the Coastguard Stations at Holyhead and Milford Haven, which had originally been in line for the chop have been granted a reprieve is some good news.
Part of me honestly wonders just how sincere the UK Westminster Government (for this read all levels of government) actually was (if at all) when the 'consultation process was announced. Obviously someone in London perhaps with a Metropolitan mindset was looking to save money, I am certainly getting the impression that Wales is out of sight and out of mind (for much if not all of the time) so who cares what happens there - at least as far as the Westminster Parliament is concerned. .
From a UK Government perspective no doubt the fact that the "Save Swansea Coastguard" campaign had collected 110,000 signatures and the fact that the campaign against the closure was very effective and very visible, was not doubt awkward but not insurmountable. One thing is true, here in Wales, this decision may be interpreted as being a little more evidence that we are ceasing to receive any meaningful material benefit from being part of the Union.
Managing my cynicism is something that I mostly successfully. However, the way the UK Government (and many other levels of Government) treat people and they way they tend to involve people in governmental processes does not help. Certainly the after the fact nature of the process does make me speculate on why people are pretty disillusioned with politics and have a fairly developed loathing of practising professional politicians at most levels of governance.
So the UK government has confirmed that is intends to close Swansea coastguard station. The UK Transport Minister Mike Penning has stated that the station at Mumbles (which employs 28 people), would close by March 2015. I have no doubt that the loss of local expertise and expert knowledge that the closure will cause lives to be put at risk at some point, off Swansea, the Gower coast and in the Bristol Channel. News that the Coastguard Stations at Holyhead and Milford Haven, which had originally been in line for the chop have been granted a reprieve is some good news.
Part of me honestly wonders just how sincere the UK Westminster Government (for this read all levels of government) actually was (if at all) when the 'consultation process was announced. Obviously someone in London perhaps with a Metropolitan mindset was looking to save money, I am certainly getting the impression that Wales is out of sight and out of mind (for much if not all of the time) so who cares what happens there - at least as far as the Westminster Parliament is concerned. .
From a UK Government perspective no doubt the fact that the "Save Swansea Coastguard" campaign had collected 110,000 signatures and the fact that the campaign against the closure was very effective and very visible, was not doubt awkward but not insurmountable. One thing is true, here in Wales, this decision may be interpreted as being a little more evidence that we are ceasing to receive any meaningful material benefit from being part of the Union.
Thursday, 3 March 2011
ECONOMIC REALITY AND VERBAL ASPIRATION
When it comes to economic development and regeneration providing the best conditions to enable our communities to grow and flourish, a sound planning policy is a key component. We should favour local small to medium sized enterprises and need to have much better thought out and far more consistent planning policies for in, out and edge of town retail developments, before our communities are damaged beyond repair.
Our Local Authorities have been too often tempted as developers offer includes, sweeteners and inducements to ease the passage of proposed developments. They may be advised of the financial consequences of planning applications being taken to appeal if permission is refused - so much for local democracy! Local Authorities periodically fail to have adequately researched retailing policies within their development plans. If retailing needs have not been assessed then it’s difficult to amend or refuse any potentially damaging planning applications from developers, then local small businesses and consumers pay the price.
Despite the talk (or lip service) about improving the vitality and viability of our town centres, many retail developments have consistently undermined this aim, many local authorities have turned a blind eye to the economic and social consequences of out of town or edge of town retail developments. The economic reality has fallen well short of the verbal aspiration, just look at the damage that has been done to Abergavenny, Chepstow and Monmouth within Monmouthshire and elsewhere in Wales.
How can local regeneration schemes work, when the once thriving commercial heart of our high streets has already been seriously damaged by an inability to compete on level terms with the increasingly aggressive tactics of supermarkets and retail chains who are chasing an ever larger market share. More than ever, our planners need to think about the long term economic consequences of planning decisions, to take the longer term view, rather than get fixated on short term financial gains and questionable inducements from developers.
You may have noticed that regeneration comes and goes in phases, in any particular community or town regeneration schemes will have cleaned areas up, built in cycle routes, created transport plans, pedestrianised streets, reopened them to traffic, re-pedestrianised them and made certain streets shared space with both cars and pedestrians (this is not as crazy as it sounds, and actually works) and so on.
We have restricted parking, created parking and removed parking, made it free and charged for it, created bus lanes, removed bus lanes and varied the hours when bus lanes can operate, etc - now this is all well and good and may reflect the latest trend in regeneration and development, but has it made the places where we live, work and shop any better? Has the regeneration process or scheme increased or generated wealth in our communities or provided people opportunities to get jobs, to go into business for themselves or generate wealth?
Regeneration is that often perceived (and sometimes it is) as being driven from the top down i.e. by elected bodies as a process that merely consults after the plans have been drawn up rather than before, during and after - any process run this way runs the risk of becoming deeply flawed. Our communities, towns and cities have over the years has been the recipient of much grant aid, development and redevelopment schemes and initiatives - how can we measure success?
Measuring a regeneration schemes success should be a key factor in the regeneration process. This is the question that needs to be asked - after the cement and the paint has dried, after the regeneration professionals have moved on - have the various schemes made a difference, I mean beyond any immediate physical improvements to the environment, have they made a real difference when it comes to wealth generation in the area affected by the regeneration scheme? If the end result is in reality a makeover, and the targeted community is no better off, save for being bereft of the 'regeneration funds' that have been effectively siphoned off by professional regeneration companies - is this success?
We need to think beyond the tick box list of the regeneration schemes managers? One key component that is often ignored or marginalised is the communities greatest resource - its people. So rather than regeneration and redevelopment professionals moving in and engaging in a token consultation process they should directly talk to and engage with local people and actually find out what they would like to be done, what they actually want for their community and their town.
Regeneration schemes and projects should be directed from the bottom up rather than the top down model that we often seem to pursue. When spending public money, then work it hard and squeeze out every possible benefit and maximise the impact locally of the regeneration process and build local benefits into the tendering process - whether by employing local people, using local resources, local skills and local input. If you are reusing or renovating old buildings then any regeneration scheme needs to ensure that old buildings can make a living after the regeneration scheme is finished.
If we do this rather than merely making a token gesture towards public consultation then any regeneration schemes will, with hard work really begin to deliver tangible benefits to our communities. After all regeneration should be a process rather than an event.
Our Local Authorities have been too often tempted as developers offer includes, sweeteners and inducements to ease the passage of proposed developments. They may be advised of the financial consequences of planning applications being taken to appeal if permission is refused - so much for local democracy! Local Authorities periodically fail to have adequately researched retailing policies within their development plans. If retailing needs have not been assessed then it’s difficult to amend or refuse any potentially damaging planning applications from developers, then local small businesses and consumers pay the price.
Despite the talk (or lip service) about improving the vitality and viability of our town centres, many retail developments have consistently undermined this aim, many local authorities have turned a blind eye to the economic and social consequences of out of town or edge of town retail developments. The economic reality has fallen well short of the verbal aspiration, just look at the damage that has been done to Abergavenny, Chepstow and Monmouth within Monmouthshire and elsewhere in Wales.
How can local regeneration schemes work, when the once thriving commercial heart of our high streets has already been seriously damaged by an inability to compete on level terms with the increasingly aggressive tactics of supermarkets and retail chains who are chasing an ever larger market share. More than ever, our planners need to think about the long term economic consequences of planning decisions, to take the longer term view, rather than get fixated on short term financial gains and questionable inducements from developers.
You may have noticed that regeneration comes and goes in phases, in any particular community or town regeneration schemes will have cleaned areas up, built in cycle routes, created transport plans, pedestrianised streets, reopened them to traffic, re-pedestrianised them and made certain streets shared space with both cars and pedestrians (this is not as crazy as it sounds, and actually works) and so on.
We have restricted parking, created parking and removed parking, made it free and charged for it, created bus lanes, removed bus lanes and varied the hours when bus lanes can operate, etc - now this is all well and good and may reflect the latest trend in regeneration and development, but has it made the places where we live, work and shop any better? Has the regeneration process or scheme increased or generated wealth in our communities or provided people opportunities to get jobs, to go into business for themselves or generate wealth?
Regeneration is that often perceived (and sometimes it is) as being driven from the top down i.e. by elected bodies as a process that merely consults after the plans have been drawn up rather than before, during and after - any process run this way runs the risk of becoming deeply flawed. Our communities, towns and cities have over the years has been the recipient of much grant aid, development and redevelopment schemes and initiatives - how can we measure success?
Measuring a regeneration schemes success should be a key factor in the regeneration process. This is the question that needs to be asked - after the cement and the paint has dried, after the regeneration professionals have moved on - have the various schemes made a difference, I mean beyond any immediate physical improvements to the environment, have they made a real difference when it comes to wealth generation in the area affected by the regeneration scheme? If the end result is in reality a makeover, and the targeted community is no better off, save for being bereft of the 'regeneration funds' that have been effectively siphoned off by professional regeneration companies - is this success?
We need to think beyond the tick box list of the regeneration schemes managers? One key component that is often ignored or marginalised is the communities greatest resource - its people. So rather than regeneration and redevelopment professionals moving in and engaging in a token consultation process they should directly talk to and engage with local people and actually find out what they would like to be done, what they actually want for their community and their town.
Regeneration schemes and projects should be directed from the bottom up rather than the top down model that we often seem to pursue. When spending public money, then work it hard and squeeze out every possible benefit and maximise the impact locally of the regeneration process and build local benefits into the tendering process - whether by employing local people, using local resources, local skills and local input. If you are reusing or renovating old buildings then any regeneration scheme needs to ensure that old buildings can make a living after the regeneration scheme is finished.
If we do this rather than merely making a token gesture towards public consultation then any regeneration schemes will, with hard work really begin to deliver tangible benefits to our communities. After all regeneration should be a process rather than an event.
Tuesday, 15 February 2011
COASTGUARD CUTS
Proposals put forward by the UK Westminster government mean that large areas of the Welsh coastline will be given little or no local emergency cover at night. If nothing else this is the Con Dem's recklessly putting money above lives and potentially putting lives at risk.
The UK Government plans mean that there will be no Welsh cover at night, as incidents will be dealt with from Southampton. Over centralisation of the coastguard means that there will be problems with identifying where incidents are taking place, already the over centralised ambulance service has had problems telling Newport (Pembs) from Newport (Gwent) and that is within Wales, heaven help any mariners in distress once its all run from Southampton, where first-hand familiarity with local Welsh coastal geography will be pretty thin on the ground.
This is madness and is completely inadequate, reckless and dangerous and a foolish cost cutting exercise. Only fifteen years ago there was the Sea Empress disaster, when 72,000 tonnes of oil spilled into the sea, and polluted more than 200k of our beautiful coastline. Milford Haven waterway is one of the largest concentrations of petro-chemical installations in the UK, and the third largest Port in the UK, despite this the Tory Government is considering shutting the local coast guard station (amongst others).
The Tories and and their willing Lib Dem partners are putting Welsh lives in danger, not to mention the lives of potential mariners. This much needed public service can be best run in Wales, so Plaid is calling rightly for a consultation on the idea of devolving the responsibility and money for maintaining this service, for the benefit of the people of Wales.
Plaid Cymru wants to see a consultation to seek the views of the people affected by these Westminster cuts. If the Tories and Lib Dems have no interest in the future of the coastguard services, and it is clear from their plans that they do not, perhaps it would be better to place it under the responsibility of the Welsh government with a fair funding deal to make sure people are safe along Welsh shorelines.
The UK Government plans mean that there will be no Welsh cover at night, as incidents will be dealt with from Southampton. Over centralisation of the coastguard means that there will be problems with identifying where incidents are taking place, already the over centralised ambulance service has had problems telling Newport (Pembs) from Newport (Gwent) and that is within Wales, heaven help any mariners in distress once its all run from Southampton, where first-hand familiarity with local Welsh coastal geography will be pretty thin on the ground.
This is madness and is completely inadequate, reckless and dangerous and a foolish cost cutting exercise. Only fifteen years ago there was the Sea Empress disaster, when 72,000 tonnes of oil spilled into the sea, and polluted more than 200k of our beautiful coastline. Milford Haven waterway is one of the largest concentrations of petro-chemical installations in the UK, and the third largest Port in the UK, despite this the Tory Government is considering shutting the local coast guard station (amongst others).
The Tories and and their willing Lib Dem partners are putting Welsh lives in danger, not to mention the lives of potential mariners. This much needed public service can be best run in Wales, so Plaid is calling rightly for a consultation on the idea of devolving the responsibility and money for maintaining this service, for the benefit of the people of Wales.
Plaid Cymru wants to see a consultation to seek the views of the people affected by these Westminster cuts. If the Tories and Lib Dems have no interest in the future of the coastguard services, and it is clear from their plans that they do not, perhaps it would be better to place it under the responsibility of the Welsh government with a fair funding deal to make sure people are safe along Welsh shorelines.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)