PARKINSON'S LAW FOR BRUM

12-03-2007

Birmingham Council's cabinet members are expected to approve the outline of a new masterplan for the city today - although if you read between the lines of Professor Michael Parkinson's initial study he's actually giving them a good kicking.

Parkinson, who works at the European Institute for Urban Affairs based at Liverpool's John Moores University, was hired by council leader Mike Whitby and regeneration boss Ken Hardeman to outline a vision for the future.

He praises much of the work that has been done over the last 20 years - the reconstruction of the city centre, the shift towards a more diverse economic base, the eradication of the concrete collar and so on.

Today, he says, we have a bustling city centre with a thriving legal and professional sector, in which Symphony Hall and the ICC have been created, and the canals rejuvenated.

We've certainly come a long way from the dark daysof 1980-1982 whenthe city lost 90,000 jobs, part a massive haemmorage of work in manufacturing industry.

All of these achievements and more are recognised by Parkinson, yet reading through the 77 pages of his report, it's difficult to avoid the conclusion that for all the progress Birmingham has made, other comparable cities have made much more dramatic improvements - and are still moving aheadwhile we have stagnated.

If this analysis is correct - and there's no reason to doubt it - the responsibility rests not just with the current Tory/Lib Dem administration of course, but with the Labour one that preceded it.

But as the current "progressive partnership" has failed to progress the redevelopment of New Street station, the tram extensions and a new library (allkey issues highlighted by Parkinson) he clearly thinks they are culpable.

Parkinson describesa city with too much unemployment, which is poorly educated, that doesn't have enough entrepreneurs, and where there are too few independent shops to counter-balance the bland, seen ‘em all before chainstores.

Worse still, we're not even making our location as the crossroads of England, work for us; Birmingham's Airport has fewer than half the passengers of Manchester, New Streetremains congested, and nothing is made of the great architectural splendour of Spaghetti Junction.

Happily there are opportunities too. Eastside, the soon to be redeveloped Wholesale Markets and the Jewellery Quarter are all places were Birmingham can seek to grow and prosper.

The question is - how to unlock that latent talent in the city and its people? Parkinson proposesreleasing the value of the city's enormous land-bank by entering leasing deals with developers; this means thatthe councilretains ownership of the asset but can enter profitable public-private partnershipsthat generate capital.

He also discusses the creation of a City Development Company which would have the ability to take a proactive role in developing and implementing the masterplan.

Which is all very well as far as it goes; but where are the Brummies in all this?

We have lived through massive changes - some, but not all of them, positive -yetour role in the creation of Birmingham's next phase appears in Parkinson's account to be minimal.

On the face of it - and we stand to be corrected - this is yet another prescription for "top down" change, imposed on the citizens in whose name it is being carried out. Very 1960s - and just the kind of thinking that landed us in the mess that we've only just escaped from.

Even at the ballot box, the voice of Birmingham people is muzzled. Those few of us who bother to votefind that anonymous agencies such as Advantage West Midlands wield vast, yet unaccountable spending power in our name; meanhwile the councilmiaows likea neutered tomcat when it should roar like a mighty lion.

Is a CDC just another version of AWM? If so, it will do little to rectify a democratic deficit that already makes so much local government merely an agency for Whitehall diktat.

Perhaps the Professor will argue that he has to go with the grain of government, and follow the funding to its source.

Maybe so; but if we're going to have a masterplan - and much of what Parkinson advocates makes for inspirational reading - then let the people of Birmingham shape it and vote for it. After all, in the main part, they are going to have to fund it, and even more importantly, live with the results.

Parkinson urges the city's leaders to be bold and ambitious; all we ask we would ask of him as the architect of this plan, is that he shoulddo likewise.

What are Birmingham's priorities over the next 20 years? And what would your masterplan include? Improvements toNew Street station? More independent shops? Better education and housing? Leave a comment on the news thread of our messageboard.