All posts in the topic Communities in Control (Short link)
Summary
- There are 8 posts — by 5 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Mark Walker at Aug 26 12:29 UTC
Hello all Any thoughts on this, published yesterday by the Department of Communites and Local Government? *= = = =* Communities in control: real people, real power Published 9 July 2008 Type(s) Legislation and policy Site Communities and neighbourhoods Product code 08LGSR05402 (Cm 7427) ISBN 9780101742726 Price 33.45 (free to download below) *Summary*Communities in control tells the story of power, influence and control and how people can use existing and new tools to access it. The White Paper looks at who has power, on whose behalf is it exercised, how is it held to account, and how can it can be accessed by everyone in local communities. The accompanying Evidence Annex<http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/communitiesannex>focuses on the state of empowerment in England and presents some of the key evidence underpinning the policies outlined in the White Paper. = = = Download it here: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/communitiesincontrol
Hi all While you're thinking about Mark's post, you might like to look at a petition on a real, current issue of local democracy and consider putting your name to it petitions.gov.uk/FalmerAcademy/ Val Cane> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:17:25 +0100> From: <email obscured>> To: <email obscured>> Subject: [BH-Issues] Communities in Control> > Hello all> > Any thoughts on this, published yesterday by the Department of Communites> and Local Government?> *= = = =*> Communities in control: real people, real power Published 9 July 2008> Type(s) Legislation and policy Site Communities and neighbourhoods Product> code 08LGSR05402 (Cm 7427) ISBN 9780101742726 Price 33.45 (free to> download below)> *Summary*Communities in control tells the story of power, influence and> control and how people can use existing and new tools to access it. The> White Paper looks at who has power, on whose behalf is it exercised, how is> it held to account, and how can it can be accessed by everyone in local> communities.> > The accompanying Evidence> Annex<http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/communitiesannex>focuses> on the state of empowerment in England and presents some of the key> evidence underpinning the policies outlined in the White Paper.> = = => > Download it here:> http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/communitiesincontrol> > Mark> > -- > Mark Walker> Project Manager and South East Regional ICT Champion> > SCIP: IT Services for Charities and Communities> Community Base, Queens Road, Brighton BN1 3XG> > Tel: 01273 234049 Email: <email obscured>> Web: www.scip.org.uk Mobile: 07956 627116> Blog: www.scipmark.org.uk> > Mark Walker> Hanover> Info about Mark Walker: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/markwalker> > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4isjbbL7ruKAztxBJXOh36>
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Val Cane <<email obscured>> wrote: > While you're thinking about Mark's post, you might like to look at a > petition on a real, current issue of local democracy and consider putting > your name to it > petitions.gov.uk/FalmerAcademy/ Did you mean http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/FalmerAcademy/ ?
Signed but it was a great pity that there weren't more people on the picket
outside Hove Town Hall today, although it wasn't very well advertised.
Tony G
On 7/10/08, Mark Walker <<email obscured>> wrote:
> Hello all
>
> Any thoughts on this, published yesterday by the Department of Communites
> and Local Government?
> *= = = =*
> Communities in control: real people, real power Published 9 July 2008
Mark
You brought this to our notice, what do you think? I'd suggest your
opinion in this area to be as pertinent, if not more so, than many of
the rest of us on this list.
Tony C
Yes, thanks for that correction Tom I have met people who think they've signed and don't get put on. If you're not used to these petitions, you might forget to go back to your email and click to confirm. Val Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:44:09 +0100From: tom.coady@gmail.comTo: vgcane@hotmail.comSubject: Re: [BH-Issues] Communities in ControlCC: <email obscured>; <email obscured> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Val Cane <<email obscured>> wrote: While you're thinking about Mark's post, you might like to look at a petition on a real, current issue of local democracy and consider putting your name to itpetitions.gov.uk/FalmerAcademy/ Did you mean http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/FalmerAcademy/ ?
Ok - allow me to break the silence. On 7/10/08, Mark Walker <<email obscured>> wrote: > Hello all > > Any thoughts on this, published yesterday by the Department of Communites > and Local Government? > *= = = =* > Communities in control: real people, real power Published 9 July 2008 > Type(s) Legislation and policy Site Communities and neighbourhoods Product > code 08LGSR05402 (Cm 7427) ISBN 9780101742726 Price 33.45 (free to > download below) > *Summary*Communities in control tells the story of power, influence and > control and how people can use existing and new tools to access it. The > White Paper looks at who has power, on whose behalf is it exercised, how is > it held to account, and how can it can be accessed by everyone in local > communities. > > The accompanying Evidence > Annex<http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/communitiesannex>focuses > on the state of empowerment in England and presents some of the key > evidence underpinning the policies outlined in the White Paper. > = = = > > Download it here: > http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/communitiesincontrol > > Mark > > -- Statistics, damn statistics and lies. My own interest lies with housing, in particular, housing co-operatives. Two decades ago their development was effectively outlawed. An exponential growth in demand was stopped in its tracks and its life-support system switched off. It had been shown that tenants wanted them, that they out performed all other forms of tenure in all the key indices - AND - as this report so lovingly puts it, provided reservoirs of "social capital". There had been support for the experiment but only so long as it proved such experiments are doomed to failure. So they shut the gate but what to do about the bolting horses? As the this report reports it: "housing is one of the most established spheres for community engagement and empowerment ….. indeed, community participation has been a theme in discussions of housing policy for at least two decades". Not co-incidentally, it was also twenty years ago that the public sector was re-designated a private sector investment opportunity under the 1989 Housing Act. We had the spectacle of City financiers bringing to the civic table their own unique perspective on matters of governance: presentational spin, obfuscation with regard to facts and a steady eye on the bottom line. New Labour simply took up the precedent and established a working relationship. In short, the option of community ownership, from which all else does flow, has long since been replaced by a plethora of inconsequential, spirit-draining alternatives. For example: "As with more general civic participation, tenant participation is a very broad concept involving a spectrum of opportunities from activity by social landlords to consult tenants, to tenant management organisations, where tenants take over some landlord functions". Nicely put, everything and anything will be considered short of a landlord constituted the tenants themselves; just so long as the replica is promoted to sound as good and the original isn't rendered conspicuous in its absence, no-one will notice. The provision of shelter in "partnership" with private investment has no desire to fund self-governing, non-profit making enterprises, whose assets can't be liquidated and where the community has effective control over its revenue stream. Where's the "competition" in that? No, this only becomes an option when it's directly funded, with new homes built at cost value, free at point of entry and where the prospective residents have control over its design and development. Twenty years ago, apart from this last one (the privilege of co-ops), these conditions were all met and taken for granted. For over twenty years now we've been offered the semblance of 'reform' but instead of abolishing access to power through privilege and influence, they've surreptitiously modernised the conduits. If Government truly sought a partnership between civil and civic society, replacing the House of Lords with delegates from member-based organisations would have made an interesting start. In terms of redressing the democratic deficit this might even have encouraged a degree of informed debate around this very issue, with at least half of the legislative chamber held accountable to those ultimately tasked with putting this into practice. Tony C
Hi Tony
I wasn't ignoring you, just busy with summer stuff...
I agree with your pessimistic version of things, although I don't have the
wealth of knowledge or experience that you do to have analysed in such an
insightful way.
I'm suspicious in general of the use of jargon like social capital, and in this
case I'm also confused by the way in which local decision-making will sit
alongside other mechanisms such as national and international issues.
The report has some good points to make, and they're not always rhetorical
crowd-pleasers, but I do notice that a lot of information coming from
Government refers to the Third Sector, which apparently encompasses such
diverse organisations as tenant associations and large housing associations.
I'd suggest that there is a huge difference now between the roles of formal
voluntary sector organisations, especially larger charities bidding for
contracts, and the work of community groups, which are mainly voluntary and may
be single issue campaigning groups. And there is also the growing interest in
social enterprise as a lever for extracting resources from local government's
hands.
This isn't about ownership in the same way as the point you make but I think
there is a current bias towards one view of the third sector ie taking control
of assets, which may exclude other important aspects of community, especially
giving people a voice.