WMCA’s new Inclusive Growth Unit

WMCA’s new Inclusive Growth Unit

We’re really pleased to be part of the WMCA’s new Inclusive Growth Unit https://www.wmca.org.uk/news/linking-cranes-with-communities-wmca-launches-inclusive-growth-unit/. It’s an opportunity to go beyond a focus on ‘problem people’ to the systemic reasons why we fail to share prosperity and how this can be addressed regionally.

We will be coordinating the input of civil society organisations into the inclusive growth agenda as well as having more general input into the Unit from our 20 years experience of exploring beneficial economics in the region. As part of our Barrow Cadbury funded work we’ve already held a workshop in February for organisations who have some level of ‘frontline’ role in economic justice and shared some initial conclusions with our WMCA contacts.

It will be a challenge for the WMCA and its partners including ourselves to coordinate the plethora of work strands – and overlaps with the social enterprise task force – into something that has the power to impact on the ‘business as usual’ growth-led approach that we have seen in every strategic economic plan since they were invented. But from what we have seen there is a genuine appetite to see change in how we value and deliver economics – so we are confident this is worth engaging with. The appointment of Claire Spencer as inclusive growth lead is definitely worth celebrating, but many of her new colleagues seem to share her willingness to push the boundaries.

We’re told that the Unit will cover not only public service reform agenda but cross-cuts the whole WMCA remit: it would be excellent to end the silo-ing of anything relating to ‘people’ away from the macho realm of ‘growth’.

From a specifically Localising Prosperity perspective, we’re also hoping to ensure that this agenda seeks not only jobs but diversifying and democratising economic ownership, and building local economies around its assets and local ‘anchor’ institutions – the story of Preston remains an inspiration on this and the Centre for Local Economic Strategies have worked with anchor institutions in Birmingham on a similar approach. Our recent work with New Economics Foundation on the economic potential of social care in the WM economy highlighted how what’s described as the ‘foundational economy’ (the one that provides what human beings actually need, often based in the places where they actually live) provides a useful driver for inclusive economics.

Of course all this must be underpinned by the right set of values and measures: social care cooperatives hit all the right numbers if you value the goods, services, livelihoods, redistribution and economic power that it brings; less so if you are motivated by GVA. So this is the starting point for the work we’re planning.

We’re looking forward to an interesting few months.

Karen Leach

Whither West Midlands

Whither West Midlands

If the answer was Brexit, then surely, we were asking the wrong question.

This isn’t a blog about Brexit: instead it asks the fundamental questions about our economy that Brexit poses, and presents a different answer.

With the government’s own economic impact assessments for the West Midlands making grim reading (worst case scenarios are reminiscent of the early 1980s recessions that devastated the social and economic fabric of the region) it is vital that policy makers, institutions and individuals prepare for what is likely to be a disruptive period for the UK economy.

Added to this is the high concentrations of leave voters in the de-industrialised areas of the West Midlands. Economically and politically disempowered, these areas have performed poorly, in orthodox economic development terms, since the 1980s. They have experienced comparatively low levels of private sector and government investment and entrenched social issues linked to poverty. Put simply, the West Midlands hasn’t fared well out of the last 40 years of UK economic policy.

It seems that for the West Midlands, Brexit could be a perfect storm:

• A lack of political power to shape national policy to meet its specific needs.
• Opening its markets to intense global competition, leading to job losses.
• Lower state investment likely to affect the poorest and most vulnerable in society.

So the most important questions are “what next?” and “Are the changes being planned for us, not by us, really in our interest?”

It seems two options exist….

More of the same?

Much of the hype around Brexit from government and its main advocates has been around the notion of a ‘Global Britain’, the narrative about this uses snappy messaging like ‘freedom’ ‘something new’ and ‘we will all benefit’. In reality ‘Global Britain’ is simply a rebranding and upscaling of the of current economic model we have followed for 40 years – you know, the one the West Midlands hasn’t done particularly well out of.

Let’s take food as an example of what this ‘Global Britain’ might mean. Early reports about potential ‘free trade’ deals have focused on cheaper food imports from places such as America, New Zealand and Australia. The result of this is that smaller UK farmers and food producers won’t be able to compete and could go bust, coupled with the enormous environmental costs of shipping food and goods long distances. So it appears behind the snappy title, Global Britain will be bad for local producers, but a bonanza for massive corporations, with capital and jobs leaving Britain in return for environmentally unsustainable food products and in some cases lower quality food.

In this scenario it seems more apparent by the day, that a real danger of Brexit will be to open Britain up to a free trade ‘free for all’ that could result in lower food, safety and environmental protections.

Something different?

Let’s be radical! If any situation called for creative thinking and new solutions, Brexit is it. Another Brexit mantra is ‘Taking back Control’ an amorphous phrase that in practice will most likely entail a further concentration of power in one place, Westminster. Even with the Devolution deal secured by the West Midlands, economic policy is generally created for the benefit of one part of the UK economy – London and the Southeast – and if this trend continues it will most likely lead to further divergence between London and the rest of the UK, but without the power to set policy that works locally.

So how about a radical redistribution of economic and political power, not only devolved to regional (though yes, that’s important) but right down to the communities we all live in?

Getting Local; Community Economic Development

Imagine a new style of economy that valued people and created a resilient and sustainable West Midlands. An economic model where local people lead and participate as owners, investors, purchasers and wealth creators. Far-fetched? Not really. Community Economic Development (CED) exists in practice in communities across the world, from hyper local food networks, energy co-operatives, complementary currencies and larger private, trade union & public-sector partnerships that grow localised economic activity for the benefit of communities.

Evidence proves this approach is a better way to grow jobs, harnessing the assets of local communities, rather than relying on distant private and public-sector owners with little understanding of the local areas. The approach is well evidenced with LWM’s research finding that higher levels of small and micro businesses and local ownership lead to higher levels of economic success, job creation, social inclusion, civic engagement, wellbeing and local distinctiveness.

So maybe the right question should be ‘How do we make an economy that works for everyone, that we all have a meaningful stake in?’

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why?

We could spend another 40 years following the current economic model, sending profits into the offshore accounts of multinationals, damaging our environment and generally carrying on regardless, or we could spend the next 40 years working together to ensure the West Midlands is at the forefront of a new social and economic revolution.

Anything else is simply unsustainable…..

Visit Localising Prosperity to find out more www.localisewestmidlands.org.uk

Localising Prosperity – a short film

We are delighted to launch our new Localising Prosperity video – a seven-minute film exploring better ways to do economics.

Through four projects that exemplify aspects of the Localising Prosperity approach our film shows how we can create an economy which is lively and diverse, meets local needs with local resources, & in which more people have a stake.

Our thanks to all the contributors involved in making this film (see more below). Please share it widely!

Thanks also to our film-maker, Susan Jones of Redhead Business Films and to our funder the Barrow Cadbury Trust.

In such a short film we’ve not had space to fully describe the featured projects and who is behind each of them, so here’s a quick round-up and some useful links:

The New Hospital: anchoring prosperity in the community

This is about ensuring “anchor institutions’ like Sandwell & Birmingham’s new hospital (leaving aside current concerns about Carillion!*) has the maximum positive impact on local people, by ensuring that retail options, procurement and related services are locally sourced and employ locally wherever possible. The organisations working on this – Sandwell Council, Citizen Home, Localise West Midlands and Smethwick CAN amongst others – are proposing that one of the hospital’s retail units is taken by a social enterprise shop  that could not only sell locally produced goods but act as a “concierge” type service for busy staff and visiting families, to access the services they need from local businesses.

Thanks to Conrad Parke, Martin Hogg, Karen McCarthy for appearances in this one.

*UPDATE: although the Carillion failure means a new developer will need to be found for the Midland Metropolitan Hospital, the work of the USE-IT! project in Ladywood, Soho and Smethwick will continue, as it relates to those areas rather than the hospital itself.  For anyone directly affected, there is advice here, a general helpline 0800 063 9282 and a helpline for Black Country businesses: 01902 912322.

Inclusive business support ecosystems in Balsall Heath

Citizens UK and the Centre for Research on Ethnic Minority Enterpreneurship have been working together with business people in Lozells, Small Heath and Sparkbrook to achieve better engagement with support agencies, aiming to generate an inclusive business support ecosystem in these areas. Nayer’s jewellery business is one of those involved. Thanks to Moses Dakurivosa and Nayer Khan-Farrukh for contributing here.

Energy Capital – local business innovation for social good

Headed by Matthew Rhodes, Energy Capital is about collaborative sector development, in which energy innovation delivers on the needs of real people and the environment, and policy shifts support it to do so, with locally owned businesses  involved at every level. RentE Cars is on of the local businesses that is ‘driving’ (forgive the pun) and taking advantage of electric car charging innovations. As well as Matthew we are grateful to Rob Jolly and Waqar Bukhari for taking part in this one.

Social care: an opportunity for inclusive economics?

Our final case study is about how social care, rather than being a problem, can be a positive force for inclusive economics that could help the West Midlands Combined Authority achieve its stated aims of sharing prosperity more widely – as a report by NEF for LWM outlines. The “foundational economy” is made up of the things society really needs, social care being one, and deserves a closer economic focus. Built around adaptable, small scale and community enterprises, social care may not provide conventional ‘growth’ but could have a huge impact on local jobs in places where they are needed, providing something we all need and care about. Crossroads Care is an example of a locally accountable and adaptable enterprise delivering care and economic opportunity. Our thanks to Christine Christie, Graham Evans, Carol Glover and her mum, and Joanne Ferguson for their time.

Together these stories show some of the ways that communities can have greater economic power and prosperity.

If you’re interested in our approach try our Localising Prosperity webpages for more information.

Karen Leach

 

 

The West Midlands Forum for Growth? Well if I were you I wouldn’t start from here.

I attended the West Midlands Forum for Growth yesterday at Resorts World. It was the official conference of the West Midlands Combined Authority, and I was attending on one of two free tickets given to civil society bodies, as part of the group of civil society organisations aiming to have a voice in combined authority matters. Tickets in general cost somewhere in the low hundreds of pounds.

In Andy Street’s keynote address, he told us the WMCA would be judged on its performance on two issues: growth, and public services and the lives of citizens. He said that although we were performing well on the first, we were not delivering well on the second. He said that there was no purpose in economic growth[i] if does not deliver the improvements in the lives of citizens.

This was a really important and honest admission for our mayor to make, at the start of an event that harnessed one day’s worth of the thinking power of hundreds of people in positions of significant power and with years of experience. It should have been the start of a challenging and free-thinking discussion about how we would make sure this happened.

There was a general sense of positivity in the room – that the West Midlands authorities were now seriously collaborating and that the devolution deal, land use and investment policies being followed were going to lead to opportunities. I didn’t really share that sense: I was thinking about Andy’s statement and wanting to discuss how we could address this need and make the West Midlands’ agenda deliver prosperity that was shared fully across its people with public services that met their needs.

But that discussion did not happen. There was nothing really different or challenging. The solutions are to have the biggest site, the fastest train, the tallest building, the greatest growth – the illusory trickle down of machoeconomics.

What about exploring the inclusive prosperity potential to be gained from enabling small development on small sites, not just big development on big sites? What about increasing local ownership? Fostering local supply chains? Raising the lowest wages? A focus, as with our social care report with New Economics Foundation, on the ‘foundational economy’, of providing the things that we all need such as food, energy, care, education?

A discussion on ‘liveability’ towards the end covered many of the right things about wellbeing but didn’t really address how the growth agenda should achieve them. It was more as if liveability was something you did in order to create more growth, not something that growth needed to achieve.

Belatedly, I started to realise what this event was really for. The vast majority of attendance, alongside public sector people, were in roles relating to development: (architects, developers, project management). There was little input from voluntary sector or small business, let alone of course from active citizens. There was none of the cross-sector debate about how policy can make a real difference, as there was at regional conferences of the early noughties[ii]. I assume that all those present had an interest in being enthusiastic about the agenda in order to facilitate access to new developments in whatever capacity they were operating. While they might have cared about it, their role and expertise was not to help deliver policy, investment and practice that meet those public needs.

This, I guess, is fine. There probably SHOULD be an event (probably in a car-centric and unsustainable consumer-orientated venue[i], probably for a prohibitive fee) that brings such people together to create a positive buzz around the devolution agenda and to network about the business opportunities that will result.

But should that event be the official Combined Authority conference? Given the Combined Authority’s remit that Andy laid out, does its real conference need to bring in a wider range of perspectives, some experts in public services and local economics, in a vastly more participative format (I counted 4 questions from the audience in 6 hours) and perhaps not charge them £300 for doing so?

We’d be happy to support such a WMCA conference in 2018.

Karen Leach

[i] I cycled there and back. Alongside the asphyxiating fumes, the only way out as a cyclist was take the third exit off the M42/A45 roundabout in three lanes of motorway-hungry traffic. I am sure I lost one of my nine lives.

[i] Yes, we are aware of the the grim realities of the impacts of such growth on our future on a finite planet. Having gone many steps backward since the not-ideal era of Regional Development Agencies, we’re currently aeons from being able to debate this. Instead, we hope to enable policymakers to see that other objectives and measures are more critical, and that this will reduce the focus on, and eventually the impact of, such growth. We know that this won’t be in time to stop dangerous levels of climate change or the depletion of finite resources, but we have to start somewhere.

[ii] And no, I never thought I would be highlighting those as pinnacles of sustainability and social inclusion.

Make social care an economic ‘engine’ of the West Midlands

Press release for our inclusive economics & social care report with New economics Foundation – launched today

Social care may be on the brink of crisis but the sector has the potential to become a driver of the West Midlands economy.

A report for Localise West Midlands as part of the Good City Economies programme, has called for a re-framing of the sector, away from large-scale providers towards community and cooperative care models.

Prioritising and promoting community-scale care provision could transform the sector, creating high quality jobs and improving standards of care across the region.

Following calls by the new mayor of West Midlands Andy Street for greater diversity in the provision of all public services, this timely report sets out the benefits of a more localised social care system.

The report, Social Care as a Local Economic Solution in the West Midlands, was scoped by a group of organisations active in the region on inclusive economics and social care.

Social care is a ‘dysfunctional system dominated by “too big to fail” companies’, the report says. For while the ‘big five’ care providers appear to offer lower costs, almost a third of their spend goes to shareholders.

Data cited in the report shows that the UK’s five biggest chain social care companies offer big returns to investors, taking up 29% of their costs —the second-biggest drain on expenditure after staff wages.

It calls for the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) to prioritise new models of care and establish a community care innovation unit.

Community-led care providers tend to keep money in the local economy and offer more personalised care for the same cost. A regional ecosystem of smaller-scale care businesses, such as West Midlands-based Crossroads Care, could ensure public investment in social care is re-invested in communities.

This re-framing of social care models a new approach to local economics, one that is aligned with the assets and needs of communities rather than focused on economic growth and inward investment. This ‘foundational’ approach to local economies could be extended to other sectors such as housing, food and utilities.

David Powell, subject lead at the New Economics Foundation and author of the report, said, ‘Social care is on a cliff-edge. New ideas are desperately needed. The West Midlands can transform the perception of the care sector in the region: a growing economic sector with the potential to meet a diversity of skills, employment and economic needs for communities that aren’t helped by GVA-driven economic strategies.’

Localise West Midlands, who commissioned the report said: ‘The West Midlands coordination role and the election of its first Mayor – who has committed to not-for-profit models of public service provision – places it in a unique position of leadership.

‘The region has an opportunity to be visionary if it understands how sectors like social care can provide careers in places where people live meeting local needs. To deliver its commitment to inclusive prosperity the WMCA will need strategies like this based on real local needs and assets, and to create an economy in which we all have an ownership stake.’

 

Notes:

Social Care as a local economic solution for the West Midlandsis part of the Good City Economies project, a partnership between New Economics Foundation and Centre for Local Economic Strategies, with funding from Friends Provident Foundation.

Localise WM works towards local supply chains, money flow and ownership for a more just and sustainable economy and will be focusing on policy opportunities such as this at the regional level over the coming years. Its work on this has been funded by the Barrow Cadbury Trust.

Download the report here

 For more information contact:

 Author and primary contact:

David Powell: David.Powell@neweconomics.org

 Co-ordinator of Localise West Midlands:

Karen McCarthy: karenm@localisewestmidlands.org.uk

@localisewm 0121 685 1155

Good City Economies: @GoodCityEconomy

 

Notes:

Localise West Midlands: http://www.localisewestmidlands.org.uk

Good City Economies: https://newstartmag.co.uk/good-city-economies/

Can you help us to inspire and catalyse a better economy?

Can you help us to inspire and catalyse a better economy?

Join LWM’s board

We know our work towards localising and redistributing prosperity resonates with a lot of people. We’d love some of that resonance to draw people to get involved in governing our future – the small but crucial ‘lynchpin’ organisation in the region’s progressive economics!

After the summer we will be embarking on a fourth phase of our Localising Prosperity programme, which came from our groundbreaking research into the benefits of a localisation approach and how it can be integrated into mainstream economic development. We are now focusing on delivery of this agenda in practice. The main strands of work will be:

  • Maximising the local benefits of the new hospital development in Smethwick, including with partners through the EU-funded USEIT project
  • Enabling more of a voice for economic justice organisations into the Combined Authority agenda
  • Supporting and challenging regional and local economic agendas to go beyond ‘growth’ to ‘who benefits’.

We will also be putting some time into diversifying our activities and will be planning for this over the summer.

To help refresh and strengthen our thinking we’re looking for two new active, committed board members with commitment to our concept and values, understanding of the tactics and communication for effecting change, and relevant knowledge and contacts.

We are also very aware that the age, ethnicity and gender profile of our board does not reflect the population of the West Midlands, and we are keen to address this in order to benefit from a wider range of perspectives and ensure we do not inadvertently exclude anyone from our group. So we particularly welcome applications from women, younger people, and people from a variety of cultural, ethnic and social backgrounds.

Please read our Board member role description and browse our website for more information. If you’re interested, please email us outlining how you meet the above criteria and why you are interested in getting involved, attaching your CV. We’ll then be in touch to arrange a meeting.

Please also pass this on to contacts who could be interested!

Karen Leach

Smile, you’re on TV! A West Midlands Combined Authority meeting is filmed

As Localise West Midlands, we are playing an important role in pressing for and enabling a civil society voice about the West Midlands Combined Authority, bringing together people and organisations that have knowledge and experience around economic issues, transport, housing and health.  We have blogged before about the West Midlands Civil Society Forum.

West Midlands Combined Authority Board meetings are held at different venues around the region, but are not livestreamed.  Even when the meetings are held in rooms equipped for webstreaming, the facility is not used.  As WMCSF, we’ve asked why this isn’t happening, and been told it probably won’t happen till the mayor is elected.  Until it does, we try to get to each meeting, to observe proceedings and to make the point that people are interested in the combined authority.

But last Friday’s meeting was held at Nuneaton Town Hall.  Again, the chamber has cameras but in this case they aren’t set up for webstreaming.  Uniquely though, local Green Party councillor Keith Kondakor has been using the right to film meetings to put proceedings on a YouTube channel.

So here for the first time is a WMCA Board meeting for the wider public to see:

 

 

Celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Lucas Plan on 26th Nov!

Veteran trade unionists and younger activists see Nobel prize-nominated plan as inspiration for the future

Leading figures from the left, trade union, environmental and peace movements are coming together at a conference on November 26th with a fresh perspective on tackling current crises, using the ideas of socially useful production pioneered in the Lucas Plan. The Plan, produced by workers at the Lucas Aerospace arms company, showed how jobs could be saved by converting to make socially useful products, rather than weapons. See www.lucasplan.org.uk,  for more information on the Lucas Plan.

lucasplanThe conference will focus on 5 key themes:

  • The Lucas Plan and socially useful production.
  • Arms conversion and peace.
  • Climate change and a socially just transition to sustainability.
  • The threat to skills and livelihoods from automation.
  • Local/community economic and industrial planning.

LWM will be running an informal workshop on the last of these. Linking all these issues is the need to rethink how we can produce what people and society actually need and overcome corporate domination through their control of technology.

Highlights of the conference will include:

  • Talks by Phil Asquith, Brian Salisbury and Mick Cooney (Lucas Aerospace Shop Stewards Combine).
  • Screening of a new film on the Lucas Plan by Steve Sprung.
  • Contributions from: Chris Baugh (PCS), Suzanne Jeffery (Million Climate Jobs Campaign), Hilary Wainwright (Red Pepper), Natalie Bennett, Molly Scott-Cato and Jonathan Essex (Green Party), Philip Pearson (Greener Jobs Alliance), Romayne Phoenix (People’s Assembly Against Austerity), Mary Pearson (Birmingham Trades Council), Tony Kearns (CWU), Mika Minio-Paluello (Platform), Philippa Hands (UNISON), Stuart Parkinson (Scientists for Global Responsibility), Dave Elliott (Open University), Liz Corbin (Institute of Making), Tony Simpson (Bertrand Russell Foundation), Dave King (Breaking the Frame), Simon Fairlie (The Land magazine), Karen Leach (Localise West Midlands), Marisol Sandoval (City University), Tom Unterrainer (Bertrand Russell Foundation), John Middleton (Medact), Gail Chester (Feminist Library), Julie Ward (Labour Party), David Cullen (Nuclear Information Service) and Richard Lee (Just Space).

The conference on the Lucas Plan 40th anniversary will be held at Birmingham Voluntary Service Council (138 Digbeth, Birmingham, B5 6DR) on November 26, 2016. See www.lucasplan.org.uk. The conference is being organised and sponsored by: former members of the Lucas Aerospace Shop Stewards Combine, Breaking the Frame, PCS, UCU, Million Climate Jobs Campaign, Green Party, Scientists for Global Responsibility, Campaign Against Arms Trade, CND, Left Unity, Quaker Peace and Social Witness, Red Pepper, War on Want, Conference of Socialist Economists, Fellowship of Reconciliation, Newcastle TUC, Medact, and Momentum.

Tickets are £10/£5 concessions: To book for the conference, visit

www.lucasplan.org.uk/tickets. For more information, email info@breakingtheframe.org.uk

BACKGROUND INFO: The Lucas Aerospace Shop Stewards Combine’s Alternative Corporate Plan (‘The Lucas Plan’) was launched in 1976 and became famous worldwide, sparking an international movement for socially useful production and workers’ plans. Facing the threat of redundancies, the Combine collected 150 ideas from shop floor workers about alternative socially useful products that could be produced by the company, instead of relying on military orders. Many of the innovations in the plan, such as hybrid car engines, heat pumps and wind turbines were commercially viable and are now in widespread use. Although the Alternative Plan was rejected by Lucas Aerospace managers, it was instrumental in protecting jobs at Lucas in the 1970s. The Combine was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 and Mike Cooley received the Right Livelihood Award in 1982. More information about the Plan, including the 53-page summary of the five 200 page volumes, can be found on the conference website, www.lucasplan.org.uk.

A better way to challenge trade deals

One of the upsetting things  about both Brexit and Trump’s victory in America, is that they have taken some solutions from the progressive left and green movements, intermingled them with the nastiness of far right rhetoric, and made far more headway than we have by doing so. For years while the Labour machine was busy joining the Conservatives in telling us that There Is No Alternative, that they were intensely relaxedgreat_offers about the stinking rich, and that free market economics would raise us all, we have been saying that many are left behind and made insecure by this economic model and entire cities and districts are written off by it as collateral damage, while inequality rises. The trade deals opposed by many Trump supporters and many Brexiters, have partially caused this, alongside other factors such as automation and poor domestic industrial and regional policy. Mainstream dogma economists sneered at us for querying the success of neoliberalism, while those experiencing the inequality and insecurity got neglected and disenfranchised.

In both countries, the rightwing media has for decades peddled the myth that immigration (or, for the nastier media outlets, immigrants) and benefits-scroungers are to blame for workers’ predicament, following the age-old pattern of splitting the oppressed into factions to fight each other. This has been the fuel for the success of the Trump and Brexit rhetorics. Now the neoliberals are saying “The people have spoken.” Well, kind of. The people have spoken through the distorting sound system of a very rightwing media, powerful megalomaniacs, and, for some, extreme desperation. As a friend said yesterday, we must not “pander to prejudice and division because we mistake that for listening”. At least there is a trace of understanding this in the new mainstream interest in so-called “inclusive growth”.

International trade and protection need to be refined collectively, not unilaterally, and with care that we’re aiming for the outcomes we really need. Hence the call of “Another Europe Is Possible” which sought reform from within Europe rather than the UK leaving it. Freedom of movement applies to people (or “labour” as it charmingly gets called), capital and goods, and capital is currently the freest of those. We should reverse this. Put simplistically (of course negotiations would be complex in reality) more restrictions on the flow of capital, some on goods, and less on people, could enable these better outcomes. It could mean that we still value our connections and the opportunities of travel, but can ensure that the industries that meet domestic needs can be protected, that countries get and contribute the goods required from other places, and that the profits this ‘labour’ generates can stay within each country to benefit its citizens more fully. Meanwhile we should ensure strategies to develop alternative industries where whole places have relied on one globally-relevant sector (Sunderland’s ship-building).

LWM is a regionally focused organisation, so although we are interested in the reform of world trade our role is more to tell the story of, and get policy change for, economics that is built on increasing local ownership and control over the economy of a place, as per Localising Prosperity. The Institute for Local Self-Reliance does a similar job in the states. The International Alliance on Localization  calls for this approach globally.

Seeking a positive from both the Trump presidency and Brexit, there is now the tiniest opportunity to challenge the neoliberal approach to trade with more solidarity and inclusivity. But only if we can challenge the scapegoating of the vulnerable and join together to demonstrate better economics.

Karen Leach

Land – they’re not making it any more – how to use it effectively in the West Mids

Have you got a minute to contribute your thoughts to the West Midlands Combined Authority Land Commission call for evidence? Deadline is 14th Oct.

It will consider “what measures could be initiated and undertaken to ensure an improved supply of developable land which supports the growth ambitions of business, the housing needs of residents, and the future diversification of the local economy.”

messagetotheplanners (2)If you think providing affordable homes in quality settlements is important… or safeguarding good farmland… or ensuring people don’t have to travel long distances to work… or that we live in quality places were we can access community facilities easily… or protecting the services the land and soil and its wildlife provide to ensure our survival… or keeping land in public or common ownership… or if you don’t think local authorities should be bribed to accept poor development…  then it would be great if you could make a response as there won’t be many contributions making these points.

snouts-in-troughOn the other hand if you’re a large developer wanting to make a case for the release of greenfield land in unsustainable locations so you can carry on building exclusive homes that don’t meet society’s needs in any way, then I wouldn’t worry – there should be lots of responses like this already!

Three points from LWM’s response:

– greater use of the Community Land Trust and similar models to keep land in common ownership and lock in the value for the community.

– Excessive release of greenfield sites will undermine the attractiveness of some of the more crucial brownfield sites, leaving areas blighted, reducing quality density and leading to damagingly dispersed land use and travel patterns.

– The old regional policy of “reducing the need to travel” should be a WMCA policy when considering all new development land.

Plenty more points to make.

Karen Leach