Written evidence submitted by Balsall
Heath Forum
LESSONS FROM
PRESENT AND
PAST PROJECTS
— Government
has known for 40 years that there is something the matter with
life in many urban neighbourhoods.
— A whole
series of initiatives have been taken to redress this problem
- ICP, Urban Aid, SRB 1-8, NRF, WNF, NDC's etc. How much money
have they spent? Very many billions. How many neighbourhoods have
been renewed? Very few.
— Why?
— Because
they were time limited and renewal takes time.
— Because
they were top-down and failed to gain real local engagement.
— Because
they came on top of existing mainstream budgets and failed to
change the way they were spent.
Therefore, if future, time and effort must be spent
on building the confidence and capacity of Active Citizens, then
enabling them as customers to significantly influence the way
existing mainstream budgets are spent—see attached Neighbourhood
Budgeting.
— Look
carefully at projects like ours and Castle Vale which have succeeded.
One key lesson is that the problem we face is less material poverty
but social poverty and the powerlessness of the customer. HMG
has been addressing the wrong problem and wasted both time and
money.
WHAT SHOULD
HMG DO TO
ATTRACT MONEY?
Not a lot. It really does need to address the way
existing money is spent in top-down monopolistic ways. You must
ask: "How can it be that we do not know what is spent in
each neighbourhood where people live and with which they identify."
Plus, "why does the customer have no influence over that
spend?" No wonder services are poor.
It's not new money we need, but to spend existing
money differently and more cost-effectively.
Doing that will take real leadership and direction.
Getting existing money out of Council and into the hands of the
organised customer will take prescription as well as persuasion.
HOW TO
ACCESS SUCCESS
IN FUTURE?
— By
whether more residents say:
— They
can make a difference.
— They
trust each other and the Council.
— By
whether the vote goes up because people believe they can influence
the system.
Attached - Neighbourhood
Budgeting
March 2011
NEIGHBOURHOOD BUDGETING
BACKGROUND
For 100 years residents have been taxed and paid
their Council charges. But, they have never seen their money again
until it came back to them in the form of top-down and uniform
one-size-fits-all services which are delivered over vast administrative
areas. The only influence which residents have had over their
money and the provision of services which they pay for has been
via a vote once every one or five years.
Yet, Representative Democracy has increasingly been
seen by residents to be distant and ineffective. As few as 15%
of eligible residents now vote in some areas. So, services have
become more and more remote and inadequate to the needs of particular
residents in the neighbourhoods where they live, with which they
identify and where they raise their children.
Thus, in Balsall Heath and a limited number of other
neighbourhoods residents have:
— Taken
matters into their own hands and built the Big Society from the
Bottom-up. This has dramatically improved their quality of life.
But, while it has cost a little extra money, that cost has come
from jumble sales and other unreliable sources. It has not come
from the far larger sums paid by residents as taxes.
— But,
these far larger sums and the services they fund have been beneficially
affected by what residents have done. For, in building a more
caring community residents have prevented problems from arising
and, thus, have reduced the need for many expensive services.
They have saved large sums of money. How much? Where is it? Why
don't we know?
The more residents themselves helped to improve their
area, prevent the need for some services and provide others in
place of inadequate top-down ones, the more they have begun to
ask these key questions:
— On
the High Street where we shop we can influence the quality of
the product on offer via the purchasing power of our purse. Why
can't we do the same in the Back Street where we live?
— Indeed,
why don't we know what the local budget or neighbourhood purse
is and, as it's our money, why can't we use it to commission the
services which we want not the ones the provider thinks we want?
— Why
can't services be tailor-made and joined up to suit the specific
needs of our area?
— More,
while we'll go on holding our jumble-sales and using volunteers,
can we retain a small portion of the taxes we pay to sustain our
preventative and representational work?
— That
is, we've changed, we've become more responsible. Can our statutory
partners now also change and partner us properly?
THE FUTURE
While residents wish to further refine their work
in building a Participatory Democracy, they have already been
recognised by both Government and Opposition as being a model
of the Big Society which is able to show others the way forward.
They say it has been a crucial influence upon their policies and
they want to know how to replicate it all over the country.
However, Statutory Partners and Representative Democracy
lag behind. Astonishingly, we still don't know what the neighbourhoods
budget is. If Balsall Heath was a private business or a voluntary
agency but had no budget and nobody responsible for spending it,
it would be declared to be "incompetent and not fit for purpose."
In effect, this is the situation which the Public Sector is in.
So, it's is clearly urgent to remedy it and give Representative
Democracy a brand new image.
Therefore, could we agree by the end of, say April
(two months) that each partner and the NSP will have completed
these six tasks:
— Agreed
what the neighbourhood budget is.
— Agreed
what part of it and which services have to be retained and delivered
centrally.
— Agreed
which part (and services) can be devolved to the neighbourhood
via local managers.
— Agreed
which part could be pooled into a neighbourhood pot for general
use.
— Agreed
which of the preventative functions of the Forum save them money
and which, thus, qualify for an "invest to save" Service
Level Agreement with the residents Forum?
— Plus,
can we agree just how much money is saved via preventative practices?
If we can ask, answer and act on these questions,
then the following should result:
— Residents
will be pleased and further empowered.
— They
will also be sustainably funded.
— The
quality of local life will be improved.
— Problems
will be prevented from arising and money will be saved.
— The
Budgets for Balsall Heath will not only be known but used more
cost-effectively.. Residents will commission the services which
they want.
— In
place of cuts and "less for less" we can have savings
and "more for less" and a replicable way of sustaining
renewal and the Big Society.
— Participatory
and Representative Democracy will form a new and productive partnership.
The vote will go up.
REMARKABLE RESULTS
We are only part of the way there. The full effects
of Neighbourhood Budgeting and customer empowerment have yet to
be felt. But, Be-Birmingham's own survey already shows that:
— More
people trust each other, the police and council than anywhere
else in Birmingham. The vote has already risen.
— Make
people feel pride in their area and feel they can make a difference
to it than anywhere else.
— House
prices have risen faster than in any other part of Birmingham.
Just imagine how much more we could achieve if the
suggestions made in this paper were bought to fruition.
A GUIDING PRINCIPLE
The old Chinese saying underpins all of the above.
It asks: "How do you feed a hungry person?" If you provide
them with a fish you fed them for a day. But, you make them dependent
on you to provide them with another one tomorrow. But, if you
teach them how to fish you feed them for life. Plus, you make
them independent and proud. You free us to do other things. And
it's more cost effective.
A PROPOSAL
It is proposed that we now proceed with some speed
to answer the above questions and to create a neighbourhood and
pooled budget and form SLA's with the Forum. In order to help
partners to proceed the Forum has asked the Chamberlain Forum
to work alongside them with a view to meeting the end of April
deadline. Colleagues will recall that the Chamberlain Forum have
just produced a valuable report for the three RSL's. It can and
will now do the same with each of the partners and produce a shared
outcome.
If we fail to make this progress not only will we
be missing a major opportunity to take the Balsall Heath Vanguard
forward, create a replicable model and help government, the residents
Forum will become unsustainable, could end and Balsall Heath will
slide backwards into its bad old ways and days. So, we can't afford
to fail. We must succeed.
| 
