Letters to Policy makers

A few months ago I wrote to the various policy machines at the three big parties, I also called UKIP but their best suggestion was to search out their local candidate.

None of the parties replied so I thought I would update my blog with the content; just a flavour of ideas...I'm not writing a report...

Employment Service; getting people back to work

We should be encouraging the public sector to work with clients instead of acting as a referral agency to private providers.

Providers are extremely savvy at adjusting their aims when market environments changes, the new system is far superior in terms of delivering accountability but perhaps quality is sporadic. The third sector has been furthered from the discussion and the large providers are not actually assisting the ‘hardest to help’ despite claiming for them.

Flexible target contracts to assist the hardest to help would be of huge benefit; the current system discourages this and a flexible contract would see morally motivated organisations obtain tenders. This would increase real support, lower dependency on benefits and reduce health costs associated with rehabilitation.

Similarly when saving money many private providers are the middle men, they pass on their contracts and oversee the success; why are we paying twice for success?

The role of a JobCentre has changed dramatically over the last 5 years and is now a model of financial drain, with small adjustments they could be an effective part of the public sector and put pressure on private providers to be competitive and not client efficient.

The public sector has their hands tied yet they receive the hardest criticisms. We tender ‘Welfare to Work’ schemes to the private sector and stop the JobCentres from offering the same service. This isn't competition, its sabotage.

The role of a job seeker could be dramatically changed too, when Welfare to Work was announced I thought someone had actually done their homework; but the scheme simply isn’t giving enough back to the tax-payer or stimulating the current and potential skills of job-seekers. Though we do not want slave labour we could easily offer a system whereby working for your benefits is more than working; it is about a career/life path that twins the private sector with Government ambitions.

Local Living Reductions

Those working in the public sector can find discounts on public services such as leisure, council tax, and Council ‘products’; such as local Council registered contractors and even local transport.

As well as being positive for community cohesion it would assist local companies to start, exist and sustain, with local money staying local.

Bristol’s pocketed regeneration is based on this mechanism for change.

This would also give Councils better control on natural resources such as empty properties, failing leisure facilities and parks; for example waste from park maintenance could be used in renewable energy schemes, empty properties could be used for local needs at clear discounted rates and failing local services could evolve to provide locally needed services.

Many Councils wait until the private sector has an idea; why aren't Councils approaching business and the community in order to make use of revenue losing resources?

Community Skill Trade

Communities hold a lot of human resource, whether this exists in the form of a now retired engineer, a first time job searcher wanting to learn, a cook or someone with life experience but no path to work.

These skills could be financially balanced in the way of benefits or support of some kind (training, travel, Local Living Reductions, investment trust), be led by third sector/charity arm organisations and allow a career path, wider work experience or simply real, positive engagement.

This already occurs within small organisations that work with communities but there is no structure or success rate measured.

The skills utilised would add to the community in a supportive way. For example keeping local areas/equipment maintained, physical community engagement, project creation aimed at community needs and the disengaged, community health, Council stock assessments or any role that the Council needs to affect. This would keep the stock of natural resources in use, improve the wider region and provide a local workforce for local businesses to physically see.

These schemes need to give wider work experience so that the role is not simply a job but a wider exploration of skill-sets under a supportive job seeking scheme.

Within smaller localities this would be imperative to success and relieve many pressures on more directed national social policy; we already adopt a similar approach with reduced rates costs to community organisations.

People want to be engaged in their community and we spend millions providing services to engage them; is it not pertinent to explore the stimulation/assessment of local needs served by local engagers?

I myself could give you four projects in my local area that would easily find support and engagement yet Council efforts to match ambitions are slow and uninterested.

Community Rehabilitation Schemes

Many offenders leave prison with little understanding of their potential and are drawn back into an easier lifestyle. Rehabilitation needs a focus and publicly/charity run organisations can benefit from this transition. Many offenders leave prison with qualifications, training and financial support but rarely are they gathered into a collective with potential.

In one example; many local authority buildings lie disused and dilapidated (especially housing) part of any future release conditions could have offenders working on a day release building projects. This would work especially well for first and second time offenders. This rehabilitation/release would exist under a real work atmosphere and ex-offenders would be able to work as a unit to further their real work experience whilst rehabilitating themselves into a regular routine.

Income would not be paid in the natural manner and would be used to support any future living income; sitting in a drip feeding trust (Exit Allowance) that is available on release.

Though not at market value the wages would allow significant savings in the way of labour/current prison reform schemes as well as giving a true living wage to support future employment.

This scheme could also be used to further our manufacturing of renewable technologies and potentially open up a new concept of rehabilitation potential.

Rehabilitation for all (not just the incarcerated) needs to change so we can get the best of our population; we should explore how this could work and not be concerned that the private sector will lose out.

People want to work, but the Government should be assessing and influencing the work of tomorrow with an understanding that career paths shift with business needs.

Affecting our business, British products sell.

While it is important to support International investors we should be looking to take advantage of our own markets, especially when they are failing or we see opportunities.

As an example I would like to use LDV.

We could have saved LDV and operated them as majority public/worker enterprise; by using Universities, existing employee knowledge, and high-tech engineering/manufacturing within the Birmingham base the issues facing design quality would have been cured.

A % of vehicles bought by the public sector could have been LDV; Universities developing renewable energy/mechanical engineering (such as Aston, Birmingham) would have had a test bed as well as a way to unearth income on future development; parts manufacturers in the base would not have closed.

As part of this process we decided older mechanical engineers were not worth supporting even though they remain a valuable resource, I would argue their knowledge is poignant to the development of new technologies especially with fresh thinking. For example, Shale gas extraction has needed both new and old technological comprehension in order to exist.

The potential would have been enormous especially when you consider a successful project and rebranding would have stimulated exports in not just vehicles but technology and patents achieved from University interaction.

At the heart of this is the necessity to stimulate our own economy and introduce the world to our products, this could be achieved with tie-in loans to developing industries.

Tie-in loans (with conditions) would direct a % of profits to the public sector as well as a responsibility to stay in Britain for X amount of years; small and medium sized British companies are very innovative but without investment and structure for their products they become exporters of ideas and our manufacturing base contracts.  

This sort of development would allow an increase of new products; while one organisation could be developing a use for a Raspberry Pi, another could be designing a platform for its use. Similarly with the increase of renewable energy technologies many products would find a partner for success, especially if we could continue stimulating our renewable energy development.

Universities and the third sector might also take the gamble and export their ideas to an available manufacturing base.

With brown-field sites in abundance we would also stimulate wasted space, thus increasing natural footfall and organic regeneration. British companies can be our success, but we must give them a platform of belief and structure.

IT will lead the way

In all of this IT has to be our leader, we were 20 years behind the USA but perhaps now we are only 10. Year on year small sections of our IT outclass the rest of the world but core components of product creation such as programming and distribution requite immediate attention. IT is homogenising yet new development seems to stem from laboratories within the UK.

Could we not stimulate final products instead of letting components be exported? Tie in loans/information partnerships would work here.

A better use of IT would also cut our spending by enormous amounts. Recent announcements on tax cuts for the gaming industry were very encouraging but we still haven’t quite understood how we can take advantage of this nationally and we’ve simply asked the private sector to ‘jump in’.

IT is our future; from vehicles and education to information delivery and product manufacture we can compete, but we are slow to support existing business and other nations are selling us their British inspired wares.

Even in our delivery we are slow, why we haven’t mapped all local facilities/needs/ideas on a national map database is beyond me; this would create an immediate, simple way for communities to engage and influence local success and more importantly could be publicly maintained.

The technology already exists.

We have the desire and the need; we need to take advantage.

Technology in school

We should also be embracing technological potential in education; at this very moment we could provide cheap to build products with export potential but it has been given no direction. The potential is limitless and the high take up of expensive iPads in our schools points to a lack of planning, need to spend budgets and completely redundant approach to technologies/knowledge developed in the UK.

Kinect is another example where interactivity and learning could be cost effective and exportable yet there is no dynamism to embrace technological potential and improve teaching and education.

Teachers

Whilst working in education at all levels it has struck me how little we utilise the natural teachers in our society, some people are naturally inspirational and stimulate a desire to learn yet we do little to encourage their direction into teaching and offer quicker access to the higher educated rather than the better teachers.

It frustrates me hugely when I see a degree qualified teacher having no ability to connect with the class, yet the natural teaching assistant inspires their pupils to learn and engage.

Turning educators into teachers needs to be a priority; pupil connection is hugely important to educational achievement and so training needs to allow the less classically educated improved access.

Changes are underway but I would argue better access should be established.

We should also continue to press for knowledge transfer from those schools now dragged from special measures. My mother is a head teacher of one of those schools and her stories are agonisingly fascinating.

Responsive regeneration

We need to start developing an understanding of organic regeneration; this is where localities improve due to a natural use of their surroundings. This has been a strong factor in Bristol and London’s development, communities make areas successful and this in turn attracts varied private investment.

Planning needs to adopt this approach, for example in cities a well situated park will naturally regenerate existing empty buildings and increase the width of areas available to receive sustainable investment/income. This already occurs in Liverpool and Manchester where public spaces are part of the local economy and local areas regenerate organically.

Planners should understand social mobility because social mobility sustains and encourages investment from all sectors; as communities are becoming squeezed it is vital that they function as a healthy unit to encourage the right stimulus.

As an example I tried to interact with a planning application for a cover restaurant on the final licensed premises in my local area, the current proposal was not the best local option but there was no creativity on any part to make best use of this dilapidated building. I tried to encourage Councillors, inspectors and planners before the decision to consider the proposal offered by the nations largest Royal Navy Club who wanted to renew the existing license for their social club and operate a community/events centre. As an added social benefit the site sits on the most popular bus route in Birmingham, and is in an area with many elderly residents and high deprivation.

Yet there was no desire on the part of the Council to stimulate local desires; only to see private business immediately take the reins. I found the same when trying to save a leisure centre from closure, even arguments to keep it open until demolished were ignored and a year on it sits, closed, as the only 3 pitch indoor facility in the region; the most deprived region in Birmingham/England with continual gang related problems.

In this particular case the YOT, Police service, local population and third sector were vocally against closure yet another natural resource has been wasted.

In order to use our natural resources good planning needs more emphasis on the community. In the case of wasted spaces and buildings, and even regeneration, we should actively pursue socially responsible potential rather than letting it find us.

Building and vacant properties

Similar to the Dutch system, buildings empty for a period of 1 year develop an occupation entitlement for ‘sitters’. Only a court eviction can remove them but there must be a good reason; such as damage, sub-letting or a demonstrable regeneration plan by the landlord.

After 1 years of residence the ‘sitters’ are granted 6 months tenancy at will.

Unlikely policy scenario - After a period of 5 years (6 years in total) and if a property is more than 80% occupied the sitters would have an option to purchase the property at 20% less market value, and after 10 years the market value when they first occupied.

This would encourage sitter-led regeneration, land owner accountability, an avenue to tackle many social problems and employment opportunities as many would want building security proving their property is not empty. It would also begin the stabilisation of spiralling living costs and force land sitting developers to rethink their strategies.

Charging Council tax on empty buildings is a good start but we need a more progressive system so that economic stimulation is not simply based on building new houses on new sites.

Local house building projects should be local and more unique; co-operative schemes on new houses would cut costs hugely and allow people to get together to ‘build and buy’ their own house at a fixed price.

Private developers may have the resources and knowledge for large scale projects but there are many out of work builders, surveyors, architects and project managers that could be put to task building REAL AFFORDABLE houses.

This could be coupled with differing building materials already used across the continent and create a separate pricing scheme for properties built from X, Y, and Z.

Our obsession with bricks could be a positive factor in introducing an alternative material scheme of this kind and discourage a large scale backlash from the existing large scale developers.

The National Vehicle Insurance Challenge

A national vehicle insurance scheme set at a fixed price and underwritten by insurers at set values (increases with accidents/offences); vehicles that qualify would meet strict Government guidelines for emissions, cost and fuel consumption which in turn would stimulate the take up and advancement of city cars and private sector public transport models.

There is room for smaller companies to provide City cars and public transport, especially within the changing landscape of energy sources and electric vehicles.

In the future transport delivery will change, whether this is taxis, city cars or creative public transport. British manufacturing can be part of this progression and so can manufacturing in Britain.

Universities could also profit as private business would vie for their knowledge of renewable technology to meet the NVI challenge.

The Government should be working to encourage technological change and stimulate the possibility of it occurring within its boundaries, or for its population.

This would be particularly interesting if we were able to affect public transport models, and many bus companies are already investing in order to create more efficient vehicles.

Food Production (following on from Discards)

In the next few decades food production and cultivation will evolve, part of this evolution will be the decision to continue importing large quantities of food or grow it ourselves.

An underground activity might be paving the way for both the answer to food production and the ability to sure up our exported components or products; I am talking about LED lighting. Grow lighting is already a huge financial winner for the nation and LED lighting is proven effective, yet it’s a technology in relative infancy; with the right support Britain could be supporting the next generation of agricultural potential as well as tackling energy use.

With an already established seed bank and high potential for micro-growing we could see an explosion of development in this field; this would alleviate much of the financial burdens that will simply greaten without action.

We also need to create positive structures for our farmers to work in, local produce can find a platform and we should be encouraging ways for communities to buy locally. There is a modicum of success within farm shops but a greater emphasis can and must be put into British produce; organisation is key and so is Government support. I see many farm shops begin and increase prices depending on the clientèle, this points to potential and demand especially as many farm shops are based away from built up areas.

If we look at something as simple as crayfish we can see a desire to remove the edible foreign species from our water yet very poor structure allowing the individual to do so.

Skill exchange could be at place here; but we are not creative in planning its potential.