Why Should Coventry Tie itself to Broke and Failing Brum? – When it could be the core of its Own City Region?

Im mystified why Coventry is even thinking of going into a Greater Birmingham Combined Authority rather than a Coventry and  Warwickshire one, given the basket case Brum has become  Their are far more trips contained in this TTWA than between Coventry and Brum and improved rail connections between these towns would always be a low priority to a Brum doninated CA

BBC

Q. “What do you get if you draw a line from Gloucester north east to Grimsby?”

A. “The real dividing line between north and south,” says Professor David Bailey, from Aston University in Birmingham.

But his is a controversial view, as I discovered during The Big Business Debate, organised by the Coventry and Warwickshire Chamber of Commerce.

It brought together more than 100 business, political and academic leaders from across the West Midlands in an early morning discussion at the Ricoh Arena.

Prof Bailey’s line places Coventry on the opposite side from important parts of its hinterland, including the county town of Warwick itself.

Among the dissenting voices at the debate was Jerry Blackett, chief executive of the Greater Birmingham and Solihull Chambers.

He was convinced that whatever side of the line it falls, the West Midlands stands together and must not allow itself to be rent asunder by any arbitrary axes.

You will have gathered from my recent posts that these questions have been sharpened by the increasing energy behind the the English devolution agenda.

Dr David Bailey's dividing line between north and south

‘Historic agreement’

Among the panellists was the Conservative MP for Rugby Mark Pawsey.

He told the meeting that this decentralisation of politics was seen by all three main Parliamentary parties, with only subtle variations between them, as an answer not just to the Scottish Question but also as a way of empowering non-metropolitan England to emerge from its total eclipse by planet London.

It is just over a month since the Labour Leader of Sandwell Council, Darren Cooper went public with what he called the “historic agreement” that he had patiently negotiated behind the scenes.

The four Black Country councils and their great long-time rival, Birmingham, had agreed to work together towards a combined authority in the hope that they could emulate that much-vaunted “northern economic powerhouse” in winning billions of pounds worth of devolved spending power from central government.

I mentioned last time that Coventry and Solihull are currently considering whether or not to join the Birmingham and Black Country venture, or to go in with Warwickshire in another combined authority altogether, of which there are in turn a variety of possible permutations.

It was lost on none of those present that Coventry is on the cusp of a great political decision.

As the Labour Leader of Coventry City Council, Ann Lucas, told last week’s Sunday Politics show, she and her fellow councillors have to determine whether the city’s centre of gravity inclines it towards Warwickshire, the Cotswolds and their neighbouring shires, or towards the West Midlands conurbation.

‘Crown Jewels’

Coventry’s decision, expected early in the New Year, will have a huge bearing not just on the city itself but on those around it.

If Coventry forms a partnership with Birmingham and the Black Country could cautious Solihull, sandwiched in the middle, realistically stand aside from it?

Solihull is after all the home of Birmingham Airport, the National Exhibition Centre and the proposed HS2 high speed rail interchange station.

How could a combined authority of whatever composition, operate credibly without the borough generally seen to possess the region’s Crown Jewels? Who most needs whom?

Several themes emerged loud and clear from the debate – from business leaders, the need for quick, clear-cut decision-making and effective delivery mechanisms. The politicians meanwhile called for those decisions to be well-made and pay due regard to local priorities.

And on the fundamental question, the mood of the meeting was clear. On a show of hands, a tie-up with the Black Country and Birmingham won about three times as much support as the Coventry and Warwickshire alternative.

This was in no sense a scientific sample of course. But as a representation of opinion among key local decision-makers, it could prove just as influential a marker as that red line on Professor Bailey’s map.

Brum to Dispose of 33 Playing Fields (and down to one conservation officer)

Here

Unattached School Playing Fields
Birmingham has 33 unattached education playing fields, intended to provide external play and sports provision for schools lacking their
own playing fields and outdoor facilities. Some of these are used by schools and the community for formal sports activity, e.g. football and some are used as public open space rather than for formal activity.
Where playing fields are used for sporting activity (e.g. football), and there is interest froma local organisation, we are proposing to transfer the site on a lease arrangement. Where there is no interest from local organisations to take on a site the options for disposal or reducing maintenance costs will be considered.

And despite having only one conservation officer (two posts vacant and being advertised) it is clear hose two posts wont be filled as 62% cuts are proposed.

PD 2 – City Design and Conservation
We are proposing to change the service provided by:
• reducing the number of specialist roles;
• limiting the amount of design and conservation advice we provide;
• passing on the responsibility to pay for specialist advice to the applicant where possible; and
• stopping the support we currently provide for conservation area designation.

Amongst other proposals are decommissioning of 20 soccer pitches and to stop of maintenance of bowling greens

Head of OBR – Build on Surrey’s Golf Courses

Telegraph

Stephen Nickell, one of the leaders of the Office for Budget Responsibility, said that the urban area of Surrey occupies less space than its golf courses as he rejected claims there was not enough room for migrants.

He said that immigration does not have a particularly bad or good impact on the economy, but that people’s objections relate to pressure on public services.

He said: “One argument said we’re a small island, not much room. On the other hand, of course, there’s masses of room. The urbanised part of Britain occupies less than 10% of the surface area. The urbanised part of Surrey occupies less of Surrey than golf courses.

“Since more immigrants mean more housing, more roads, more airports, more incinerators, more of this being required, and since the evidence would suggest that people by and large don’t like these things, especially if they are near them, that’s the key issue about immigration that people may wish to face up to.

DCLG Select Committee to Publish #NPPF report on 16th December

DCLG Select Committee

The Committee will publish its report on the operation of the National Planning Policy Framework on 16 December

Publication of report

The Communities and Local Government Committee will publish its Fourth Report of Session 2014-15, Operation of the National Planning Policy Framework (HC 190), on Tuesday 16 December at 00.01am.

Advance copies of the report are available to witnesses under embargo, in electronic format only, from Monday 15 December at 9.30am. This is by request only. Requests should be made toclgcom@parliament.uk.

Media representatives may request a copy from the Media Officer atcalderg@parliament.uk.

The report will be available on the internet at the time of publication, and will be accessible via the Committee’s webpage. Details of the inquiry can be found on the Operation of the National Planning Policy Framework inquiry page.

Printed copies of the Report may be obtained, on publication, from the usual outlets, including The Parliamentary Bookshop and The Stationery Office (reference: Fourth Report of the Committee, Session 2014–15, HC 190)

Tesco to Scrap Plans for 100 Stores

Daily Mail

The axed Tesco projects include a high-profile development in Margate, Kent, which was opposed by many locals and the Government’s retail adviser Mary Portas – the self-styled Queen of Shops – who feared it would destroy local trade.

Others on the list that will not go ahead include three sites in Devon at Brixham, South Molton and Holsworthy.

Tesco paid a premium price for many of the sites involved and some may now have to be sold at a loss. The firm’s property arm will try to get planning permission for housing estates on many plots.

Many schemes were secured by the grocer following bitter fights by community groups and traders.

Others plans that have been axed include Ipswich, Hadleigh in Suffolk, Romsey, in Hampshire, Sherbourne in Dorset, Tolworth, near Kingston, and Coleford, Gloucestershire .