{"id":364,"date":"2010-10-07T07:56:52","date_gmt":"2010-10-07T07:56:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/leedscd.wordpress.com\/?p=364"},"modified":"2010-10-07T07:56:52","modified_gmt":"2010-10-07T07:56:52","slug":"what-if-leeds-was-a-tax-take-opportunity-for-whitehall","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/realisedevelopment.net\/index.php\/2010\/10\/07\/what-if-leeds-was-a-tax-take-opportunity-for-whitehall\/","title":{"rendered":"What If Leeds was a ‘tax-take opportunity’ for Whitehall?"},"content":{"rendered":"
John Baron over at the Guardian Leeds site recently published a quite remarkable\u00a0dialogue\u00a0between our new Council Chief Executive, Tom Riordan and elected councillors. \u00a0It is a tremendous piece. \u00a0It is the kind of\u00a0openness\u00a0and transparency that I\u00a0think\u00a0offers real hope for progress. \u00a0Tom, John and the Councillors\u00a0involved\u00a0are I\u00a0think\u00a0to be commended.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
But it was just 2 sentences from the piece, which I\u00a0recommend\u00a0you read in full, that really caught my eye.<\/div>\n
\n
We have to convince the people in Whitehall that Leeds is a tax-take opportunity for them if all the jobs we aim to create up here come off.<\/div>\n
If we’re going to grow the economy we need the Environment Agency’s new flood defences, we need the Leeds trolleybus scheme, we need our LEP to be the best in the country. – Tom Riordan<\/a>, Leeds City Council CEO, as reported in the Guardian Leeds<\/a><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n
2 short sentences that tell a powerful story. \u00a0An every day story of top down strategy.<\/div>\n
We have to persuade Whitehall that we are a ‘tax-take’ opportunity to secure the investment needed to create jobs. \u00a0Because jobs depend on us getting large infrastructure projects such as trolley busses and flood defences. \u00a0And these depend on investment by Whitehall.<\/div>\n
It also depends on us having a really smart Local Enterprise Partnership<\/a>, a group of ‘the anointed<\/a>‘ who will take decisions and make investments (if they have any money) that will lead to increased\u00a0gross\u00a0domestic\u00a0product\u00a0in the city. \u00a0It will be up to them\u00a0to realise the city as a ‘tax-take’ opportunity for Whitehall; as an efficient driver of profits for people with the capital to invest.<\/div>\n
A compelling story perhaps, but not the only story. \u00a0It is a story based on our deficits. \u00a0The things that we have not got.<\/div>\n
Might there be some other stories we could explore?<\/div>\n
What if we imagined that ‘growing the economy’ (or indeed a bolder and braver vision of developing sustainable communities; economically, culturally and socially) depended not on trolley buses, LEPS and flood defences, but on us engaging the intelligence, passion, creativity, aspirations and dreams of the people who live in the city and supporting and networking them to create real power to the create sustainable communities in which more people felt both valued and supported?<\/div>\n
We could call this story ‘grassroots, bottom-up and responsive’. \u00a0Or ‘person centred’. \u00a0Holistic perhaps as it would integrate economy. society and culture. \u00a0This is a story that is based on our\u00a0current\u00a0assets, the things we already have and how we make the very best of them. \u00a0And, no less true for being a clich\u00e9, ‘people are our greatest asset’.<\/div>\n
Both stories are valid. \u00a0Both have truth in them. \u00a0Both are necessary. \u00a0And I\u00a0believe\u00a0that Tom is interested in developing both, even though in\u00a0this\u00a0piece only the more dominant current narrative about physical infrastructure gets an airing.<\/div>\n
Only one of these narrative receives\u00a0massive investments of time and money, requires massive budgets and leaves most of us pretty much uninvolved\u00a0and powerless spectators.<\/div>\n
One\u00a0receives\u00a0almost no investment by comparison, requires very modest investment and would engage and develop all who wanted to be\u00a0engaged\u00a0in creating the future that they want for\u00a0themselves\u00a0and their community.<\/div>\n
One of them has powerful interests behind it, with deep pockets and powerful connections who can manage and lead discussions in the city. \u00a0One of them has no such powerful ‘leadership’.<\/div>\n
One of them\u00a0will\u00a0primarily serve the wealthy and powerful, relying on trickle down, philanthropy, social mobility, and taxation to re-distribute wealth. \u00a0One of them will promote social justice and inclusion.<\/div>\n
Now both narratives are necessary. \u00a0Of course we need the right infrastructure. \u00a0Of course we need good strategy. \u00a0Of course we need powerful advocates who can fight our corner in Whitehall and beyond. \u00a0But this is only part of the story. \u00a0Both ‘strategic’ and ‘responsive’ narratives must be developed and resourced if the city\u00a0is\u00a0to move forward in a way that is sustainable, economically, culturally and socially.<\/div>\n
‘Responsive’ and ‘strategic’ are the yin and yang of balanced progress.<\/div>\n
And if you need any convincing that perhaps the balance is not yet properly struck in Leeds just explore this conference coming up to discuss the future of Leeds City Centre. \u00a0Look at who sponsors <\/a>it?<\/div>\n
Attendance at the conference is free. \u00a0So I would urge you to attend and make sure that your voice gets heard. \u00a0It is the only way that we can find out if anyone is REALLY listening.<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\u201cThe arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.\u201d<\/div>\n
– Theodore Parker\/Martin Luther King<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n

\n<\/span><\/span><\/div>\n