Thank you for being in touch about the hugely important issue of the Ladywood Regeneration Scheme. I wholeheartedly agree with all of Ladywood Unite’s six points, and have added comments below:
1) I would be delighted to meet with representatives of Ladywood Unite
Having spoken to families who stand to be affected by the scheme, I am appalled by the lack of meaningful consultation with the community on such an important issue. I have spoken with people who have lived in their homes for 30 years, are deeply rooted and woven into the neighbourhood around them, and who stand to lose not only a house, but a community. I am so grateful for and impressed by the energy with which Ladywood Unite has been campaigning on behalf of residents, creating organisation and strength in numbers, and would love to know more and understand how I can best support you.
2) I fully support working “to stop the compulsory purchase and demolition of freehold houses, good quality and new homes including leasehold houses, and churches.”
I grew up in Ladywood and love and respect our vibrant and diverse community. It is unconscionable to me that the Council and Berkeley Group consider it a good idea to bulldoze a whole community without meaningful community engagement and consultation.
I am aware of Council documents from last year stating that “initiating the compulsory purchase process will make the seriousness of the authority’s intentions clear from the outset, which in turn might encourage those whose land is affected to enter more readily into meaningful negotiations” making clear that the Council intends to use the threat of compulsory purchase as a tool to gain the compliance of Ladywood residents.
And of course, there are many council tenants who don’t have any protection at all.
3) Yes, we absolutely must “work to prevent the displacement of a diverse and vibrant community, aiming to preserve community and family networks across generations.”
We are seeing people being treated as though they were chess pieces to be moved around at the will of developers. Headlines like “Berkeley set to bag £2.2bn Birmingham estate overhaul” https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/buildings/berkeley-set-to-bag-2-2bn-birmingham-estate-overhaul-21-06-2023/ speak volumes, as do the lip service consultation process we have seen, and the exclusion of many residents from public meetings so that they have literally been left out in the cold with their voices unheard. All of this points towards a profit over people mentality and a lack of meaningful community engagement.
Birmingham City Council claims that the development “will address both social and environmental issues and deliver significant benefits for the local community and wider Birmingham economy.” I think if they intend people to believe those words, there needs to be a full and meaningful process of consulting with the local community and hearing what residents themselves think would benefit them.
4) I fully support working “to redress power imbalances favouring a luxury developer and the council over residents, advocating for residents to be able to make decisions about their future”
As far back as the 1960s, Joe Holyoak wrote of Ladywood that “residents had no representation, but had planning done to them. The result was a community which was swept away, together with its familiar streets and landmarks” Norman Power also wrote of the destruction of a resilient and rooted community as the old Victorian neighbourhood was bulldozed and replaced with high-rise towers. We must learn the lessons from the past and not sit by and watch history repeat itself.
We must insist that large bodies like BCC and Berkeley Group approach this community with decency, humanity and respect. That they see people, not pound signs.
The Green Party is vocal and eloquent on the need to use more than crude economic arguments when making decisions that affect the lives of people, as you will see from this interview with deputy leader Adrian Ramsay.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511lz64rrpo
5. I agree that we must work to provide clarity and commitment on plans for social and affordable housing, aiming to update current plans offering no social housing at all, and supporting accelerating repairs for properties that need them now.
Current plans show no commitment to social housing, and only a 16% commitment to affordable housing- affordable to who is a question we must ask. If the development claims to seek to improve quality of life in Ladywood, we must keep asking whose quality of life it seeks to improve. Will current residents still be able to afford to live there? Have they been meaningfully consulted? What improvements would current residents like to see? What guarantees are there that they will not be priced out of the area?
The current plan claims it will improve people’s lives, but actions have demonstrated otherwise – letters threatening Compulsory Purchase, poor communication, badly organised consultation, being invited to meetings then denied access, has all caused stress and distress, and does not speak well of the current organisation and planning.
6. I absolutely support raising “the matters affecting us in the House of Commons, especially the need to close viability loopholes in planning and strengthening diverse community input early on in, and throughout, regeneration planning”
I will continue to support these aims and use my voice on behalf of the people of Ladywood to challenge leaders on issues like this one, regardless of the results of this election.
Notes and References
Appendix 8 of Council Decision document – links below – gives an insight into the attitude of the council. It states that there will be full and meaningful consultation and that the council will seek to use compulsory purchase as a last resort. It then says, “valuable time will be lost if the acquiring authority waits for negotiations to break down before starting the compulsory purchase process. It is also noted that initiating the compulsory purchase process will make the seriousness of the authority’s intentions clear from the outset, which in turn might encourage those whose land is affected to enter more readily into meaningful negotiations”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy954jz0q0vo
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/news-opinion/sorry-council-promises-lessonslearnt-27374409
https://birmingham.cmis.uk.com/Birmingham/Document.ashx?
czJKcaeAi5tUFL1DTL2UE4zNRBcoShgo=0VowudRJ2XXNJAGpcEerfRVmtovK1hLk89Qq
o3lC7Vt6dJmOryv9FA%3d%3d&rUzwRPf%2bZ3zd4E7Ikn8Lyw%3d%3d=pwRE6AGJFLD
Nlh225F5QMaQWCtPHwdhUfCZ%2fLUQzgA2uL5jNRG4jdQ%3d%3d&mCTIbCubSFfXsD
GW9IXnlg%3d%3d=hFflUdN3100%3d&kCx1AnS9%2fpWZQ40DXFvdEw%3d%3d=hFflUd
N3100%3d&uJovDxwdjMPoYv%2bAJvYtyA%3d%3d=ctNJFf55vVA%3d&FgPlIEJYlotS%2
bYGoBi5olA%3d%3d=NHdURQburHA%3d&d9Qjj0ag1Pd993jsyOJqFvmyB7X0CSQK=ctN
JFf55vVA%3d&WGewmoAfeNR9xqBux0r1Q8Za60lavYmz=ctNJFf55vVA%3d&WGewmoA
feNQ16B2MHuCpMRKZMwaG1PaO=ctNJFf55vVA%3d
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?
mid=1HdpAU9_YQKssP8yUcnw1ce_yoq9Lx2w&ll=52.47804025298297%2C-1.92317292
2580303&z=16
https://ladywoodunite.com/2023/07/29/what-have-we-been-told-so-far/
https://birmingham.cmis.uk.com/birmingham/Decisions/tabid/67/ctl/
ViewCMIS_DecisionDetails/mid/391/Id/da94c519-cee1-4901-9a04-939b584f6464/
Default.aspx
Ladywood Unite 
Leave a comment