Joanna Martindale and Nicky Cambridge report on the discussion on these two projects at CityForum

Introduction to Neighbourhood Councils

The Council’s new administration has made a commitment to introduce “neighbourhood councils”. The exact definition and scope of this work is being defined at the moment. Communities are unlikely to want lots of ‘little’ councils everywhere. The Hangleton and Knoll project already have what some might call a ‘council’ but it is run by residents for residents. Some of the trustees did a ‘google’ search on the term neighbourhood councils and found something pretty similar to the H&K Project model.

In the city neighbourhood forums and LATs have developed organically, there is a fear that the programme of neighbourhood councils will impose boundaries and structures which will attract money only to disappear when the money and programme goes (similar to the NDC experience).

The programme must have respect for local infrastructure and boundaries. It must also make sure people can engage not just be attending meetings.

Introduction to We Live Here

This project has gained funding through the NESTA ‘Creative Councils’ programme. It is based on a few assumptions. It would be great to hear back from people present today whether those assumptions are correct:

• Not enough people are involved in decision making in the city
• People are doing things in their communities, and have opionins and voices, but these aren’t connected to decision making.
• When people want to talk to communities it would be helpful to know where to go – and this is the argument for creating a common civic space.

Audience Discussion

There has been a lot of consultation in the city that people have taken part in but they haven’t got what they want or need from taking part. In this sense consultation has been a good example of disengaging people.

Community describes both place and interest. Decision making structures are place based. How do you connect multiple identities of community with decision making? A ‘Community Needs Audit Project’ was undertaken several years ago which asked this question and people defined their community/place as the next 2 or 3 streets.

Challenge to this came from a participant who said that they didn’t know their neighbourhoods but felt part of the green business community and a friendship network. Although when asked agreed that it would be useful to know and talk to them.

Essentially people want to define their own communities.

A point was made with regard to the fact that those people who are heavier public service users have more reasons to engage e.g. if you are disabled or live on a council estate. There is a risk that the tech space may exclude the voice of those we are most interested in and give those we aren’t more power.

It is important that We Live Here is linked with other mechanisms in the city and sits inside existing networks – it must not build anything new.

Place may be a useful starting point for the project as everyone lives somewhere.

Need to think about and consider the issues of people living in private rented housing who are often forced to move on after a 6 month tenancy.

Existing structures such as LATs aren’t always representative and don’t offer anything for people not engaged in place.

There need to be a range of hooks (reasons) why people would want to engage. Some issues will get loads of people turning up (e.g. gypsies and travellers)  but they aren’t necessarily going to be the people affected most by the decisions. People turn up to discussions about issues that affect their lives.

Why do people want involvement in decisions? Are they enlightened or doing it in self interest?

If people aren’t mandating to take part in decision making why should they be allowed to? Thats why we have elections. Decisions should be representative and accountable.

Some people for example homeless people will have no voice in such mechanisms as they have no connection either to place or decision making. However they are likely to be affected by decisions relating to place.

We need a stronger drive on voting so that more people feel that politicians are making decisions based on their views.

Question (unanswered): Do students vote in the city or where they originally lived? [Editor’s note: they have a choice of where to vote, as they live there and here] How is this reconciled with decision making?

Summary

There needs be ongoing dialogue on this issue.

Given this is a university town we need to consider how students are involved.

We need to think about and work on democratic engagement.

We must not be obsessed by place – but when we do we must describe it differently.

We must ensure that decisions are taken by those most affected by them and that decisions are democratic and accountable.

We must remember that some people use and rely on public services more than others but that unfortunately this people are likely to be those less able to engage with decision making particularly when technology based.

We must have a mixture of online and offline ways to engage.

We must consider the needs of vulnerable people such as homeless and those in insecure private rented housing.

We must not impose structures but work with what exists.

We must accept that people define community and place in lots of different ways and imposing artificial boundaries will not work.