7 July 2015
Solihull Council's Leader of the Opposition has published today their response to the Combined Authority's launch statement.
Solihull Opposition Leader James Burn has raised concerns about the fact that poverty, low income and inequality are not mentioned anywhere in the launch document, and that the Combined Authority may actually make these matters worse rather than better.
Whilst welcoming the fact decisions can now be made locally and that the management of public transport may be brought back into public hands, they also raise concerns about housing, how the Authority will be held to account, and the lack of attention paid to energy efficiency and carbon management.
Cllr James Burn, Leader of the Opposition on Solihull Council (Green Party) said:
"I am genuinely shocked that for an area like the West Midlands, issues of poverty and inequality are so far down the agenda that they don't even appear on it."
"The Combined Authority could be a real opportunity to transform the lives of everyone in the region, but may actually end up making things worse. It seems this authority is all about making it easier for big business with the people getting the crumbs."
--
Solihull Green Party response to the West Midlands Combined Authority launch statement
There are many things we welcome in the launch statement.
We are really pleased that decisions about the West Midlands will be made in the West Midlands, rather than Westminster.
We are also very excited about the proposal to bring the management of public transport back into public hands. That way, the network can be made to work for the people who live here, not just for private profit, and we can (finally) have an Oyster card-type system.
But there are also many things that really worry us about the launch statement.
We are very concerned that there is no mention of poverty or inequality in the launch statement whatsoever. A Combined Authority should be a key vehicle by which these issues can be addressed.
At the moment, our economy is growing, but growth isn't benefitting everyone. Those on the lowest incomes are getting poorer. Most families in poverty are actually working families now.
The Combined Authority's assumption is that the benefits of growth in already well-performing areas will trickle-down to other places. There seems to be scant evidence to back up this claim.
Instead, it is very likely that those areas with weaker economies will be left even further behind, and will become even more disadvantaged.
The Combined Authority is also hoping that the taxes generated by new businesses will help to offset the cuts.
Yet we also know that low incomes cause people to use public services more. If the economy becomes more unequal because of the Combined Authority's efforts, demand for services may actually increase.
We are also worried about the longer-term risks of the proposed strategy. We have all realized, with the credit crunch and Euro crisis, how unstable the economy can be. If there is no growth, and no increase in taxes, how will we fund services?
The Combined Authority is going to try and encourage outside investment. But if outside investors decide to move their business elsewhere (for example, to another country), this will have a huge impact on the local economy. We are also mindful that if someone invests in an area from outside, the profits will leave our local area.
What we would rather see (inequality):
We would like to see a Combined Authority actually designed to benefit everyone, which acknowledges the very high level of inequality and addresses it.
The WMCA should undertake a comprehensive poverty assessment to identify the current situation in the region, and the likelihood of change at the moment. The assessment should be updated yearly and made publically available.
The WMCA needs to concentrate on creating jobs on decent wages, with good conditions. We want to see the promotion of business citizenship, and jobs that benefit people. We do not want to see zero-hour contracts, minimum wages and anti-social hours as the norm.
What we would rather see (local economies):
The WMCA should concentrate on helping our weaker local economies to grow. This would reduce the demand on public services, and it would mean government cuts would not hit so hard.
The WMCA should provide far more support for small and medium sized businesses, and business start-ups. Local businesses mean the profit stays in the area, and they are less likely to move their company elsewhere.
We would also like to see a concentration on getting public institutions which cannot leave the area (hospitals, universities, schools, councils etc.) encouraged to spend their money within the area they serve. If they cannot source a service locally, the WMCA should encourage local businesses to start. This way, more money would flow around the area, benefitting people here.
What we would rather see (accountability):
At the moment, we do not know how the public will hold the Authority accountable. This is a real concern. We are also worried about more powers being given to the Combined Authority in the future, especially if it is not a directly-elected body.
As with the Greater London Authority, we would like to see an elected body in charge, chosen by proportional representation across the area. This would mean everyone is represented, and the public has a real say in what happens.
Other key asks
We will need to build a huge number of houses, particularly in Solihull (as it is one of the two "growth centres"). We aren't sure where they will go, or who will decide. Powers over planning need to remain local.
The Combined Authority also presents an opportunity to make a real difference to energy efficiency and to reduce our carbon footprint. This has not been taken.
