Maybe the answer to the Democratic deficit that is Birmingham and much of the nation lies in splitting up the city… there can be no unity when, as I pointed out yesterday, parts of the City are. In enmity with the rest, as reflected in last year’s riots. The northern suburbs south of Sutton belong with Sutton in a separate borough. The city centre and the inner area should be another borough and in the south two further boroughs, one based on Kings Norton and the other on the part of Birmingham originally in Worcestershire, centred in Yardley. The change would reflect that of Manchester. Few people realise that Manchester is only 1/3 rd the size and population of Birmingham. Many think of it as the second City. The city centre has two other metropolitan boroughs touching it … Trafford and Salford. That works a lot better than Birmingham. Old Trafford is not in the City of Manchester but in Trafford. Nor is the BBC, which is in the City of Salford. Few realise that. This change would make the inner city wake up to the fact that that it must make money or die. It cannot rely on the wealth of the suburbs or government bailouts. Nor can it rely on erecting skyscrapers for students and not for the indigenous population.
Thanks again Richard - You make a thoughtful and serious point. ..Birmingham’s sheer scale has long created tensions between neighbourhood identity, governance and democratic accountability, and comparisons with Greater Manchester are increasingly difficult to ignore. The question is whether a city of Birmingham’s size can still function effectively as a single political and administrative unit, particularly when different parts of the city often have very different economic realities, priorities and cultural outlooks. Greaater local autonomy, smaller borough structures and stronger community representation may well produce more responsive government and a healthier civic culture. Equally, any fragmentation would need to avoid deepening division or creating competing inequalities across the region. What is becoming clearer, however, is that many residents no longer feell meaningfully connected to the present structure, and that alone suggests the debate is no longer theoretical.
Maybe the answer to the Democratic deficit that is Birmingham and much of the nation lies in splitting up the city… there can be no unity when, as I pointed out yesterday, parts of the City are. In enmity with the rest, as reflected in last year’s riots. The northern suburbs south of Sutton belong with Sutton in a separate borough. The city centre and the inner area should be another borough and in the south two further boroughs, one based on Kings Norton and the other on the part of Birmingham originally in Worcestershire, centred in Yardley. The change would reflect that of Manchester. Few people realise that Manchester is only 1/3 rd the size and population of Birmingham. Many think of it as the second City. The city centre has two other metropolitan boroughs touching it … Trafford and Salford. That works a lot better than Birmingham. Old Trafford is not in the City of Manchester but in Trafford. Nor is the BBC, which is in the City of Salford. Few realise that. This change would make the inner city wake up to the fact that that it must make money or die. It cannot rely on the wealth of the suburbs or government bailouts. Nor can it rely on erecting skyscrapers for students and not for the indigenous population.
Thanks again Richard - You make a thoughtful and serious point. ..Birmingham’s sheer scale has long created tensions between neighbourhood identity, governance and democratic accountability, and comparisons with Greater Manchester are increasingly difficult to ignore. The question is whether a city of Birmingham’s size can still function effectively as a single political and administrative unit, particularly when different parts of the city often have very different economic realities, priorities and cultural outlooks. Greaater local autonomy, smaller borough structures and stronger community representation may well produce more responsive government and a healthier civic culture. Equally, any fragmentation would need to avoid deepening division or creating competing inequalities across the region. What is becoming clearer, however, is that many residents no longer feell meaningfully connected to the present structure, and that alone suggests the debate is no longer theoretical.