Mike, I try to fathom your arguments but often I feel you address the problem of the city but then return to solutions that have got the city into those problems in the first place. It reminds me of The “King of the North” attack on the Bond Market. We need the bond market because the economy is in a mess… if it wasn’t in a mess we would not need it stopping the government from doing this or that. The same is true with the Commissioners. They are here because the last council messed up the city’s finances. It is no good saying that they should go and at the same time saying the problems have not been solved but that democratic accountability must be restored, when it was that democratic accountability that got the city into the mess it is in. There is one flaw in that argument… there is no democratic accountability in a one party state, which Birmingham had been for more than a decade. Democratic accountability involves not just elections but the willingness of the electors to change. Until 2026 this was not the case. And the Labour administration knew that and spent more than a decade bribing their core voters. This is the fundamental problem of a one party democratic state. The one party knows where its core voters are and will use the money it has to sweeten those voters. I saw it in Franco’s fascist Spain, in Labour Britain under Wilson and Callaghan and I saw it in recent years in Birmingham. But in all these cases you can bribe your core voters for as long as the money is there. But when it runs out and the bribes stop so does the support. You rightly say that the rise of Reform and the Greens was caused by the Commissioners yes but it was caused by what the commissioners did,… stop the bribes. By bribes I do not mean giving voters wads of cash, though sometimes that has been the case when dealing with specific groups of council workers. What I mean is using the patronage of the council to benefit groups of Labour voters in key wards. Things such as wellbeing centres… All very well but does an area, as here, need five in a two miles radius. Such centres were deployed to create a subservience of the voter to the values of the Labour administration. And of course to create lots of public service jobs, reliant on the Council for their wages. It was also the case in Fascist Spain where the State built large sports halls and often very large swimming pools in every government supporting town to enhance the popularity of the regime. And of course it worked until, in the 1970s Franco died and the money ran out. And as it did in Birmingham in recent years. The dustmen strike reveals this clearly. A vital group of workers overpaid by the council in the first place and overmanned, compared with dustmen in other parts of the country. Overpaid because Labour needed them sweet. And when women workers saw the inconsistency they went to court. An inconsistency not based on comparable jobs in other authorities… no, care workers in many authorities are paid less…. But inconsistencies when compared with men employed by the same Council… the rest is history. And so, being broke, the commissioners came and will no doubt stay. And the bribery stopped as the money ran out. And Labour votes did not just crash …in some areas it went through the floor… a 50% fall being not uncommon, as my ward by ward analysis will show. But your solution seems to be: evict the commissioners and reinvent the past and give those who messed things up in the first place the power to tax property. This is like giving an alcoholic a pub to run. It will mean higher taxes here and places around Birmingham will be laughing as companies and people leave the city for less taxed areas. It is about time that you recognised that the Council created the problem but that it cannot be solved by recreating some mythical pre crisis structure. This city has been poorly run not just recently but since at least the 1960s. It is broken and beyond repair. Do you imagine that a left wing coalition of Labour (who were humiliated in the election), the Greens, Lib Dem’s and the odd independent will be capable of repairing the city. No… Do you think the officers of the Council will be able to do it, who share the blame for the mess, No….or the Commissioners… NO… So the mess will go on until a radical solution is found…and you know what I think that is: to recognise that the City is too big and too divided to be governed as a whole and to break it up into 3 or 4 cohesive boroughs, each where there will not be one party government free to bribe voters continually. But first you have to recognise that the problem is insoluble. Once you do the solution is obvious, as it was for the former Northamptonshire CC and the now defunct Humberside CC. Until then you will continue, year after year, to lament on here the state of Birmingham. Are you capable of seeing that? Seeing beyond the myth that Birmingham is a great city, when most Brummies do not agree with you and have shown it by the recent election results. You must look beyond the myth and perceive reality.
Thanks Richard, The flaw or a flaw in your well presented argument argument is that you treat Labour electoral dominance and democratic accountability as the same thing. They are not.
The real democratic decline in Birmingham began long before the financial collapse. It began when internal party culture hardened into managerial orthodoxy and political patronage, weakening challenge, scrutiny and dissent. By the time the crisis arrived, the city was already operating within a narrowing political culture were tooo many decisions were being made inside systems that no longer listened properly either to residents or to internal critics.
That does not mean the commissioners are unnecessary. Nor does it mean the former administration deserved to remain in office. Quite the opposite. The electorate has now removed much of that old political structure and rightly so.
Where I disagree is in the suggestion that Birmingham’s wider history is one of continuous failure. The city of the 1960s, 70s, 80s and into parts of the 90s was far from perfect, but it was capable of large-scale civic ambition, municipal confidence and economic growth. Birmingham built, invested, manufactured and expanded. The current malaise is comparatively recent and coincides with the rise of increasingly managerial politics, weakened civic leadership, hollowed-out local democracy and a national economic culture dominated by caution, compliance and managed decline.
Nor do I accept that permanent commissioner-led governance is a solution. Commissioners can stabilise accounts, but they cannot create civic energy, democratic legitimacy or long-term economic renewal. Accountancy control is not the same thing as political vision.
The answer is not to recreate the exact structures that failed. But neither is it to conclude that Birmingham is inherently ungovernable. The challenge is to rebuild democratic culture alongside financial competence, rather than assuming one excludes the other. Perhaps a better taxation system (some chance...!!!).
You may ultimately be right that the city requires substantial structural reform, perhaps even stronger borough-level autonomy. But that argument should arise from democratic renewal, not from the assumption that democracy itself is the problem.
Thanks… a few thoughts… I have no idea of how Labour internal politics is run, so I cannot comment on accountability and dominance but to say that, as in fascist Spain, when you have dominance entering the door accountability flies out the window. When I was 14 I was with a couple of English friends in the Plaza Mayor in Madrid. I went to get some sweets from a kiosk in the square. As I was buying the sweets one of these kids ran up to me and said x had been arrested and was being taken to the local nick. I asked why? All he was doing the kid said was taking photos. I rushed over to the other side of the square and spoke to the policeman in Spanish what’s going on? He had, as they did then, his loaded gun pointing at my mate. We all went to the police station and my mate was locked in a cell. That was a bit surreal, dark dingy waiting room with chains hanging from the wall. I had to negotiate the situation. I said they are just boys here on holiday and he was taking photos of the statue of Felipe III on horseback. The station sergeant said yes but he also took a photograph of the policeman standing beside it. That is forbidden. Well, after mentioning how important tourism is to El Caudillo, the Chief, Franco, I was ordered to tell my mate off in English. Later at home I mentioned it at dinner and was told that it had nothing to do with photographing a policeman. No, my mate’s photograph was pointing towards the building behind, where the secret police had their HQ. When you have dominance of one system then accountability for actions will evaporate. No ifs or buts, so you should not be surprised that one led to the other in your party. It was inevitable. And this infects not only politicians but officials and like flu is passed on to people like the police. Now whether lack of accountability and corruption go hand in hand I cannot say but they are certainly close neighbours. As to the Commissioners as I said they are not the solution, as you say. Personally I think Birmingham is ungovernable. I cannot see a left wing coalition led by a party utterly rejected on May 7 having any moral legitimacy or integrity. And any other combination will not work numbers wise. If the Tories did a pact with any left wing group the Tories would be toast and they ought to know that. They are stupid if they don’t. The Reform must be laughing for they know that without them any coalition is untenable. But no one will work with them so they can go into the next election and say we were robbed… we were the biggest party in terms of seats but we did not sit at the table and look at the mess the coalition has caused. (If you are in opposition you don’t need accountability.) Then breaking up the city into boroughs is the only way forward. These next four years will I think prove I am right.
So.....a revolution by the powerless voters.....to free themselves from powers on high.....they cannot touch by other legal methods........DO KEEP THIS STORY GOING!
There was a publishing error I think the other day (maybe for some) I hope you didn't miss this aspect of the tale - https://substack.com/@withgrit/note/p-199222727?r=207aex&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action and one more tomorrow and final article Friday. - 😊 Enjoy. Yet to be written.
Mike, I try to fathom your arguments but often I feel you address the problem of the city but then return to solutions that have got the city into those problems in the first place. It reminds me of The “King of the North” attack on the Bond Market. We need the bond market because the economy is in a mess… if it wasn’t in a mess we would not need it stopping the government from doing this or that. The same is true with the Commissioners. They are here because the last council messed up the city’s finances. It is no good saying that they should go and at the same time saying the problems have not been solved but that democratic accountability must be restored, when it was that democratic accountability that got the city into the mess it is in. There is one flaw in that argument… there is no democratic accountability in a one party state, which Birmingham had been for more than a decade. Democratic accountability involves not just elections but the willingness of the electors to change. Until 2026 this was not the case. And the Labour administration knew that and spent more than a decade bribing their core voters. This is the fundamental problem of a one party democratic state. The one party knows where its core voters are and will use the money it has to sweeten those voters. I saw it in Franco’s fascist Spain, in Labour Britain under Wilson and Callaghan and I saw it in recent years in Birmingham. But in all these cases you can bribe your core voters for as long as the money is there. But when it runs out and the bribes stop so does the support. You rightly say that the rise of Reform and the Greens was caused by the Commissioners yes but it was caused by what the commissioners did,… stop the bribes. By bribes I do not mean giving voters wads of cash, though sometimes that has been the case when dealing with specific groups of council workers. What I mean is using the patronage of the council to benefit groups of Labour voters in key wards. Things such as wellbeing centres… All very well but does an area, as here, need five in a two miles radius. Such centres were deployed to create a subservience of the voter to the values of the Labour administration. And of course to create lots of public service jobs, reliant on the Council for their wages. It was also the case in Fascist Spain where the State built large sports halls and often very large swimming pools in every government supporting town to enhance the popularity of the regime. And of course it worked until, in the 1970s Franco died and the money ran out. And as it did in Birmingham in recent years. The dustmen strike reveals this clearly. A vital group of workers overpaid by the council in the first place and overmanned, compared with dustmen in other parts of the country. Overpaid because Labour needed them sweet. And when women workers saw the inconsistency they went to court. An inconsistency not based on comparable jobs in other authorities… no, care workers in many authorities are paid less…. But inconsistencies when compared with men employed by the same Council… the rest is history. And so, being broke, the commissioners came and will no doubt stay. And the bribery stopped as the money ran out. And Labour votes did not just crash …in some areas it went through the floor… a 50% fall being not uncommon, as my ward by ward analysis will show. But your solution seems to be: evict the commissioners and reinvent the past and give those who messed things up in the first place the power to tax property. This is like giving an alcoholic a pub to run. It will mean higher taxes here and places around Birmingham will be laughing as companies and people leave the city for less taxed areas. It is about time that you recognised that the Council created the problem but that it cannot be solved by recreating some mythical pre crisis structure. This city has been poorly run not just recently but since at least the 1960s. It is broken and beyond repair. Do you imagine that a left wing coalition of Labour (who were humiliated in the election), the Greens, Lib Dem’s and the odd independent will be capable of repairing the city. No… Do you think the officers of the Council will be able to do it, who share the blame for the mess, No….or the Commissioners… NO… So the mess will go on until a radical solution is found…and you know what I think that is: to recognise that the City is too big and too divided to be governed as a whole and to break it up into 3 or 4 cohesive boroughs, each where there will not be one party government free to bribe voters continually. But first you have to recognise that the problem is insoluble. Once you do the solution is obvious, as it was for the former Northamptonshire CC and the now defunct Humberside CC. Until then you will continue, year after year, to lament on here the state of Birmingham. Are you capable of seeing that? Seeing beyond the myth that Birmingham is a great city, when most Brummies do not agree with you and have shown it by the recent election results. You must look beyond the myth and perceive reality.
Thanks Richard, The flaw or a flaw in your well presented argument argument is that you treat Labour electoral dominance and democratic accountability as the same thing. They are not.
The real democratic decline in Birmingham began long before the financial collapse. It began when internal party culture hardened into managerial orthodoxy and political patronage, weakening challenge, scrutiny and dissent. By the time the crisis arrived, the city was already operating within a narrowing political culture were tooo many decisions were being made inside systems that no longer listened properly either to residents or to internal critics.
That does not mean the commissioners are unnecessary. Nor does it mean the former administration deserved to remain in office. Quite the opposite. The electorate has now removed much of that old political structure and rightly so.
Where I disagree is in the suggestion that Birmingham’s wider history is one of continuous failure. The city of the 1960s, 70s, 80s and into parts of the 90s was far from perfect, but it was capable of large-scale civic ambition, municipal confidence and economic growth. Birmingham built, invested, manufactured and expanded. The current malaise is comparatively recent and coincides with the rise of increasingly managerial politics, weakened civic leadership, hollowed-out local democracy and a national economic culture dominated by caution, compliance and managed decline.
Nor do I accept that permanent commissioner-led governance is a solution. Commissioners can stabilise accounts, but they cannot create civic energy, democratic legitimacy or long-term economic renewal. Accountancy control is not the same thing as political vision.
The answer is not to recreate the exact structures that failed. But neither is it to conclude that Birmingham is inherently ungovernable. The challenge is to rebuild democratic culture alongside financial competence, rather than assuming one excludes the other. Perhaps a better taxation system (some chance...!!!).
You may ultimately be right that the city requires substantial structural reform, perhaps even stronger borough-level autonomy. But that argument should arise from democratic renewal, not from the assumption that democracy itself is the problem.
Thanks… a few thoughts… I have no idea of how Labour internal politics is run, so I cannot comment on accountability and dominance but to say that, as in fascist Spain, when you have dominance entering the door accountability flies out the window. When I was 14 I was with a couple of English friends in the Plaza Mayor in Madrid. I went to get some sweets from a kiosk in the square. As I was buying the sweets one of these kids ran up to me and said x had been arrested and was being taken to the local nick. I asked why? All he was doing the kid said was taking photos. I rushed over to the other side of the square and spoke to the policeman in Spanish what’s going on? He had, as they did then, his loaded gun pointing at my mate. We all went to the police station and my mate was locked in a cell. That was a bit surreal, dark dingy waiting room with chains hanging from the wall. I had to negotiate the situation. I said they are just boys here on holiday and he was taking photos of the statue of Felipe III on horseback. The station sergeant said yes but he also took a photograph of the policeman standing beside it. That is forbidden. Well, after mentioning how important tourism is to El Caudillo, the Chief, Franco, I was ordered to tell my mate off in English. Later at home I mentioned it at dinner and was told that it had nothing to do with photographing a policeman. No, my mate’s photograph was pointing towards the building behind, where the secret police had their HQ. When you have dominance of one system then accountability for actions will evaporate. No ifs or buts, so you should not be surprised that one led to the other in your party. It was inevitable. And this infects not only politicians but officials and like flu is passed on to people like the police. Now whether lack of accountability and corruption go hand in hand I cannot say but they are certainly close neighbours. As to the Commissioners as I said they are not the solution, as you say. Personally I think Birmingham is ungovernable. I cannot see a left wing coalition led by a party utterly rejected on May 7 having any moral legitimacy or integrity. And any other combination will not work numbers wise. If the Tories did a pact with any left wing group the Tories would be toast and they ought to know that. They are stupid if they don’t. The Reform must be laughing for they know that without them any coalition is untenable. But no one will work with them so they can go into the next election and say we were robbed… we were the biggest party in terms of seats but we did not sit at the table and look at the mess the coalition has caused. (If you are in opposition you don’t need accountability.) Then breaking up the city into boroughs is the only way forward. These next four years will I think prove I am right.
So.....a revolution by the powerless voters.....to free themselves from powers on high.....they cannot touch by other legal methods........DO KEEP THIS STORY GOING!