Tuesday 13 August 2013

Community pubs again

Community pubs are in the news once again as some 100 have been reported as achieving community asset status under the Localism Act. This sounds very positive. It gives local communities the right to delay any sale of the community asset for up to 6 months and gives them the opportunity then to raise funds to buy the asset and to do so as current use value, excluding any development gain from a change of use, say to residential. There is the prospects of the pub building be used not just as a hostelry but for a variety of local needs. But the sting in the tail is that funding for the purchase and subsequent running of the building still has to be raised. Only the wealthier communities will find it easy to find such funds. Elsewhere this potential will depend on much creativity and innovation in finding resources to make the building a true community asset. Where might such resources be found? Sweat equity is always a possibility, particularly for refurbishment. Community time banks might help with ongoing running of the asset. Crowd-funding and peer-to-peer lending  are two options that are making innovative use of the internet to provide small businesses and social enterprises with low cost loans. There are possibilities here but communities are going to need some basic business planning and financial advice to understand how to access them. A future of community-owned and managed assets is possible but it will require a clever and imaginative mix of expertise and ideas to become a reality.

Saturday 10 August 2013

Empty shops: is deregulation the answer?

Last week proposals were aired to loosen planning regulation so that empty shops can be converted into homes: see the Guardian article here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/04/councils-powers-high-street-planning. Well, there is a pressing need for more homes. And my last post pointed to the changes in our high streets with many blank shopfronts. But is this the answer? It leaves all the decision-making to the market. So what kind of homes will result? Upmarket or for those in the most urgent need? Bought by owner-occupiers or a buy-to-let landlord? Domestic or overseas buyers? Who can tell? In a property market place, these decisions are left to myriad individual decision backed by purchasing power. And any conversion back from residential to another use would work the same way. If and when demand for retail activities goes back up, who is to say that the (old) high street is where the most profitable sites will be found. So this small shift in deregulation could lead to considerable change in our local areas. That does not mean it is a bad idea if you think that market decisions will lead to the outcomes that people need. My view is that they will and they will not. Some people's needs, demands and wants will be met; others will not. But the more interesting question is what is the alternative? In  a market economy, all those atomised decision-makers don't really need to cooperate beyond working out how to hand over the money. Any alternative will put greater demands on our ability and desire to cooperate. This lies behind the calls for greater community involvement - it assumes more cooperation within communities. The real problem to address is how to foster this without coercion. How can people in a locality be brought together to decide on the future of, say, their high street in a real and concrete way, not just consultation on a plan. How can they be encouraged to feel sufficient ownership of their area, an area full of privately-owned properties, to want to cooperate on the future of any individual property, on that empty shop? These are a tricky questions and deregulation can seem a much easier answer. But that does not make it the right answer.

Thursday 1 August 2013

The High Street

Those walking the (currently) sunny streets of our town centres will be aware of the increasing number of vacant shop fronts. It is therefore timely to note that a review of the Portas initiative has just been published:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/211536/Future_of_High_Street_-_Progress_Since_the_Portas_Review_-revised.pdf. For those who don't know about the Portas Review, it was an attempt by shopping guru Mary Portas to rethink what was needed to revitalise UK high streets. A mix of town management, financial measures and campaigns were proposed. In the event, the government established Portas Pilots in 27 towns with funding of up to £100,000, together with a mix of other funding pots for other areas. They also argued that their general deregulation strategy (for business and planning) would help. But the evidence of shop closures suggest that this is not working well. Is this just the current economic climate to too severe for such pump-priming of small retail businesses to work? Is the deregulation agenda an ill-conceived way to handle the nuanced needs of high streets? Or, perhaps, as a recent Local Government Information Unit briefing (by Majeed Neky, 18th July) suggests shopping streets are in the midst of a much more profound period of change. This is not a temporary down-turn but a sea-change in what such streets are for. In this case a broader debate is needed on what uses these premises can house and how they can meet local needs. As ever with this government, there is a tension between its localist rhetoric and its dependence on promoting market-led economic growth, with the latter usually winning out. Perhaps it is time to take the localist rhetoric more seriously to consider how the public spaces of the high street and the community assets of local retailing and services could be maintained in the absence of growth. This would require new and detailed attention to the mix of taxation and regulation that owners and occupiers of these properties face, with a view to thinking seriously about how to facilitate community-led activity.