10/07/2011 The Politics Show East

Here in the East: We're in Corby at a former royal

residence and centre of government, to talk about this government's

Localism Bill, devolving power to councils and to communities, like

the one in the centre of Corby that's reclaimed this ancient

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2366 seconds

Hello and welcome to Corby. It is the part of the programme at just

We have come down, not for a teddy bear's picnic, but to talk about

the government's plans for the big societies. --. Here to tell us

about the would land in Corby is the chairman of Friends of

woodlands. Why do these woodlands need friends? As a child I used to

play here. Over the years, the woodland has been deteriorating and

getting really bad. We formed the England Is Ours to clear that -- we

formed the group to clear the woodland. To make it accessible to

all the people of Corby. The school's use it, and everyone else

over the past three years. How easy was it to find people to help? Who

is involved? Everyone is involved. They have an interest, even if it

is only a comment about the woodland. They can come to our

meetings and express their comments. Who benefits? He everybody.

Everybody who has ever been through Corby. They all come in here.

accessible? It is accessible to everybody, even the disabled. We

have done 6.5 kilometres of pathway so everyone can get down here. They

all come to the woodland. Some would say this is a great example

of the Big Society. People here are keen to emphasise it predates David

Cameron's idea for some years. It is part of the government's

localism bills. In this region, the localism agenda is coming under

scrutiny in two areas. One is controversial plans to get rid of

our waste. In Northamptonshire campaigners are bringing a legal

challenge against the Secretary of State's decision to allow nuclear

waste to be stored at a village landfill site.

It is not a Tale of Two cities, but more of two kings. Both are

challenging the Government's Localism Bill. Both won their

voices heard. The people here have protested against it, and they

think they should listen for. 90% were opposed. Shouldn't they

take notice of that? People should be listened to. Eric Pickles ruled

that nuclear waste to could be stored in a satin sheer, angering

one of his own MPs. -- in Northamptonshire. It flies in the

face of everything the Government has been saying about localism. The

last Labour government changed the rules so that nuclear waste could

be dumped far away from where it is generated. Eric Pickles chose to

ignore are referendums. Campaigners say they feel betrayed. There was a

fair degree of cynicism about politicians in general, what they

say and what they do do not meet. We are very angry and it

illustrated to as the fine words that we hear coming out of Eric

Pickles's mouth is not backed up by the deeds he undertakes. Heading to

King's Lynn, they are fighting plans for a �600 million

incinerator. For a referendum came out against it here. If they ignore

what people want on this, though Localism Bill is dead in the water.

Where people feel strongly enough to come out in large numbers, and

that decision is absolutely clear cut, it has to be respected. If

you're not going to respect it, you have no business being in

government. The local council had the referendum, they have listened

to local people. The Localism Bill enables -- enabled this referendum

to take place. Our referendum was one of the first in the country and

people have voted against it. Experts say people's expectation of

the Localism Bill is not realistic. Ministers have given a greater

impression that the Localism Bill will allow everybody to get

everything they want, than is ever going to be the case. There will be

some at national planning decisions made at a national level and some

major ones made at a county or district level. Local people will

just have to put up with big. typical of the Government. They do

not take notice of anything people say. Neither this Government or the

past government. Not very democratic these days. Legal

challenges are now being made in both parts of the region.

Campaigners will make their views We have moved up the road to

Rockingham Castle where the parliamentary supporting Roundheads

battled against the monarchist Cavaliers in the civil war.

Democracy has grown since then and now the Government says its

Localism Bill will set the foundations for the big societies.

People are voicing concern because they could be facing cuts of up

their own. We have been looking at a charity which helps young

families in Northamptonshire. Leanne's eldest son has severe

cerebral palsy. Throughout his life, she has had support from a charity.

Today, one of their volunteers is helping her it take Robbie and his

younger brother to the park. Leanne is in little doubt that without the

charity's support, the pressure would have become too much.

Sometimes it would be the only time in the week I would leave the house,

when my lady came. We would go for a walk, feed the ducks and have a

chat. Without the support, where would you have been? I dread to

think. I would not have a left the house. Things like a family shop

would have been impossible. You cannot pursue a wheelchair, manage

a baby and pursue a pushchair as well. The charity embodies many of

the principles of the big societies. The volunteers support 80 families

a year. It can appear that you are giving and not getting, but

actually you do get a lot. It might not always the obvious what you do

get. So volunteering is a two-way process? It is. Tough times lie

ahead, last week, a volunteer organisations in Suffolk with their

concerns about the Big Society. All at a time when there Grant's face

being cut. The there is not going to be an emergency bail-out. We may

do it for Eurozone countries, but they will have to find cost saving

from the back office. At home start, it is hard to see where it can cut.

It only has two full-time staff. Soon it will learn if grants for

its funding will be renewed. I do not see that the Big Society means

anything for us, because we are already doing it. Do you fear it

will affect your funding? If they need the money to be spread further

afield, obviously it will be affected. And that, inevitably,

would mean less help and support for families that need it.

The minister for civil society visited the region recently. Nick

Conrad caught up with him to discuss the big societies. He began

by asking him what it means clear - -? It is about giving people more

or responsibility over their lives and there public services that they

use. It is the government trying to support people who want to get more

involved in their communities. It is giving people a sense it is

worth getting involved locally, your voice will be heard. Will we

change that overnight, no. You say it is not about helping the

Government, but the Government has taken away core grants which are

affecting some of these charities. There is the need to reduce public

expenditure, radically, because we cannot go on spending �120 million

a day in interest. The stuff we want to do, the Big Society agenda,

it is really about how communities will work in the future, how public

services get delivered, giving people more power. That is what we

want to do, that is a long-term agenda us. I put it to you that

people's support for the Big Society has been rather

underwhelming. Now charities are turning to the Government saying

they did not have the might of people they need to continue with

their services. Running charities is very difficult. They are used to

managing through tough times. can see the full interview on our

website. We have come inside the castle, in a moment we will meet a

professor who is the vice chancellor of the University of

Northampton. First, let's niche the Conservative MP for South

Northamptonshire. The Labour MP for Luton South and an audience of

interested parties. Giving more people a say in

planning has to be a good ambition, doesn't it? It is a good ambition.

Some of the things we will talk about today will drop out that

there is a tension between the big, national infrastructure take

decisions and not overbearing local communities at the same time. Our

guiding position should be, if it is important for the national

interest we go with that, but everything else should be locally

decided. Andrea, would you say the problem with localism is that

basically people's hopes have been raised and then dashed again?

at all. The Bill is going through Parliament at the moment so we are

in a bit of a grey area where we are still under legislation passed

by the previous government and we are waiting to approach this brave,

new world where local people will have their say on local issues.

That does not mean all infrastructure projects that are in

the national interest can be included in that. There needs to be

an area where the government still has a say. Roger Kingston wants to

come in here. He is from a residence alliance and is concerned

about lack of infrastructure. There are 20,000 houses to the west of

North Hampshire being built, localism is working for you or not?

It is not working for us. We are still governed by an on

democratically elected quango. We have not yet have the

infrastructure completed for the housing estates that we live on. We

hoped that this new coalition government would give us some say,

some control over that. But I understand that it is not possible.

Andrea, what you make of that? You said this government would deliver

planning power back to local authorities who know and understand

the local area. The issue is, as I said, we are in a grey area. To get

rid of the corporation before 23rd team that would require primary

legislation. It takes so long to reverse the some of these top down

planning policies that were introduced by the last government.

Likewise with the regional spacial strategy that has done so much

damage to Northamptonshire, in terms of planning that was not

wanted, it is difficult to put a stop to it. What about the

referendums, local people can instigate a referendum. That is an

ambitious plans. It is an interesting idea. One of my

concerns is that we have a system of democratic accountability which

involves selecting people to stand locally to represent their own area.

I have concerns we are undermining local government in some of those

initiatives. What about the rest of the audience? Does anyone believe

localism is working? We had a referendum under the old rules, I

know the localism Bell has not been passed yet, we were supporting our

local council because they had turned down planning for the

radioactive waste to be stored. 98% of people who voted did not want it

and it was overturned by the Secretary of State who said, as you

have said, national interest tactics President of a local

interest. I would say, where has been the national debate. Do you

have a response? I have every sympathy. I am very concerned about

that particular issue. There needs to be a national debate about

radioactive waste. With regards to the Localism Bill, everybody would

agree that localism does not mean you can just say, nothing we do not

want will ever happen here. No-one believes that is possible. Nuclear

waste is a very different issue, but where incinerators, even wind

farms where I personally am very questioning of the technology, but

I do think there are issues and big projects where government national

interest has to hold sway over localism. I do want to move on to

big society. Nick, you university is a socially enterprising

university. You obviously see this sector growing in the future. In

what ways will it grow? There are a number of ways we can see it grow.

One example would be helping people set up companies, they could be

third sector, charity organisations, or perhaps part of the public

services which have been outsourced. Help them to create their own

companies and take charge of their own destiny through setting

themselves up as social entrepreneurs. The profits that

they generate, and the key thing here is that these entities must be

profit generated, that money is ploughed back into the good of the

company. It does not go to shareholders. Let's talk about

voluntary projects. At the beginning of the programme we went

to see that Forest that has been developed in Corby. What about this

label, the big societies. Do you like it? Not really. In Corby we

have developed a partnership approach to these things over many

years. People volunteer in Corby because they want to help each

other, they want to help local residents. Corby people are cheesed

off to be part of what, to me, it seems nothing more than a

rebranding exercise by the Conservative Party. With cuts

affecting local community groups, the ability to be able to do these

things has been reduced. Devon, what about this basic premise of

encouraging communities to work together, to look after themselves?

It is a great idea. I am a massive advocate behind the ideas of the

great -- the big societies. The problem, and it has been put more

articulate than -- articulately than I ever could, is that the

money is not there to do it. We are beginning to see more social

enterprises, charities, other groups, go to the wall because they

cannot receive that funding. It is unfair to raise people's hopes in

this way, and then to dash them by not giving the money out in the

first place. Andrea, a good idea, that branding? The Big Society is

more of a vision. There is no doubt the people in this country have

volunteered for years. Four fifths of everything that goes on in the

country is somebody caring for someone else. The Big Society is

not a policy, it is more of a vision. In the last Budget, the

government enabled charities to claim the gift Aid, and to enable

people we want to bequest money to a charity when they died to pay it

to the charity instead of the Exchequer. It enables people to

volunteer more, it is about encouraging companies to let their

staff volunteer. It is not some kind of brand that people have to

slot into. Barney, I know you were from the Home-Start charity that we

featured. How do you see the future? The future for at this game

in the county as well as Northampton is that we have

confirmed funding until the end of September. We would then be

entering into a negotiating a discussion. Generally, do you feel

the idea of a big society is catching up on? I think it has been

oversold. That is the problem. We got very excited during the run-up

to the election. Professor, finally to you, as far as young people go,

they are future. If they can add to a bigger society, it can add value

to them? I think so. There is an enormous at -- appetite from our

students with volunteering. Last year, we volunteered 26,000 hours

to local communities. That is about �0.5 million. Universities have a

great role in society to develop the notion of volunteering for.