Category Archives: Regeneration, Renewal And Resilience

What Now For Liverpool’s Sefton Park? (A Monday Women Debate)

Sefton Park06.7.30  (middle lake, small) 009.jpg Plans for Sefton Park are taking shape rapidly – as are ideas for several of Liverpool’s other Parks. Monday Women decided to have a debate; points from our discussion follow. Your contributions on how Liverpool’s Parks should be developed are also most welcome.
Sefton Park Cherry Trees 06.5.5 009.jpg Meeting up with other Monday Women this evening, one very hotly discussed topic of conversation was the merits or otherwise of plans for Sefton, Otterspool and Newsham Parks. Amongst the issues considered, of course, was the fate of the cherry trees by the middle lake.
It’s actually very heartening that so many people wanted to talk about these plans in detail, and to continue the discussion elsewhere. We therefore came up with the idea of making this topic a ‘main’ item on my website…. so here it is!
I’ll kick off with a few thoughts on plans for Sefton Park, in my own locality (years ago, this would have been Newsham Park, so I have something of a ‘compare and contrast’ perspective on developments).
The main issues in contention for Sefton Park currently seem to include:
Eco- Solar 06.7.15 031.jpg * Do we want lighting, or bats? (Maybe we want both; how about ground-level lighting of the southern, presently non-lit, paths.. which would also remove any concerns about strollers being well-lit, and supposed potential assailants lurking invisibly in bushes ‘behind’ the lights) How will we ensure that the vibrant wild and bird life of the park is nurtured?
* Why are the only toilets in the Park in the Central Kiosk? (The Palm House has some, of course, but they are not open to the public.)
Sefton Park 06.7.11&12 024 Waterway grot.jpg * Do people realise that the Park is far from ‘natural’? (Conservation is a managed process; many trees, bushes and supplings have just grown as they will, and some of these probably do need to be removed.)
* How will the intended new waterways be designed? And how will they be kept clean and clear?
* Has anyone realised that, if the attached allotments (apparently controlled not by Parks & Gardens, but by Recreation & Leisure…) are drained to remove waterlogging, there is a fear that the water will cascade across the Park?
Sefton Park 06.5.25 Bandstand 024.jpg * What sorts of performance space/s are intended for the Park? Will these be all-weather, and who will manage them?
* Is there any scope for a pleasant meeting place / restaurant at the south end of the Park, and what will become of the Central Kiosk? Will there be any public art?
* Where will young people be able safely to congregate in the evening and at weekends, whilst younger children, families and older people can continue to enjoy the quieter aspects of the facility?
There are lots of questions, some of them quite fundamental, in the issues being raised, so it’s good to be able to report that we can expect a Public Exhibition and Consultation on the Sefton Park proposals, cum December. Watch this space for details!
And, in the meantime, please do carry on the debate right here. (NB You don’t have to publish your details; the only check we make on this website is that you are not a spammer!) We all look forward to hearing your views, below…
See also: Sefton Park’s Grebes And Swans
Liverpool’s Sefton Park, Swans, Herons And Grebes

Sefton Park, Liverpool: Winter Solstice 2006
Cherry Blossom For May Day In Sefton Park, Liverpool
Cherry Picking Liverpool’s Sefton Park Agenda
Liverpool’s Sefton Park Trees Under Threat – Unnecessarily?
Solar Lighting Could Solve The Parks Problem
Friends Of Sefton Park

Technology & Enterprise: The Good News For UK plc

A very high global ranking in use of ICT, plus a report that Britain now has the best financial environment for entrepreneurs in the world, will be welcomed by many, but might seem more of a mixed blessing to a few. Combine this however with a UK Government paper showing how ICT can support even the most excluded, and perhaps everyone could agree that maybe we’re on to something really promising?
The Economist doesn’t always carry the cheeriest of good news for us Brits, but this week’s edition does provide some interesting information.
The Milken Institute, a think-tank in California, has reported that Britain now has the best financial environment for entrepreneurs of the 121 countries (92% of the global market) it has ranked every year since 1998. The Institute looks at the breadth, depth and vitality of each country’s capital markets – and has concluded that we are ahead even of Hong Kong, Singapore and the USA for the first time.
Then, also in the 5th November edition, the Economist tells us that the World Bank has rated Britain below only our competitors above, plus Denmark, in capacity to exploit information and communication technology (ICT). This index is based on the availability, quality, affordability, efficiency and adoption of ICT.
Perhaps for some these reports raise alarm rather than cheer, but there’s another interesting piece of news too – the UK Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has just released a report, Digital Solutions to Social Exclusion, which suggests ICT may be of benefit even to the most excluded of our citizens. It is now being used to help homeless people to get jobs, maintain medical support, and much else.
Nobody’s suggesting that everything in the garden is rosy; it never is. But here is evidence indeed that science and technology can, with the right push, work hand in hand with the market to enhance life chances for a whole lot of people.

The CCLRC – And Why We Really Should Want To Know About It

CCLRC notice 113x91 007a.jpg The CCLRC is the Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils of the UK. Its 2005 Annual Meeting was an amazing showcase of research at every level from the very tiniest scale imaginable (if indeed you can), to the most enormous. Here were world-class scientists and technologists, telling us what they do and why they are so incredibly enthusiastic about it.
Daresburry Lab. & Innovation Centre 007.jpg The CCLRC is not an organisation which often hits the front page of the papers; but, as we all know, some of the best things in life are the least paraded. So I want to spend a few minutes right now saying why I think it’s a really exciting prospect.
First, though, the basics: the CCLRC is the UK’s Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils. In other words, it’s the top body in charge of (very) Big Science in the UK; and yesterday, 4 November, I was lucky enough to attend their national Annual Conference, at the Lowry Centre in Salford. I’m still buzzing!
The science budget is massive
Consider this: the CCLRC budget last year was nudging half a billion pounds, and it has oversight of some of the most prestigious and influential laboratories in the world, including the Daresbury and the Rutherford Appleton facilities in Warrington and Oxfordshire respectively.
Scientists and technologists in these laboratories, working alongside colleagues in numbers of our great universities, are exploring almost everything you can imagine about our world and our universe.
At the tiniest, nano, level these scientists are looking at how ‘engines’ at the atomic scale are ‘driving’ muscles; and they have developed a ‘molecular flashgun’ – the brightest beam of light ever created anywhere.
At the other extreme of size, CCLRC supported research is attempting to model global climate changes, and look at planets and space.
Science at the cutting edge
Much of this we were told about at the meeting yesterday, with fascinating presentations bringing together simple models and amazingly enthusiastic speakers, world authorities in their subjects.
And in between all this there are the pieces of work which will bring about cures for illnesses, new ways to produce manufactured goods, and greater understanding of genetics…
Then we were invited to look also into the future. Where will science and technology be taking us?
Futurology
This question is importantly about ‘futurology’, that informed guessing which tells us that exciting things, challenging things and sometimes really difficult to grasp things are about to emerge, all as a consequence of the extraordinary work which is being carried out in scientific communities around the world. To read about some of these anticipated developments, clearly explained and illustarted, just turn to the CCLRC’s own website.
Daresburry Lab. & Innovation Centre 002.jpg As is quite apparent when one looks at these fascinating developments, no laboratory or university can now undertake Big Science in a vacuum from others. Collaboration is always the name of the game, across regions, nations and continents. And this brings us to another reason why the CCLRC and its huge expertise is so vital, to the UK as a nation and to the geographical areas in which it has a major presence.
Big money and big ideas
Investment at the level of the CCLRC is hard to secure. It doesn’t think small. It brings the most able and influential scientists and technologists with it wherever it decides to blossom; and this, in turn, brings forth industrial and commercial investment, and employment opportunities at the highest level – in other words, it enables the sort of synergies between economic development and knowledge for which any area of the UK yearns.
Do not suppose for one moment that, because most of us would be very hard put even to explain what Einstein discovered about particle motion a century ago, this Big Science has nothing to do with us.
Big Science brings opportunities (and, indeed, challenges) of the highest order, it brings amazing collaborations between people of many regions and nations, and it brings as yet barely touched scope for economic synergies and development.
A pretty phenomenal return on investment of less than half a billion pounds, when you see it like that.

Does The Train Take The Strain? (Or Shall We Take The Car?)

Ideally everyone would use public transport; but of course they don’t. Perhaps however this is not simply because of the usual overt issues – cost, frequency, reliability etc – but also because of less easily measured human responses to uncomfortable contexts such as isolated platforms, cold and wet waiting areas and a general feeling on insecurity about the ‘transport offer’ overall.
Trains play quite a significant part in my life. Given the choice, I would always go for public transport; though often of course I can’t.
But I do whenever possible choose to travel by train, both long distance and for commuting. This strategy is not however without snags. Whatever enthusiasts claim, train travel can sometimes feel uncomfortable or even unsafe.
When you’re on the Intercity it’s hard to realise how fast you’re travelling through small stations; when you’re commuting from one of these points, it’s even harder to believe that trains – enormous vehicles by anyone’s standards – are permitted to rush past where you standing on the platform at such breakneck speeds. It’s like standing on the slipway of the motorway; and just as scary.
Then there’s the lack of shelter and the isolation. Train stations on commuter routes, outside London at least, tend to be vast unpeopled wind-tunnels, away from the road and houses, which expose one to rain and cold, and, potentially, to being alone in very lonely places. No matter how many CCTVs, it can be unpleasant to realise you’re the only one on the platform – at the moment. Add to this the rudimentary and sometimes solid brick, unwindowed, covered stands which may afford the only seating, and you begin to feel very vulnerable indeed.
My guess is that many people feel this environment hostile. Panic buttons, good lighting and visible CCTV can go a long way to sustaining the excellent safety record of most train stations; but it doesn’t always come over that way. And when people don’t feel safe, they find an alternative – for preference not noisy and jumbled up buses, but their warm, locked cars. (I checked in the office yesterday; every women there said her car was first choice for just these reasons.)
Thus perhaps do barriers to easy use of public transport in our non-capital cities arise; and this is before we even start to ask whether it’s straightforward to buy tickets (not all systems have the equivalent of Transport for London’s Oyster Cards), whether the signage is good (why do noticeboards ask ‘Have you bought your tickets?’, when they mean, ‘Here is the machine, by the wall, which will sell you a ticket?’), and whether the train will actually turn up as promised, and is actually going where you planned to go.
In my more radical moments I am tempted to suggest that no public transport employee, in the public or private sector, should ever be permitted to claim a car allowance, though of course claims for use of public transport would always be allowed. This would apply even more to managers and planners than to everyday workers.
but this is obviously not going to happen, so maybe the next best thing would be to encourage transport companies to have ‘exchange away days’, where a member of staff from Company X is invited to travel difficult journeys around the area of Company Y, with nothing except a tenner, a notepad and pencil and a train timetable in his or her pocket.
What seems perfectly logical and simple to people who do use a trainline all the time, often seems far more problematic to someone new to the scene; does the tram have a special name? where’s the ticket office (and are there different ones for different services)?; why is such and such a line cancelled with such regularity?; does this service feel equally safe for all types of passenger?; can you work out how the various routes interconnect?
Uncertainties arising from these sorts of questions probably go a long way to explaining why public transport is far from always the method of choice. Getting people out of their cars and onto the train or bus is a big priority environmentally, but for success it has to be done in ways which the punter finds comfortable.
And if comfortable and safe-feeling public transport doesn’t happen, problems will also arise for wider regeneration and renewal, especially in areas without high car use to start with. The action of choice may be no action – just stay put and don’t bother.
It would be interesting to know how much research has been undertaken into which aspects of comfort and safety most reassure travellers, and which of these are the most cost-effective, in all senses of that term. For many of us, how the train and other public transport systems are run is of only marginal interest; but how we feel about using the systems determines at a very fundamental level whether we actually choose to make use them.

Liverpool School Of Tropical Medicine Teams Up With Bill Gates

LSTM (logo) 06.7.30 015.jpg The Bill and Melinda Gates award to the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine is testimony to the excellence of that institution; and it is also a huge endorsement of investment in the future of science in the North of England and beyond.
Congratulations to Professor Janet Hemingway and her team on their award from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation!
LSTM (i2006) 06.7.30 004.jpg LSTM (new build) 06.7.30 007.jpg As a Member (and previously a Trustee) of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine I have watched over the past three or four years as the School’s ambitious plans have progressed from the drawing board to the Gates Foundation Boardroom. Everyone has been very focused on success, and building the ‘package’ which has brought this about was painstaking work. It has involved careful co-ordination between governmental funders, national and local politicians, academics at the highest level, and many others.
People like Bill Gates don’t give their money unless they are convinced it will be well matched by other funds, and will be extremely well spent.
This is extremely good news not only for the LSTM and the University of Liverpool, but also for the city and the Northwest of England – not to mention for the prestige of British science itself. The research is of the highest standard and the outcome, in terms of impact on people at risk of malaria, will be massive.
Regional synergies
LSTM (inc kids' pics) 06.7.30 009.jpg Slowly but surely the connections between science institutions in the North of England are being made. The synergies of collaboration are beginning to be visible beyond the largely ignored ivory towers.
If these new developments are genuinely welcomed and nurtured by our city and regional leaders for what they can bring, the impact on parts of the UK could be almost as significant, in their own way, as the impact of the research in the locations where the medical risks being studied are to be found.

Is Art Good For Your Health?

Why is commissioned art in hospitals such a problem for some? The evidence suggests that, just as much as in other public and work places, art can help people to be comfortable and positive.
There they are, the arbiters of ‘value’, getting very upset about money which has been spent in one or two hospitals on ‘art’. It’s a waste, they declare. We could be buying more drugs or equipment, but we’re squandering the readies on something that you just…. look at!
Well, perhaps these joyless folk haven’t grasped the concept of added value. Perhaps the evidence, from a variety of sources, that being happy (or at least, happier than before) helps you to get better has passed them by. If you can see green vistas, or pleasant pictures and images, you will relax more easily, and you may even be able to leave hospital a day or so earlier than if you’re stuck in a grey and souless place.
There are not that many ways in which service providers can actually save on overall budget and, at the same time, increase effectiveness and make people happier – but this is indeed one of them!
No-one seems to be saying that art is going to replace medical treatments. Proper consideration of clinical diagnosis and treatment must always be absolutely paramount. Medicine will however always be an art as well as a science.
If people in hospital have pleasant things to see and think about, if they can look at artefacts which help them to feel they are still connected with their wider comminuties and interests, if there are nice things to talk about with fellow patients, that makes a difference.
But ‘nice things to look at’ don’t just appear; they have to be created. I remember Adrian Henri, who painted murals for the operating theatre suite at the Royal Liverpool University Hospital, recounting how much research he was obliged to do before he so much as lifted a brush. He had to ensure his images gave no unwitting offence or alarm to patients from many different faiths and cultures as they entered a place none of volunters to visit.
Perhaps those who choose to take such a high-handed and cold view of what’s appropriate for people in hospitals should remember that the evidence also points compellingly to the idea that pleasant workplaces are good… and that applies whether you work in a commercial office or a medical context. We all benefit from environments which make us comfortable and positive. And the evidence is there to show this benefit can be measured in outcomes even accountants would acknowledge.
Within sensible reason, let’s agree that there’s always a place, when were thinking about real people, for soul as well as science. Who knows when any of us might be in hospital and glad of a little visual cheer?

Facilitation & Leadership

Leaders offer direction; Facilitors generally should not. But how fluid is this distinction, and to what effect?
Do Leaders emerge or are they made? Are some Facilitators also Leaders? Or is the role of a Faciltator to bring about change through the agency of others – perhaps those who already have the mantle of Leadership, or perhaps others who will come to the fore via the process being facilitated?
The answer is probably that both these models apply in different circumstances.
A professional Facilitator (whether paid or not) is someone whose task is to bring forward responses from a group which has already asked for this to happen, maybe via an already established Leader.
On the other hand an informal Facilitator (usually a volunteer) may be someone who wants to get a group or interest established as an entity in itself. Such a person may well emerge from that group as a Leader.
And why are these distinctions important?
Again, the answers vary. Sometimes for instance informal facilitation is a route to significant developments which can be harnessed by, say, regeneration or other ‘official’ bodies to bring forward spokespeople for given interests. Conversely, on occasion it has been known for formal Facilitators to take upon themselves a leadership role acceptable by those who engaged them, but perhaps not by those whom they are facilitating.
The more the variables are considered, the more likely it is that the role claimed, Facilitator or Leader?, is that which is in fact being enacted.

Why Change Management can’t be perfect (as if you didn’t know)

Different communities and groups frequently have different understandings of why ‘change’ occurs and how ‘progress’ is achieved. Leadership and initiatives in such circumstances can be very challenging. Nobody’s interested in Policy Pilots. They want Results.
It’s always puzzled me, and the more I think about it, the more so…..
We all know that
(a) we live in times of rapid change,
(b) the variables in the changes are uncountable, and
(c) to whatever extent, change has to be eternally managed.
In other words, we are solidly aware that the whole process is unpredictable and subject to serendipity at every stage of the game. Plus, there’s never an end. Change is a dialectic as compelling as Time itself.
Why is ‘change’ a worry?
So why do so many people spend so much time criticising ‘Change’, and apparently so little time in general public discourse considering ‘Since Something Is Going To Happen Anyway, What Shall We All Do To Make It A Bit Better?’
Clearly, the myriad of forces which impel change as such also apply to the motivators and causal factors behind any individual’s reaction to that change. There are psychological ones, socio-political ones, geo-economic ones… The list could go on.
There is also however a general cultural factor which probably applies diffierently at different times and in different places, whether we are thinking about huge historical eras or micro-contexts like single workplaces.
Here are some possible scenarios to which one might be able to apply specific examples.. just fill in with your own!
The cultural backdrop
In some cultural understandings – and again these may be micro as well as macro – there is a sense simply that Things Happen. This probably includes amongst other ‘Things’ people who are outside the group, who are perceived with whatever degree of acceptance or resistance to be the agents of the change…. No good communicating with them, because ‘We’ won’t make any impact, so just wait and see, and then judge the outcome.
Then there are other cultural understandings which may suggest that, whilst ‘We’ are aware of what’s going on, the option of complaint later is preferable to taking early responsibility for what arises. The Comfort Zone is visible, but is safer than expending the time and energy which a pro-active response would require.
And finally there are cultural understandings which just fail to appreciate the fluid nature of the process of developing ideas. In this case, people do know how to interrogate proposals and they may well have strong views, but they see every decision and outcome as cast in stone.
This last is a particularly difficult position to address, but one familiar to many of us who attempt to initiate Managed Change.
Vague ideas which leave things hanging…
You perhaps go into a situation with a remit to support constructive developments, and you ask those concerned what they think. Their response is, ‘Well, what do you want?’……
But you know that, come the time when plans crystallise into actions, there will be plenty of advice on What You Should Have Done.
The dialectic of such development is challenging. Not everyone sees any difference between Change and ‘Consensual Progress’; nor does everyone want to. If you as an initiator emphasise the plasticity of outcomes, you are accused of not knowing your stuff; but if you offer directional leadership (is there any other sort?) you are of course autocratic.
It’s all a matter of perspective, as any politician or organisational head attempting to pilot his or her favourite policy will tell you.
Empowerment
Empowering people and communities to believe that things can usually change consensually for the better – that only very rarely is there no space for adjustment – is one of the most difficult aspects of community leadership, whatever the ‘community’.
Perhaps one of the first steps in this direction is the acknowledgement that we all, You, Me, Them, make mistakes; and that it IS possible to learn from and act on these, positively.

Planning For Energy Futures With The CBI

The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) is warning us that posssible energy shortages mean a winter of discontent awaits. This is a matter of concern for everyone. When energy is taken by the banks and business as seriously in terms of analysis as finance, the notion of ‘Futures’ may help us to understand ‘Options’ in a whole new way.
My grasp of ‘Futures’, in the financial sense of the word, is slight; but I gather it’s all to do with large-scale ‘Options’ on investing by banks to produce decent returns later on. So far, so simple.
But isn’t this what we need to think about with energy futures, as well as financial ones? The CBI – an organisation which I would imagine knows a bit about futures and banks – has just said they have serious concerns about energy provision this winter. A long hard snap and we’ll be in for a winter of discontent the likes of which only those of us long in the tooth can recall.
Strangely, the forward thinking which is routinely made for financial futures doesn’t seem to feature when businesses consider energy futures. Some of us would argue, however, that energy is where it’s really all at.
What’s the ‘gold’ of the future?
Hasn’t it been said that the gold of the future is oil? Or maybe these days renewables?
Recent days have seen high-level hints that more nuclear power is on the cards for the UK. Conservationists and eco-people will be horrified by this. Industrial contractors and perhaps some regeneration specialists may see it as a promising way forward.
The real question must surely be, how much thought have we all put into ways of providing energy for the future? And how much have we also thought about the levels of energy we really need, as opposed to the levels we all currently expend?
Conflicting demands
Leaders in different parts of these fields seem to be looking several ways at once.
Businesses want cheap energy in abundant supply (though some of them do of course make efforts to conserve it as well).
The politicians are trying to do two things: encourage us on the one hand to save energy, and on the other to consider forms of energy production which may or may not be sustainable and long-term safe.
And the scientists are telling us that the technologies for energy conservation and production have not all been explored to the same level. We aren’t as yet in a position to evaluate fully the relative effectiveness and risk of all the possible ways forward; but we do know how to produce shorter-term big science solutions.
‘Options’ in energy
Back then to the ‘futures’ idea. We have graduate physicists and others who, it is reported, have too little to do. (An irony, in my experience, is that many good physicists end up working as analysts in banks, not laboratories.) And we have businessess which are worried about energy. Why not put things together and start to take the ‘options’ on energy as seriously as those on finance?
This isn’t just an issue for people who have lots of money to spend, it’s an issue for us all. Without energy, at suitable levels of availability and sustainability, there could be no banks or businesses anyway.

Liverpool’s Newsham Park needs to be conserved

Newsham Park in Liverpool is a Listed Historic Park; yet it has on its perimeter distressingly neglected vintage houses owned, it is said, by the City Council and local Housing Associations. Some concerned locals want the City of Liverpool to take action against itself on this matter. This situation, as some residents understand it, hardly suggests positive re-inforcement of active citizenship in one of the most deprived inner-city localities of the UK.
The very first place we ever lived in Liverpool was, literally, a garret in Fairfield Crescent, off Newsham Park. Still a student, I thought this quite exotic, a place of our own even though the downside was three very steep flights of stairs.

Since my time there many years ago Newsham Park has suffered considerable neglect. The local bank has disappeared, many more people seem to be unemployed, and despite some new retail outlets and the efforts of Kensington New Deal there is widespread visible decay in some parts of the area.

Nonetheless the area is blessed with numbers of residents who are fighting energetically for their patch. Newsham Park is in its design an elegant green space surrounded by large Vistorian houses and wide carriage ways. It was, and still has the potential to be, an urban gem for those who live in the north of the city.

It is shocking therefore to hear that some of the most delapidated housing around Newsham Park is actually owned by the City Council and local Housing Associations. And this, in a Listed Historic Park and within a Conservation Area.

The news is apparently that Newsham Park residents have decided to ask the City to take enforcement action against the owners – sometimes one gathers themselves – of the most neglected properties. Whether this comes about, and what the official response might be, we shall see.

But it does leave us to wonder exactly how one of the most deprived localities of the UK can bring about much needed change for the better, if those who live in and care about it it apparently have to ask their own city to remedy disgraceful neglect on their very doorsteps.

Should it transpire that the City Council, as an example and encouragement to concerned local people, can’t find ways to look after its own property, what hope is there for the rest?