Skip to main content

Government calls for removal of John Hemming as Chair of Strategic Partnership (or do they?)

We have been told that next year's NRF for Birmingham will be over £32,000,000. That is obviously good news for the city.

There is a difficulty, however, in that in informal meetings representatives of the government have been threatening to not pay that money to Birmingham unless I am sacked as chair of the BSP.

I confirmed this in an informal discussion with Graham Garbett (director Government Office West Midlands) on Monday this week.

If the government say they will fine Birmingham £32 Million unless I resign of course I will fall on my sword. This is not, however, something that the government should get involved in. I have always had concerns about Civil Servants trying to exclude elected politicians from decisionmaking.

After the discussion on Monday I spoke to Joe Montgomery (director Neighbourhood Renewal Unit) and asked him for his views. He said he would talk to the minister. Joe phoned me on Wednesday, but would not answer the question as to whether or not it was acceptable for me to continue chairing the Strategic Partnership.

Clearly this issue has to be clarified. I was told that I would get a letter from Government Office. Nothing has arrived as yet. The answer needs to be either "yes" or "no". Weasel words that say nothing whilst sly, implied threats of funding cuts are made in confidential meetings are no good to anyone.

Frankly I believe that the government's actions on this are appalling. They are riding roughshod over local democracy. This does not bode well for the future. What I want now is an answer from Government Office. Is it or is it not acceptable for me to remain as Chair of the Strategic Partnership?

Comments

John Hemming said…
I think it is because I am too stroppy. The allocation mechanisms for the 6-7 financial year have not even come close to being worked out. This year's figures are widely available.

Popular posts from this blog

Why are babies born young?

Why are babies born young? This sounds like an odd question. People would say "of course babies are born young". However, this goes to the core of the question of human (or animal) development. Why is it that as time passes people develop initially through puberty and then for women through menopause and more generally getting diseases such as sarcopenia, osteoporosis, diabetes and cancer, but most of the time babies start showing no signs of this. Lots of research into this has happened over the years and now I think it is clear why this is. It raises some interesting questions. Biological youth is about how well a cell functions. Cells that are old in a biological sense don't work that well. One of the ways in which cells stop working is they fail to produce the full range of proteins. Generally the proteins that are produced from longer genes stop being produced. The reason for this relates to how the Genes work (the Genome). Because the genome is not gettin