Karren Brady has written a form of manifesto as a "candidate" (see link) for directly elected Mayor of Birmingham. It is difficult to be a candidate for a position that does not exist, but it does add to the debate.
If people decide to concentrate Birmingham's political power in one person then of course she is qualified to stand. I don't think that the Birmingham Conservatives will like the idea of being told who their candidate is by David Cameron, however.
Most of the things Karen Brady complains about are things where the decision is made by the government or people appointed by the government. (New St, The Casino, Midland Metro, the Central Library.) The Quangos such as Advantage West Midlands have boards accountable to the Ministers in London not the Council in Birmingham. Manchester and Liverpool are run by Cabinet and Leader systems not by an elected Mayor.
It is also important what she misses out of her article. Birmingham City Council (unlike the Greater London Authority) runs Housing and Social Services (amongst other additional services). I highlight Housing and Social Services because in 2004 when the current administration took over the situation was so bad in both services that the government were seriously considering taking responsibility off the local authority.
Big prestige projects are important. However, the bread and butter issues are also important and should not be ignored by anyone who wishes to offer themselves for this role.
I have been asked if I would stand. My priority for the moment, however, is to sort out the disaster that is Public Family Law in the UK (and its links to the inappropriate behaviour of some paediatricians). I could not do this whilst also being Mayor of Birmingham because of the amount of time it takes.