O’Conall Street

Another Thursday, another surreal debate on Hearts and Minds, talk about fiddling while Rome burns.

This time it was Conor Murphy’s turn to explain how meeting would damage partnership and how tackling the real issues of concern to ordinary people undermines equality.

We were discussing Sinn Fein’s bizarre approach to government on O’Conall Street today. Given we could not get our head around their position or their definition of partnership and equality we thought we might offer up our own solution to the current impasse.

Simple.

Lets have a ‘Facebook Executive’. No meetings, no face to face contact, no process blockades just effective open government. And what better way for the Executive to respond to the current economic crisis.

The other nine Ministers would have to join Margaret Ritchie on Facebook. They set up a closed group and get on with posting papers on the ‘wall’ and then use the discussion board for real debate. Surveymonkey.comcould be employed any time a vote was needed. Nothing complicated or requiring any personal contact just a simple click and the Fuel Poverty Strategy would be agreed for civil servants in Omagh and Ballymena to deliver.

The Assembly could get on Facebook too with some public pages for us ordinary mortals to take a peak at the work.

As for the North South Ministerial Council, I am sure now that Facebook is setting up shop in Dublin they might be able to think of a new network called ‘island of Irish’ or something like that to get the two cabinets talking.

The great unwashed could set up groups calling for anything from an Executive Meeting to free prescriptions for pets. And those really committed to this value for money democracy could blog on the side and launch petitions to the First and Deputy First Ministers.

Now for the real good news. No more standing in the wind waiting to get into the Assembly to witness no business. No more personal protection officers lurking about with bulging jackets. No fleet of ministerial cars pumping greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere and for those young mothers at the Executive table some real work - life balance.

I could not lay a figure on the current cost of running the Assembly but do know the bill during the last period of suspension was a staggering £110millon.

A Facebook group is free.

Martin McGuinness opened the Northern Ireland Economic Conference in Belfast yesterday with a poor speech which drew heavily on the First Trust Quarterly Economic Review - a report which has been loosing credibility by the minute since its publication. As one colleague asked; was that last years speech?

He did not stay for questions or any of the presentations. Nor did any of his advisers or MLA colleagues. In fact I spotted only one MLA during the entire day and did not see a single Special Adviser. Pity that because some thought provoking presentations followed which offered a ‘reality check’ on the issues this region’s economy will face in the coming years.

I say this because Tony McCusker, a former senior civil servant and now Chairperson of the Community Relations Council, writing in this month’s edition of Fortnight Magazine expresses explicit concern about the workings in the Executive. Mr McCusker says:

“One key element of this fairly unstable government process is the expanded system of ministerial advisers….. Within OFMDFM they form a cabinet system like in the EU Commission….. Neither in the UK nor Ireland, both of which rely extensively on advisers, does the system operate to the exclusion of the senior civil service to the extent apparent under the current [SF-DUP] Executive. Advisers were apparent in the first Executive but there was then greater appreciation of the views of senior officials and perhaps a better basis of communication between political appointments and the permanent group of officials.

I was one of those advisers in the first Executive and can say that the relationship with the senior civil service was one of partnership. Yes there were tensions, but they were constructive tensions. This was not about one side beating the other or one group excluding the other. In simple terms everyone knew there was more than enough work to go around and we got on with fulfilling our roles as best we could. Back then a good few of us would have been seen as the annual economic think in. After all we were being paid to get our head around the issues and advise accordingly.

Back to the presentations.

Oxford Economics, Adrian Cooper, forecast a drop of in employment during 2009 and 2010 with recovery in 2011.

PWCs Philip McDonagh brought the figures home with some new research findings on the extent of the downturn in the construction sector which coupled with falling consumer confidence, retail spending and much lower public spending are creating a ‘perfect storm’ for the North’s economy. We can expect at 50% drop of in residential construction employment this year according to a survey PWC and the CEF conducted of over 200 home builders. The impact of this downturn will be felt in every county as this sector is well spread out across the North.

If you thought the problems are confined to construction or global factors beyond the executive’s control then think again. Skills are a devolved matter and the presentation on the size of the skills gap in this region was a red flag to our regional government of ever I saw one. The facts were presented by Professor Mike Campbell, Director of Policy and Research at the UK Commission for Employment and Skills.

I have already blogged about Martin Mansergh’s speech and additional comments. The quote of the day goes to Philip McDonagh who is response to a question from NICVAs Frances McCandless about whether there should be a formal social partnership structure in NI simply answered - Yes!

He is right.

With such little economic experience in the Assembly and such an obvious lack of understanding of the strategic issues facing the executive, social partnership would offer experts a stake in the regions future and ensure our fledgling government was able to work collaboratively with all the major stakeholders. Although this could be a big ask given their inability to work with each other.

We can only live in hope.

I stuck my neck out last night saying that I thought McCain - Palin lost the election this week.

When I posted my thoughts on Facebook they generated a fairly heated debate amongst my friends including one or two respected commentators.

To my relief Pulitzer Prize winning Columnist, Clarence Page, has come out to suggest Obama might win this race. You can read his full article here.

On another measure, Real Clear Politics Inter-trade Market Odds are now 66 - 34.5 in Obama’s favour.

Also speaking at the Northern Ireland Economic Conference, Finance Junior Minister, Martin Mansergh TD said the legislation currently being debated by the Oireachtas will allow the Minister for Finance to add other banks to the scheme.

The Minister appeared to hint that this provision could be used in the future to include Northern and Ulster Bank.

Wonder if the Executive should get lobbying on this?

The press made a bit of a story out of the SDLP’s newest member on Belfast City Council having the temerity to express an opinion in public. Cllr Niall Kelly gave his assessment of the SDLP’s recent electoral performance in Fermanagh on his blog, The Belfast Stoop.

What a wonderful breath of fresh air. A young, energetic councillor expressing himself intelligently and coherently on his own blog. I am not going to pass judgement on whether it was wise of him to speak so frankly about the internal organisational challenges facing his party, but in general terms I do want to congratulate him for trying to open politics up and encourage discussion beyond those who turn up for party meetings and even beyond party members. Blogs like his are a fantastic way for ordinary people to get involved in political debate. They are a direct route to the voters for any good public representative and should be encouraged and supported.

Northern politics has for too long been the stuff of ‘high level talks’ and ’secret meetings’. O’Conall St stands square firm behind anyone looking to shake off the cobwebs of inner circles and caucuses.

In the States Barack Obama is revolutionising politics by bringing ordinary people into his campaign. He encourages discussion and debate in public. At this is not just true of politics. Some of the most creative and successful companies in the world are open houses for opinion. Google and Microsoft actively encourages their employees to blog and discuss the issues of the day and in their industry in a responsible way. Indeed Weber Shandwick is no different and so I am here writing these words along many other colleagues - bloggers around the world.

Young Cllr Kelly is one of the first of a new breed of Irish politicians to get this.

Alex Maskey delivered another spectacular display in political denial on the Politics Showthis Sunday as Peter Robinson talked all though in Fermanagh.

The more this stand off continues, the more convinced I am that both Sinn Fein and the DUP are driven exclusively by selfish partisan interest. They are classic examples of using power for the few not the many.

But what about the people?

Both parties have done their best for example to turn the debate about the future of selection into a sectarian ‘them and us’ when in fact it is an issue which transcends community and if anything splits people along socio-economic lines.

Nor have they displayed any interest in tackling the current fuel poverty crisis, the gaping whole in public finances, the need to urgently reduce our carbon footprint or sort out the planning system. All issues which can’t be boxed off neatly into a community stand off.

A friend commented to me that politicians in NI are smarter then people give them credit for but smart does not mean good.

All the bread and butter issues aside, the acid test of all this has been the absolute failure of the DUP and Sinn Fein to tackle the elephant in the room – sectarianism. Both parties rejected the ‘Shared Future’ policy and neither are interested in progressing any debate which could lead to a cross cutting anti-sectarianism policy which could seriously change things here.

But then why bite off the hand that feeds you?

Last week we shared our thinking on the Labour Conference. Here is the considered Weber Shandwicktake on this week’s conservative gathering in Birmingham. I guess the point we are trying to make is that they will have much bigger issues to discuss then the UUP - Tory love in.

Whilst Gordon Brown’s government has suffered through the Northern Rock, data loss and by-election sagas since last September, David Cameron’s Conservatives have gone from strength to strength. Taking their cue from Brown’s election U-turn, the Tories have since delivered landslide local election gains, a Conservative Mayor of London and the first Conservative by-election gain for 26 years. Given the Conservatives’ strong position in the polls, it is hardly surprising that Cameron is approaching this year’s Conference baying for a general election.

Yet while some within the Party may be allowing themselves to get carried away, key insiders acknowledge that widespread enthusiasm for ousting Labour has yet to be matched by public enthusiasm for a Conservative government. The main aim for the Conservatives will therefore be to convince onlookers that they are both fit and prepared for office.

Adhering to tried and tested wisdom used by both Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair whilst in Opposition, the Conservative leadership is expected to steer clear of making hard commitments which could alienate some voters in the run up to the next election. This year’s keynote Conference speeches from the Shadow Cabinet are therefore more likely to represent attempts to maintain the current momentum through broad promises of fresh thinking, increased efficiency and accountability.

Birmingham’s past and future will be the theme for the Conservative Conference this year. Speakers will use Birmingham as a case study to showcase their plans for the future. The Shadow Cabinet will also take time out during the Conference to perform voluntary work in and around the Birmingham area.

Conference Agenda

As with the previous Conferences under Cameron, the days will be arranged around key domestic and international issues. However, unlike last year, there is no time for a guest speaker on the agenda. It would seem the Leadership sees this year’s Conference as too significant to allow the focus to waver. Similarly, there has also been markedly little time allocated to Boris Johnson to set out his vision for London, as the emphasis is instead placed firmly on the Shadow Cabinet.

Sunday’s first sessions are dedicated to the Conference theme of Birmingham and to celebrating the past year’s electoral successes. After this, and a short interlude from London’s Mayor, it will be down to business as the Party looks to woo Britain’s disillusioned electorate. Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox will outline plans to repair the links between the country and the armed forces, followed by an account of the Conservatives in the nations and regions, where Labour are fast losing ground. Monday will begin with a look at the economy as George Osborne and his team are expected to attack the Government’s performance during the credit crunch. The afternoon session will examine the NHS at 60 and care for Britain’s older people, where the Government have recently come in for criticism from groups such as Help the Aged. Tuesday’s agenda will expand on the recent Conservative pledge to “mend Britain’s broken society”. Shadow Secretary of State for Children Schools and Families Michael Gove, Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve and Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Chris Grayling will outline their visions to transform the school, criminal justice and welfare systems, as well as strengthening the family unit

Wednesday will bring the post-election vision to a crescendo, as Chairman of Conservative Policy Review Oliver Letwin and Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office and Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Francis Maude confirm the Conference’s intentions in the bluntly titled discussion “Preparing for Government”. After a nod to the environment and international issues from Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles and Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague respectively, David Cameron will rally the troops in what is, most likely, the penultimate Party Conference before the nation goes to the polls.

On the Fringe

Each year, the fringe agenda offers businesses and other interested groups the opportunity to influence the direction of the Conservative Conference as front bench representatives join the experts in discussions relevant to their remits. This year’s fringe agenda is dominated by the “broken society” theme, and will feature a number of events looking at reforming the schools and welfare systems, improving skills, regenerating cities and supporting Britain’s poorest communities. On Tuesday, Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Chris Grayling will address the subject directly in a session entitled “Fixing Britain’s Broken Society”.

The agenda also provides an opportunity for discussion on headline current events. On Monday, for example, former Shadow Home Secretary David Davis will be among the speakers proposing solutions to the problems of gun and knife crime. Tuesday’s session on “President Obama or President McCain: Who should a Tory vote for?” threatens to split opinion over the Party’s historic ties with the Republican Party.

Traditionally, the fringe agenda provides an opportunity for Conservative Party members to speak candidly about the Party’s policies and direction. Though most of the events look to be safe bets for the leadership, Monday’s afternoon session “The NHS at 60: Time for Retirement?” may raise opinions that sit uncomfortably with David Cameron’s pledge to make the Conservatives “the Party of the NHS”. Also on Monday, Chairman of Conservative Policy Review Oliver Letwin will be challenged to answer the doubters in a discussion entitled “How progressive are the New Conservatives?”. In a fringe programme largely bereft of danger spots, it will be important for the key figures to perform well in these sorts of discussions, in order to dispel doubts over their future ability to govern.

Bradford and Bingley will probably have been nationalised by the time you read this. Another sign that irrespective of what deal is struck in Washington, the crisis in our financial markets will continue for months if not years and the tax payer have to dig deeper to protect homes and savings. B&B demutualised and floated on the London Stock Exchange in December 2000. In fact over the past decade nearly all the big building and mutual societies have abandoned their roots and headed for the stock market to serve a new god.
 
I know there were attractive business arguments for this mass embrace of global capitalism. The international money markets looked strong and stable. The cost of credit was falling and customers believed they could do much better with a big global bank then from a relatively small mutual society. But lets face it the big winners were the banking executives who over night inflated their salaries and were awarded attractive stakes in the ‘new banks’.

So what are building societies and why are they different from banks?

A building society is a mutual organisation. This means that instead of having shareholders, it has members who collectively own the business and are also its customers. The main examples of this type of organisation in the UK are co-operative societies, mutual insurance companies and building societies. Members have the right to vote for directors regardless of how much or how little money they have with the society.

Large businesses like banks may enjoy economies of scale. By having more customers and so lower unit costs, they might appear to outperform building societies in attracting customers. However, this is not always the case.

So why do people choose a building society over a bank?

Each building society invests its profit back into the society’s business. Unlike banks, mutuals do not pay dividends. In other words - your money works for you, not for some rich kid in the City. This enables the building society to offer competitive rates of interest on both savings and mortgages. It sets the rates it pays savers at just less than the rate charged to borrowers. This margin gives the society a profit. Many analysists believe this offers customers a much better deal.

Surely the time has come for governments in Britain and Ireland to support the recreation of mutual societies which are capable of supporting communities and which rely on people, not markets, for their future.

Customers choose to do business with a building society because many find them more personal, approachable and more trustworthy than banks. An independent survey during 2007 found significantly higher levels of saver and borrower satisfaction with customer service in building societies.

Given a crisis of confidence is at the heart of the current crisis, surely a trustworthy system which can support home owners and encourage a viable property market is a much better option then waiting up all night to see if some legislators in Washington DC are going to agree to save the world or not.

This would be funny if it were in the movies. Unfortunately it is all too real.

So McCain turned up and the debate did in fact live up to the undoubted abilities of both candidates.

CNN gave the floor to the bloggers after and below is their debate on the debate.

For my money Obama crushed McCain on the economy and held his own on foreign policy, McCain’s trump card. There is a base-ball rule that says the runner always gets the benefit of the doubt in a toss up at first base. Obama has been running ahead all week so he gets the debate. All he needs to do is keep running.

Margaret Ritchie MLA, the Minister for Social Development has a hard hitting article in the current edition of Fortnight Magazine attacking Sinn Fein and the DUP for ignoring the elephant in the room of Northern politics, sectarianism.

It is well worth a read in full.

A Radical Shared Future Agenda can help our Society Grow Up

Despite the current huffing and puffing at Executive, Northern Ireland finally has some kind of stable, albeit tortured, peace agreement. It is, of course, a pity that we have arrived at this settlement by taking the scenic route – not least because the essential work of reconciliation could have started long ago. But we have to start from where we are, even if that is not where we ought to have been.

We now look to the unlikely duo of the DUP and Sinn Fein to deliver reconciliation and the signs so far are not very encouraging. They couldn’t bring themselves to put reconciliation at the centre of the Programme for Government where it belongs. In fact I’m not sure they know what reconciliation really means, or worse still, that they actually want to achieve it.

The real work of reconciliation is not just to end conflict and to reduce tension but to figure out a pathway to a Shared Future. There is an enormous difference between the vision of a Shared Future which I would subscribe to and the uneasy coexistence that the two parties leading our government seem to be content with. But it won’t put me off doing what needs to be done in DSD.

When Mark Durkan asked me to take on the Social Development Department, I of course, spotted the opportunity to tackle the growing housing crisis.  I also saw the potential to direct the work of the Department in such a way as to effect positive social change in pursuit of reconciliation and a Shared Future.

And surely no one can doubt that radical social change is what is needed now in Northern Ireland if we are finally going to grow up and face the things that divide us. We cannot expect to heal our divisions if we continue to reinforce them by maintaining the comprehensive and thoroughgoing segregation of our people.

Our ‘Troubles’ have created a legacy of communities that live apart. For too long people have grown up, played and lived in separate neighbourhoods, been taught in separate schools, followed different sports and been slow to share the workplace.

There can be no doubt that over the years this segregation fuelled the conflict. Entrenched, both physically and mentally, communities grew further apart, unwilling and unable to see that this segregation was as much the cause of their insecurities, as the answer to them.

It is my view that unless we try to reduce segregation by driving forward a progressive public policy agenda then we cannot achieve reconciliation.  And for me the obvious place to start is in housing.

When I announced the New Housing Agenda in February this year, I very deliberately made Shared Future a central theme in all housing policy development. Although I have always held this view about segregation, it is heartening to know that I am not alone.
The Northern Ireland Life and Times survey has revealed that some 80% of people would, given the choice, live in a mixed neighbourhood. Yet the reality is that those waiting for social housing have very often little or no choice in this regard, and more often than not end up in single identity estates simply because there is no alternative. In the same survey some 52% of people thought that Government could do more to address the problem.
We have now started work on a number of new Shared Future housing developments across Northern Ireland. In these Shared Future developments a considerable amount of community involvement is required to ensure that tenants are ready to commit to sharing and abandoning the trappings of a single identity enclave.

Significant progress has been made on new schemes in Loughbrickland and Sion Mills and I expect to launch these in the coming months. Every new build scheme that now comes forward onto our Social Housing Development Programme will be screened to explore its potential for inclusion as a shared future development. In time, and I accept it will take time, shared future housing in the context of our new build programme must become the norm, not the exception.

However it is not enough just to focus attention on new developments.  The majority of existing social neighbourhoods remain single identity estates.

Over the next three years, we will develop at least 30 Shared Future housing neighbourhoods within existing NI Housing Executive estates. These will offer existing tenants the opportunity to live in a neighbourhood where diversity is welcomed and where there is real encouragement and support.

Five neighbourhoods from across Northern Ireland have already committed to participating in the programme – Springfarm in Antrim, Lissize in Rathfriland, Knockmore/Tonagh in Lisburn, Gortview/Killybrack Close in Omagh and Ballynafeigh in Belfast.
The key for me to this programme, the unique aspect that will make the Programme work, is the community-led nature of it. Neighbourhoods must commit to the Programme, if they seek inclusion within it. It builds on good work already underway within a community where there is already a realisation that a Shared Future will lead to a better future for everyone on the estate. When that desire is there, then the statutory authorities can support it but no amount of money will deliver that support if neighbourhoods are not ready to make that first step.

The first ‘Shared Neighbourhood’ initiative at Springfarm estate in Antrim provides a good example

Springfarm Community Association five years ago identified that older residents were moving away, replaced by younger people who didn’t want to stay long. The estate had a growing reputation for drug dealing, and sectarian attacks were on the increase. Not surprisingly, the Housing Executive struggled to find tenants for empty homes and these vacant properties added to the ant-social behaviour issues in the area

Throughout this time, the Springfarm Community Association worked hard to develop a sense of community cohesion. They improved not just the image of Springfarm but also the physical appearance of their homes, gardens and streets within the estate.  A voluntary charter has been put in place, signed by all residents and embracing anti-sectarian measures as their commitment to a new future, once and for all turning their back on the past. There is now a waiting list to get re-housed in the estate.
 
I want to replicate this work in each of the other 29 neighbourhoods who have signed up to our Programme. Just like Springfarm, they will require support and buy-in from their respective communities. There remains a need for community volunteers to work alongside the Community Cohesion Officers that we will put in to support the Programme. I recognise that some Shared Neighbourhoods will undoubtedly suffer setbacks, but these initiatives will improve the lives of many people.

However for me – while I will celebrate the Shared Future initiatives now underway in new and existing estates – I know their limitations. We can trumpet the progress in the selected areas but the truth is that the Shared Future work we are doing is only possible in areas where there is already a fair degree of cross-community integration. In a sense we are picking off the low-hanging fruit, places where sharing has a chance. At the same time, if we are honest, we are doing relatively little to counter the ghetto mentalities that exist in more staunchly single-identity communities.

Part of the reason for this of course is that our system of allocating houses according to objective need, actually reinforces the status quo. The existing housing segregation means that waiting lists are largely segregated also, so that when a house becomes available to be re-let it is, in the vast majority of instances, going to be allocated to someone of the same community background as the previous tenant – thus perpetuating the segregation.

So a more radical approach is needed if we are serious (and believe me, I am) about stepping up the delivery of ‘Shared Future’ housing. My view is that we now have to regard Shared Future housing as an entitlement for those who want it.  This is a radical proposition, yet it is only replicating what already exists in the Education sector

Many parents today choose the medium of integrated education for their children because they want them to be educated in a mixed, shared environment. The State recognises this demand and generally does its best to meet it. So why do we not offer the same thing in housing? If parents want to bring up their children in a mixed, shared community then surely the State has a duty to meet that demand also?

The Education sector also has a well established Shared Future ‘product’ – the integrated school. We now need to create a similar product in Housing and, although I don’t underestimate the difficulty, I will be undertaking the necessary work to make this a reality.

Factoring Shared Future thinking into the provision and allocation of social housing could have profound implications for both our system of allocating houses (the Housing Selection Scheme) and also our planning of where to build (The Social Housing Development Programme) – but I am convinced that it is necessary.

I also want to factor Shared Future thinking into how DSD develops policy around its many community support programmes and initiatives aimed at tackling deprivation.

I know I will face opposition to this policy direction: There are those who are simply opposed to a Shared Future. In some cases because they find their single identity communities easy to control. Also, some housing and/or equality ‘purists’ will object to any interference with the Housing Selection Scheme – and yet how can they justify a perpetuation of a sectarian carve-up?

This is the big issue in housing and social development. The proverbial elephant in the room. Yet if we don’t radicalise our Shared Future agenda our society will never grow up. And it needs to grow-up.

Do we really want to have a society where the first thing people think about when they meet is ‘which foot’ the other person kicks with? Where we have a Minister changing an official document 150 times because he finds the term ‘Northern Ireland’ unbearable. Where the BBC has a daft ‘policy’ on the use of the word ‘Derry’?  And where paramilitaries still rule the roost in single identity  working class communities all over Northern Ireland.

I believe most people want to move on. They want to ditch all the baggage from the past and build a new future together. They want to make our new society a success.
And what will success look like? There is a great example from the South.

I have a picture in my mind of the Ireland/England Rugby match at Croke Park where 75,000 Irishmen stood respectfully for ‘God Save the Queen’ and many proud Ulstermen stood for a thunderous rendition of Abhrainn na Fheinn.

I have never seen so many tears before a match! But they were tears of joy, a recognition that a special moment had passed. Where a nation was able to show that it had grown-up and buried the prejudices of the past.

When do we get our special moment? 

Isn’t it time for us all to grow up?