What do they mean when they refer to "resilient Cities" and who are they?
If my experiences in Brixton are anything to go by, then the answer to the second part of the question is "sociopathic idiots" either elected or employed in local government planning, legal, regeneration or housing departments; 'ignorant' self-interested council Leaders or fat-cat, incompetent, 'unsackable' local council chief executives.
As for "Resilient Cities", then the answer flows into another question - "resilient" for whom? Lambeth council has recently been reported as having 'stolen' up to £60 million from the public's purse by 'investing' in one dominant primae facie quality project in Clapham. David Cameron's "Big Society" mantra appears to only apply to helping big 'investors' to expand their property portfolios. The locals can go to pot (literally!)
The project I am thinking of was one site quoted as presently costing £80-100 million. Glamour personified, is one way of seeing this project (if one has poor taste and believe that all that glitters is gold). No one has mentioned quality, and no one has mentioned that whilst having not carried out the majority of repairs on estates in 'poor' depreciating neighbourhoods for years, repairs monies are being 'stolen' to 'invest' in this 'prestige'. But never fear, it's a "mixed development" and will even incorporate a library - Gosh!
I have read too many reports on the mess that has been created across Nigerian Towns and Cities as a result of 'slum clearances'. I need not mention Robert Mugabe stooping to 'tribal & political' discrimination to enforce evictions to enable him to'achieve' his take on 'regenerating' parts of Cities in his country.
If we simply extrapolate, we can see how easy it is for us to arrive at the same destination as our African brethren.We need go no further than look at the plastic, primary-coloured 'housing' projects promoted by the uneducated buffoon John Prescott to see a real bad future in housing and land use.
I was shocked to find, for example, that, in an interview with Dominic Grieve, (now the UK's Attorney General), he did not know what a "mixed development" was. I mean zero knowledge. There were riots happening in France at the time, and Sarkozy had made some inflammatory remarks about some of the local youths.
Once I realised that he had a unrepairable and complete blind-spot which could not even begin to engage with any sensible discussions around community up-liftment or instilling community opportunities and aspirations, I knew that we were done.
ON another occasion, I attempted to have a conversation with Philis(sic) Starkey, (chair of the then Parliament select committee ODPM), I predicted the 'down-turn' in the economy, and told her when. I made certain references to the housing market and social housing in particular. This jack-ass's response was "we don't deal with individual cases". I take it she was making reference to my being harassed in that building in a bid to stop me making any political contributions. If I were being cynical, I would have said that my Black female face did not fit.
I mention this last case, because it was clear to me, that if these politicians who were writing reports and making recommendations could not 'engage' with 'their' subject or 'engage' with the very people they claim to be interested in, then the public were in deep trouble.
Hence my apprehension on hearing the term "resilient Cities" being banded around without any mention of risk prevention and anti-corruption elements as core elements of the discussion. For me, it also requires a real and profound care for people, and people-centered architecture.
The use of poor quality people in management or poor quality material is one and the same thing. The first will promote the use of the later. Which will inevitably make people very unhappy.
This could lead to unnecessary 'dispersal' policies, which would lead to neighbourhoods being stripped of their characters, vacuums forming, into which criminals and other miscreants will quick enter.
I want to see planners who have the confident to do their jobs fairly, without feeling jealous and 'inadequate' where architects and their duties are concerned. Planners, no matter how many ways, they want it to be so, are NOT architects. And whilst we are at it, neither are developers. I have had to many conversations with rich investors or developers, who tell me, that "anyone can do what an architect does". I have even been told that a building can be "designed" on "the back of a packet of fags...by anyone!"
No wonder, the beer-guzzling donkey called John Prescott, and the self-aggrandising prince charles, felt happy surrounded by these types. They were kindred spirits.
The point is, ordinary, normal people are not interested in living 'through' these delusional characters. Normal people do not expect to go home with prince charles, or whoever it may be, to share their bed in some palace, or Prescott's former pad. They want to go home to their own homes, to their own happy families, in a 'nice' area.
Therefore, if we are aiming at real 'resilient Cities', then every-bodies standard of living should be raised, and every-bodies expectations of the design of their housing & neighbourhoods should be raised to the highest levels. 'Consultations' which involve hand-picking local sychophantic village idiots will not do. Its the equivalent of asking a blind man to tell you what he can see. One or two may claim, they can 'make out shadows or 'outlines', but we all know this is a lie.
Educating the wider general public (especially in poorer neighbourhoods) is essential, but not essential at the hands of unqualified and contempt-filled individuals. I don't know how to answer the "who" here, but I do know that there needs to be a mechanism set up to really 'reach' residents. I know that this has been recommended in the past, and I do know that there is a definite danger, that ordinary, normal people have and are being intimidated away from participation. I am also struck that in many cases, ONLY uneducated older people are encouraged in. Which speaks more about the 'temporary' mindset of programmers and planners, and 'their' vibe of "no-hope" and lack of respect.
Risk prevention and anti-corruption mechanisms should be an automatic part of events. So should instant dismissal and other performance accelerators be installed as motivators. Otherwise the boat will be overloaded in one direction, causing the whole thing to want to tip over.
Brixton, has already 'tipped over' , it just a matter of who will be given to task to rescue it from itself. The area has been swamped & flooded with immigrants for years, under Labour. DWP and UK Borders have bent over backwards to pay for and advance these 'fiesty', criminal-fraternity strangers, at the expense of deep-rooted residents.
These risks were ignored by the incompetent ignorant IMF-job-applying 'emotional dunce' Gordon Brown. The public should never be put in that position again. The same goes for the issue of crime. I have heard toe-curling tales of how "cheap and easy" it is to 'buy a policeman'. "Cash for Police" or "Cash for Police stories" are common place. Criminals are left deliberately on the loose to torment specific sections of the community, informers are allowed to murder, rape and even commit incest, with the total backing of Borough commanders and the most senior police officers in Scotland Yard. The senior police men and women sell class A drugs, guns and even go out on 'crimes' with their criminal "community-leader" mates. All these things have to be seriously factored in to the equation.
Otherwise, we may as well prepare to all carry a gun, live in gated communities, and 'unlearn' the art of conversation. I am confident in myself, but I do not hold up much hope in others abilities. However, I am an optimist, and I have faith in the human condition improving. Whether that condition will improve for Black people across the UK is questionable. I am naturally active, but the majority are not, plus they are easily led into the negative. I recommend hitting the negative king-pins (usually older men), and the young will eventually get the message.
