The Peterborough Pravda. Is this what Louise Mensch wants from local media?

****

Yesterday, Louise Mensch – the MP for Corby – argued that local newspapers are an essential cog in our democracy:

She called on the government to conduct a review into "local democracy and the local press" to see if there might be some sort of direct or indirect subsidy that could support the sector.

She attacked plans for local TV stations, which will compete against newspapers, because the proposed funding plans include using part of the licence fee as well as BBC content.

Now there are a few obvious things that might be said about Mrs Mensch’s suggestions not least that Tory MPs calling for business subsidies is a wholly new experience for this very long-standing Tory member.

However, at the heart of this isn’t the question of whether we have a local press – in my view we have as vibrant a local debate as we’ve had in a very long while. But here in Bradford very little of that debate is down to the local evening paper.

Local papers have declined, many have merged, closed or become mere shadows – more advertising sheets that newspapers. And that decline continues – think for a second or two where you go to look for a job, a car, a house or the cinema listings? In times past you bought the local rag on the appropriate day and looked in the class ads. Now you use your lap top or your iPhone – tomorrow you’ll be using the telly in your living room.

Local newspapers have become ever more reliant on the money that local councils spend – the statutory notices, job ads and theatre listings. Without this cash, many more local papers would go to the wall. Maybe this would be a loss but it is the market that is killing these papers not the choices or decisions of local councils. People no longer buy the evening paper – 30 years ago the penetration of the York Evening Press was up at around 80%. Hardly a house in the City didn’t receive the paper. Today that paper sells around 25,000 copies each day (as it happens about the same as Bradford’s Telegraph & Argus). The Doncaster Star sells fewer than 3,000 copies.

It seems to me that, for all her good intentions, Mrs Mensch is railing against the wind – for sure, stopping councils from producing their own free newspapers and not using the license fee to support local TV might slow the decline a little. But the decline will continue for the simple reason that people no longer buy the local paper and local businesses no longer advertise in the local paper. And while this is happening local papers reduce their editorial staff – I fear that many will simply be desk-bound churners of press releases (which isn’t why anyone went to journalism school) – to the point where they simply don’t have the resource to cover stories.

However, public subsidy – using taxpayers’ money to stop local papers closing – seems like a recipe for a supine, state-directed newspaper. Something of a Pravda of Peterborough or Isvestia of Ipswich – regurgitating the tractor stats produced by the local authorities and printing without question or challenge the words of the local MP. A ghastly shade of the challenging, offending and investigating local paper of legend.

Maybe that’s what Mrs Mensch wants but for me, I’ll take my changes with bloggers, Facebook and citizen journalism. That might just be the better future don’t you think?

....

SHOCK: Mayor of Doncaster complies with Labour Government advice on translation!

A huge furore greeted the announcement by the newly elected Mayor of Doncaster that translation services should be scrapped. This was proof positive that said mayor was either mad, stupid or racist - or possibly all three.

However, Peter Davies' proposals are, in truth, pretty close to the best practice advice from the Department for Communities & Local Government (DCLG):

“As our guidance on translation makes clear, we believe translation needs to be targeted and evidence-based; and provide a stepping stone to learning English. So we would expect areas to find out whether new migrants can speak English, only translate where they cannot and then make information packs bilingual or be clear about how people can learn English.”

Given that the implementation of the Mayor's policy is resulting in the redirection of funding to the provision of ESOL courses and support perhaps we should applaud Doncaster for being one of the few local councils to follow John Denham and the Labour Government's advice? Courses that, in a classic piece of dysfunctional government, Labour cut!

Why three days in Doncaster hasn't put me off having an elected mayor in Bradford!

I have spent that last three days as an "accredited member peer" in Doncaster - a really interesting place and a fascinating council! And, as I'm sure you also know, Doncaster has a directly elected executive mayor. Furthermore many of you will also know that - after eight years of a Labour mayor (following 30-odd years of Labour control) - the good folk of Doncaster elected Peter Davies standing as an English Democrat as their mayor.

Experiencing from within the Council the effect of this surprise has been particularly interesting. The press coverage of Mayor Davies has focused on his less-than-liberal views but little of no attention has gone to what the new mayor is actually trying to do. And the processes involved in developing strategies and programmes that respond to Mayor Davies' agenda (while at the same time recognising that he has no party, that Labour remains the largest political group on the council and that there are wider regional or national agendas to take account of as well).

Now those who oppose elected mayors cite election results such as this one, the election of H'angus the Monkey in Hartlepool (who is now in his third term of office - amazing what free bananas can do) and the chaos that is politics in Stoke as arguments against elected mayors. The relatively successful mayoral systems in Bedford (where there's a mayoral by-election following the death of that mayor), Newham and North Tyneside seem to get less interest or attention.

For me though - and this comes at a time when Bradford Council is consulting on whether to move to a directly elected mayor or for councillors to elect a leader and cabinet for four years - elected mayors provide a real opportunitiy for new, independent and better directed local leadership. But my dear colleagues who lead the main Bradford parties are all firmly opposed to having an elected mayor. For the record here's my take on those colleagues views:

1. Opposition from many Conservatives isn't about the principle (will an elected mayor lead to better governance in Bradford and/or a more effective council) but is about a feeling that we wouldn't win! As Conservative's we're supposed to be sceptical not cynical! It's also party policy as far as I know!

2. Those who talk about the "root of the problem" not being addressed (like Bradford's Liberal Democrat leader) fail to articulate what that problem might be. Here's a guess: assuming it's not a Liberal Democrat mayor, that party would lose much of its ability to hold much larger parties to ransom and to play one side off against another. They would need to begin to engage positively in local politics.

3. Apparently the local Labour party believe that a mayor isn't right for Bradford - what on earth does that mean? Most often it is suggested that having a mayor would exclude the Asian community - as if we're likely to get an Asian council leader in the foreseeable future! Electing a mayor reduces the Labour Party's ability (and other parties for that matter) to use ethnicity and the politics of faith in manipulating support from these communities - surely that would be a good thing? Unless you're just interested in power!

Even having seen up close the impact of a mayoral system in Doncaster, I still think it has great merits. Above all elected mayors allow for independent candidates to get elected and, even from the main parties, reduce the power of party dictat and the whip. And it is a far better system than electing a leader and cabinet for four years - that's much the same (although Bradford's Liberal Democrat leader clearly hasn't read the policy) as electing a mayor directly. Except less democratic and less transparent.

Bring it on in Bradford!!