Local activism

One of the things that I've been meaning to do since I started in this job is to get organised about supporting our local groups. In my original interview for policy co-ordinator I made a big thing about how fantastic it was to have a network of local groups and contacts. But since I've actually been in charge of that network, I've done very little to develop it or to really support it.

But I'm hoping that's going to change now we have a full staff team in place, and this week I went along to Hackney the first meeting of the new branch there. Like other of our branches, they met in a local pub (the Pembury) which I like as it's part of that continuity of voluntary association that goes back to beyond the eighteenth century (and is kind of related to the phd) where pubs played a role as the location for people to get together and try and change things themselves. However, we were right in the middle of the pub so it wasn't a great location if you actually wanted to have a good debate. But the people involved are really keen and have already been campaigning at the weekend for a borough-wide 20mph limit. The meeting also provided good evidence of how those involved in one group are often involved in many more. So with this meeting, we had people who were already active in Hackney Cyclists, local disability organisations and connected to the civic society. It is easy to label these people as "the usual suspects" but these are the people who do have some initiative and can make the connections between groups and can claim a wider legitimacy through those connections.

These people are also the ones who can galvanise wider support and get that wider "armchair" member support. I was reminded of this at the training day we organise yesterday with CTC and the Campaign for Better Transport for our local activists. Rod King from the Warrington Cycle Campaign was talking about their successes snd the way in which they work, with about 10 activists backed up by 250 members. Not everyone has to be active, but the wider membership can help give legitimacy to their work. The day also made me think about how much of the discourse about the voluntary sector only really talks about, on the one hand, big voluntary organisations who deliver services or who run big national campaigns, and on the other hand the smaller community organisations who work at a local level to improve areas (and only the ones in more deprived areas are of interest to academics or policy makers). But this ignores lots of voluntary activism by members of local groups of national organisations, like Friends of the Earth, the WI or Citizens Advice. These associations are vital in linking national policy with what is happening at a local level, and government strategy should recognise this more.

Olympic week

This week seems to have been a bit Olympic (in between work on padded lamp posts).

Cabe's away day for their enablers at Leyton Orient on Wednesday included presentations on the development of the Olympic site and what supposed to come after, with the paving needed for the games coming out and then a move to make it more like a park, with housing development from both sides then coming in to mingle with the parkland to create Elysian fields. Or something. Though Simon Barnett, who's our representative on an Olympic advisory board, says that there are concerns that the legacy plans are being scaled back and the parkland is being shrunk too much.

Cabe's awayday also involved a tour on a minicoach around the Olympic site, for which we needed to present our passport and were warned that on no account were we allowed to take photos of the site for copyright reasons. All that you can really see at the moment is just the work to essentially flatten everything on site, clean up the contaminated soil with big soil washing machines, and some of the more major infrastructure changes, such as a new embankment of the Lea so that barges can be used to bring in material (and therefore reduce some of the impact of lorry trips on the surrounding area). There is a real corporate control of the presentation of the plans, with much emphasis on the green sustainability of the development (for instance they intend to reuse on site 90% of the materials from demolishing existing structures). Though demanding 3,000 cars and dedicated lanes for the IOC doesn't quite fit with this.

In contrast to the presentation on Thursday, Pete and I went to a talk at the Museum of London by Peter Marshall on Thursday. His view of the Olympics was much more cynical - his talk showing pictures of a changing East London implied that the Olympics will end up similar to the docklands developments with flats for the rich while those living outside the new developments get left behind (though he did criticise the docklands developments for lacking an overall plan - but then implied criticism for the Olympics for being the opposite and having too controlling a plan for the area).

I think like most Londoners I have a pretty ambivalent view about the Olympics in 2012, based around thinking it's all a bit of a waste of money but keen (through work) to make the most of the opportunity. The appeal for lots of people (particularly government departments and quangos) is that the 2012 games has two things that make organisations want to get involved and try and develop their own plans to add to it - firstly a nice clear target date in five years time, and secondly the awareness that there's a lot of cash going to be spent to make sure it happens and that other activities get linked into it. Which explains why we'll be having a number of meetings on related plans on this at work next week...