A Tale of Three Towns: What Denbigh can learn

In recent posts, I have chosen to focus on the current status of the high street where I live. I may be deluding myself, but the responses to the existing discussion strongly suggest that a core nucleus of people care passionately about our town. That is as good a starting point as any.

I received a really well worded response from someone this morning citing the strengths and weaknesses of the existing high street. The respondent made the point that high streets such as the one in Denbigh will ultimately become venues for local services such as cafes, hairdressers, nail salons, bookies etc. It was also pointed out how valuable it can be to have a local butcher. Instead of having to buy your meat pre-packed in the weight dictated by the large supermarket, the local butcher can supply your exact need. If you are part of a couple or living alone, this can be a massive difference. So, instead of buying 500g of minced beef in a plastic container, your local butcher can supply you with a lesser amount with far less packaging. In most of the arguments I've heard so far bemoaning the future of our high street, many people seem to overlook the mind boggling amount of plastic packaging foisted upon us by the large supermarkets. I detest it and also worry about it's impact on our environment. It takes up to a thousand years to degrade in some instances so sustaining such an approach is actually irresponsible.

Today, I intend to focus on two towns of comparable size to illustrate that the high street in Denbigh is faced with an opportunity rather than a threat. I will describe the first town to you. In 2001, it had a population of 9,458. This is very similar to that of Denbigh. It has a famous castle just like Denbigh. It has a well known supermarket on the periphery of the town centre just like Denbigh. It has limited car parking in the centre of the town just like Denbigh. It has a healthy quota of pubs just like Denbigh. It has a fair smattering of charity shops being run by a willing army of volunteers just like Denbigh. It has a small theatre just like Denbigh. It also has a predominance of independent shops which are extremely well supported by the local community. Like Denbigh it also has an area which has not had the rub of the green when it comes to jobs and opportunity. The town I refer to here is Ludlow.

On a recent placement which lasted for 15 weeks, I had the opportunity to observe Ludlow at close quarters. A number of aspects were immediately noteworthy. The first thing to note was the absence of empty shop premises on the main high street. The second was the large number of local shoppers on foot. They were enabled by large pedestrian areas in the town centre. It was very pleasing to see such a high ration of independent shops to multi national chains. There was no doubt that the former were in the ascendency in Ludlow. Aside form their impressive variety, their service to the public was wonderful to see. They did have a moderate sized Tesco but you always got the feeling that the Tesco remained secondary to the town centre. That was because planning for the Tesco was only granted with the town centre in mind. The local planners did not make life easy for the Tesco and have restricted the extent to which it can impact on their high street. They got the important bit right - they recognised the absolute importance of a vibrant high street with respect to the local economy which they serve. Their castle is of a similar age to the one in Denbigh but is utilised far more. It is the centre piece of most of their festivals and is situated right next to their highly prized daily street market which they have fought so hard to maintain. It is to their credit that they have done so because they now boast a thriving high street as a result. In other words, they have resisted too much change for the sake of change and sought to retain the character and strength of their high street.

Moving a little closer to home, the second town which I would like to highlight is also notable for it's thriving street market. At the time of writing, it too boasts a healthy high street with very few empty retail premises. Until recently, it has only allowed a moderate sized Tesco on the periphery in such a way as to maintain the integral strength of it's high street. Mold is down the road in Flintshire and the local council charged with the responsibility of sustaining the vibrant high street look as though they are now going to grant planning to a large Sainsburys as well. That aside, the town has held it's own even with the added threat of Tesco. The market is held twice weekly and is well supported and attended. As with Ludlow, the variety and quality of the independent shops is excellent even if the ratio of multi national chains is slightly higher.

It should not be too difficult for Denbigh to observe the towns I have highlighted and seek to emulate some of their more sensible strategies. Just because our high street has sported empty shops recently doesn't mean they can't be filled provided the will exists to support them and the shops themselves seek to offer all that is good about the independent sector; great quality and service. The re-introduction of a street market shouldn't even be open to debate in Denbigh and I would strongly advocate more pedestrian zones in the town centre. I would finally play the trump card all day long - Mold doesn't have a castle like Denbigh. Ludlow does and uses it for all it's worth. Denbigh should be doing likewise because many other towns would give anything to have such an obvious asset.

The forthcoming St. David's Day festival will be great for Denbigh and I'm really looking forward to going along to support the town. But the town needs this sort of event to be the norm - not the exception.

Lies, damn lies and statistics

The recent decision by my local Council to cease funding for Rhyl Sun Centre has provoked a great deal of criticism. How much of that is fair remains to be seen.

Seeking to defend their decision, the local Council cited the inability of the appointed (not for profit) management organisation to contend with a 2.8% reduction in it's subsidy. That amounted to £50,000 annually. It is open to conjecture how their proposed £10 million project for an Aquatic Centre now looks given the importance attached to £50,000.

Of course, the real reason for closure of the three sites in Rhyl and Prestatyn is perhaps as barn door obvious as it seems. The smoke screen speaks of ineffective management and infrastructure in need of repair and upgrade. Much has also been made of the "shelf life" of the sites in question. The latter tickles me because even a tent will last for decades if constructed and looked after properly. The former North Wales Hospital was built in 1848. Had it not been for a series of outrageous decisions since it's doors finally closed in 1995, I have no doubt it would be still be standing and ready for another century of public service. I was under the impression that building had progressed since the Victorian era but I stand corrected if that is not the case. Perhaps it is the decision making which has deteriorated since Victorian times rather than the actual construction?

Returning to the closures though, it is obvious that the real motive has been cost saving. For all the rubbish spun out regarding mismanagement and deterioration, closure of the three sites will immediately save the Council millions of pounds per annum when they are being asked to make savings - in common with just about every other council in the UK. To debate whether such cuts is right or wrong is fast becoming academic because they are clearly here to stay. What is not academic is to discuss the most appropriate areas for these cuts to take place. The management structure at my Local Council is mind boggling. When I worked in the Private Sector for the largest wholesale food supplier in the UK, the machine was meaner and infinitely leaner. Every penny spent had to be justified and accounted for and if cuts were made, they were invariably based on past performance. We had nowhere near the number of managers which the local Council employs. The same local Council has this week announced a £250,000 project aimed at attracting tourists to the town of Ruthin.

The same local Council also gave the thumbs up to Tesco a few years back and it's fair to say the effect on the local high street has been significant. So rather than pursuing the attentions of tourists who might only visit sporadically, would it not be more instructive to try and pursue the local residents who appear to have deserted their high street in droves? Or is this not the priority of the council? I can only comment on what I see in front of my eyes and the evidence to suggest that the local Council is serious about high street regeneration is currently a little thin on the ground.

In a mirror image of the situation unfolding in my County, the locals of Ruabon and Plas Madoc are fighting to try and overturn the decision to close Plas Madoc Leisure Centre. As in my home county, the story is depressingly familiar. Two perfectly adequate leisure facilities are being dropped in favour of a new centre. The rationale is doubtless the same - perceived cost savings. A good friend of mine has recently ascertained that the Council making that decision had been paying a staggering £40,000 per annum for the lease of a photocopying machine. That leisure site was being run by the Council - not an outside body. I'm no expert on photocopy machines, but I would suggest that I could buy a reasonably good one for a fraction of that amount!

When any of us seek to justify the money we are spending in our own lives, we usually have to think about the impact of those decisions on our families and loved ones. I would have thought the same principle would hold for the local council?

Time for new blood?

As the local council elections draw closer, I have taken time to reflect on where we are and where we might be five years hence. A cursory glance at the incumbent local councillors reveals one stark reminder as to how far we have to go. The most obvious feature of the current councillors where I live is their age.

While they all undoubtedly have experience of sorts from all walks of life, it is their age which is likely to be least attractive to the one sub section of voters most disenfranchised as I write. When local council elections were last held in Denbigh, just 591 of the 1,583 eligible to vote did so. Much criticism (justified in my opinion) was expressed when the new Police Commissioners were recently elected throughout the UK. The counter argument always follows that democracy is being played out irrespective of the turn out. I counter that it is not healthy to content ourselves with voter turn outs of one in three. Even with a half full glass and brimming with optimism, I know that this falls well short of our democratic aspirations. But why does it?

It does so because the current incumbents of public office have failed to engage with a significant proportion of the total electorate. Maybe people really have given up on the democratic process but maybe they haven't. Maybe it's time for younger candidates to come forward with a voice more sympathetic to the aspirations of their peer group. I would happily vote for a younger candidate if only to inject some balance for the existing cohort of councillors. Experience is a wonderful quality but it also comes with baggage. Experience warns us against risk. Experience urges us to play safe. Experience convinces us we have all the answers.

Youth comes with a different set of qualities. Failure is often something yet to be experienced. That is a massive advantage. Youth can see how something can work. Experience can see the pitfalls. Youth has the imagination to see beyond the obstacles. Experience can become too focused on the obstacles. I could go on but I hope my point is made.

If the forthcoming elections were to yield an influx of younger members, I'm sure the town would be the winner. In a recent group I set up exploring what it was that people would like to see on our high street to  make it more attractive and vibrant, I was overwhelmed with the number of responses. Sadly, those responses featured too few of the views and insights of our younger age groups. There is nothing I would love more than to see some of the under 30s become actively involved with THEIR town.

If the next elections are decided by the votes of three quarters of the electorate, we will have a better chance of being represented by a more age diverse subset of councillors. It is not that I have any misgivings about any of the current incumbents - I don't. I know how hard they all work often behind the scenes for little reward. I would just like to see a better spread of our community and witness the youth getting more involved. Those I've spoken to are brimming with fantastic ideas so let's try and engage them to take the next step. The energy of youth is a vital resource which I feel we are currently missing out on.

If we really want to see a vibrant high street in our local town, I feel passionately that we can only do so with the involvement of all age groups and we are currently missing out. In their seminal song "Teach your Children", Crosby, Stills and Nash recognised fully the symbiotic relationship between the old and the young. While the first part of the song urges parents to teach their children well, the second part provides the balance by urging the young to teach their parents well. It cuts both ways.

Hunger in a Civilised World

The decision by our most prominent Church leaders to write an open letter protesting at the growing numbers of people needing food is a long overdue debate. The growth of food banks has been well documented in recent times as many of us have continued to feel the after effects of the recession.

All recessions result in misery and it is sadly the poorest in society who inevitably fare the worst as jobs become more scarce. The debate this morning on the Today programme concentrated on how to solve this problem. While I applaud that approach, I would also urge people to engage in seeking the cause. If the cause is removed, the problem will be addressed more effectively.

As I write, we live in a purportedly civilised society. Food waste has never been so high. In equal measure, the general public and the all conquering supermarkets must both shoulder their share of the blame. I would struggle to think of a more immoral scenario than this one. On the one hand, we have increasing numbers of people going hungry (this is 2014) and increasing levels of food being thrown away. Yes, we have food banks and for some they have literally become a lifeline. As the welfare budget has been cut, those dependent upon it have become ever more squeezed.

Did the new Government in 2010 have the choice to maintain the welfare budget? Sadly, I don't think they did. They have introduced a new system which encourages people to work if they are able to do so but this is not a new system. This is the very system upon which Beveridge built the Welfare State after the war. One of the problems has been the way in which successive Governments have allowed the budget to rise. In so doing, they have perpetuated a culture of dependency upon it. The Welfare State was never designed for such an outcome. I have genuine sympathy for the disabled, carers and those genuinely unable to work. These are the very people for whom the Welfare State was designed. I was a carer for my first wife for over two years and received the princely sum of £11 per week for the privilege. It's not that I wasn't grateful for that money because I most certainly was. It's just that it was patently insufficient and in no way recognised the true worth of the millions of carers who continue to work for their loved ones every day. The money they save the NHS is incalculable.

When a new Government comes to power, it is faced with assessing the state of the nation's finances before it can start making promises about spending money and this Coalition was no different. We can argue about the speed of the cuts but we can't argue about the need to make them. Our country was in a financial mess and they have had the thankless task of addressing that. I do not profess political allegiance to the Coalition but I do recognise that they had to take the decision they took. Whether the deficit was caused by the outgoing Labour party or the Global recession or a combination of the two is frankly irrelevant now.

But the real question remains; why are people going hungry? In truth there are many reasons for this. I find it interesting that religious leaders have entered the fray at a time when religion has seldom seemed less relevant. They deserve great credit for initiating the debate. In the days when our churches were well attended, a man would not stand by and witness his fellow man suffer the indignity of hunger. I certainly wouldn't. The demise of our community spirit has contributed largely to this and has been brought about by a succession of ill advised policies.

I listened to the CEO of British Gas (Centrica ) this morning defending the prices being charged by his company. It is reported that 3% have left in the last year with many more expected to follow. That is one glimmer of good news in that the competition within the energy market is beginning to warm up. If we still had our coal industry, this problem need not be as bad as it is. Still, we are where we are so we must look forwards and not back. Looking forwards, we need to invest in strategies which will reduce the cruel levels of fuel poverty. Having to choose between heating or eating is a tough choice. It is all the more so when you are an elderly person living alone. Again, if our community was functioning as it once did (and as it still should), we would not stand by and tolerate such an outcome.

I have recently highlighted the need to support our local high streets. The main reason why I support this so passionately is that this constitutes the community hub. The church, the pub, the cafe, the grocer, the butcher, the cobbler. The list goes on but these services should be at the centre of our lives - not on the periphery. The supermarkets should be on the periphery but a succession of Governments both national and local have welcomed them with open arms. Had they stopped for one minute to consider the consequences, they might not have been so quick to do so. The effect on local jobs has been catastrophic but the effects on local community has been devastating. A vibrant high street correlates with a vibrant community spirit and if you don't believe me go to towns like Barnsley (overtly Labour), Ludlow (overtly Tory) and others. They demonstrate that you can have a healthy high street in spite of one of the supermarkets. Politics has little to do with it. This is all about people making community choices when they spend their money - if they want to live within a strong community. It is the role of our independent high street shops to be community orientated and distance themselves from the cynical marketing ploys of the share holder driven supermarkets. We pay our money and we take our choice...

I listened yesterday to an interesting programme exploring the recent trend which has seen the big four supermarkets see their takings stagnate while the discounters such as LIDL and Aldi have prospered. An expert was charged with buying the same basket of shopping fro LIDL and Tesco. They were not buying foie gras - just basic food such as bread, milk, eggs, vegetables, fruit, cereal etc. The basket from LIDL costed £17. The equivalent basket from Tesco costed £27. Even with a clubcard, that is an almighty difference for the many millions living on or near the bread line.

But how far have we sunk when supermarkets are throwing food in to skips at the rear of their premises and seeking to prosecute those trying to rescue some of that food for their consumption. How much food are we all throwing away and why are we doing that? What do food banks represent to us? Do we see them as solutions for the needy or do we see them as an indictment of our civilised society?

Mold: A great market town under siege?

In several recent posts I have highlighted some of the challenges facing Denbigh. It is the town where I live so understandably occupies my thoughts more than other towns. I have highlighted the need for the town to reconnect with it's roots and return to the high street. Unlike many similar sized towns, Denbigh has thus far only had to deal with the effect of one of the big four supermarkets. That has been quite enough as evidenced by the depressing numbers of empty shop units currently available. Still, this piece is intended to provide optimism and I still believe passionately that the local community can once more make their high street a vibrant place should they choose to support it in the way their forebears did.

Across the border in Flintshire lies the historic market town of Mold. Despite the presence of a very large Tesco store on the outskirts of their town centre, Mold has arguably maintained it's high street better than Denbigh. Most would agree that the presence of their twice weekly street market has been a vital factor in this. The current street market in Denbigh is a mere shadow of it's predecessors of yesteryear. The market in Mold though continues to punch above it's weight and provides an important focal point for visitors to the town. The way Mold has prospered is an example of what similar sized market towns can achieve if they get the fundamental basics right.

As I write though, Mold is on the verge of another battle. Not content with one large supermarket, the local council is weighing up the prospect of sanctioning another - directly over the road from the existing one! While I admire greatly the way in which Mold has weathered the retail storm up to now, I genuinely fear for the future of their high street should Sainsbury's be granted planning permission. It's hard to see how the decision makers can possibly justify the absurdity of such a move. I could be forgiven for thinking they don't even want a high street in their town centre. Should they choose to look at the high street of just about any town in the UK which has been subjected to this retail onslaught, they will see exactly what I mean. What chance the green grocer, the butcher, the florist, the newsagent, the electrical shop, the cafes? The list just goes on and on because the supermarkets are sustained by corporate greed. They don't want a slice of the cake. They want all of the cake. Their unrivalled buying power means they often get the whole cake while town centre businesses fall over like dominos.

I hope the local council doesn't give the green light to this latest move but if they do, I can predict with near certainty the future for the high street in Mold. At present, local people who frequent the street market catch up with old friends and have a chat. The market is a social hub which sustains community. The supermarket does not do this. People park up, fill their trolley and go home. If that were not true, there would not be a vacant retail unit on the high street in Denbigh. As I write, there are seventeen at the last count. I wonder how much evidence the local council would need to acknowledge the perils of their retail strategy?

A toxic partner

My local council has today stumbled on to their latest "strategy" for Rhyl. The once popular seaside town on our coast which entertained the Beatles 50 years ago has recently been subjected to a swathe of council cuts to key services principally in the leisure sector. As the location of choice for thousands of holiday makers for many years, the promenade at Rhyl now stands as evidence for what happens when local government get involved. All the evidence today paints a picture of a local council with no understanding of the sea front at Rhyl. They certainly show no signs of understanding what made Rhyl THE place to be for so many years for so many people.

Having erected the Children's Village in the late 1980s amid a fanfare of optimism, the then council (since renamed) assured everyone that it was money well spent. Even it's location beggared belief. Originally intended to augment the now rotting SkyTower, the new Children's Village was built nearby. It achieved several notable feats. It blocked the view of the sea (which had for decades been what people came to see!). It blocked an important access point to the sea. It has toilets for which visitors have to pay and it must rank as one of the biggest wastes of money in the history of local government in this part of North Wales. It still stands as a somewhat grotesque relic of a previous administration. Defiant to the last, they continue to resist calls for it's demolition. To do so would be to admit failure and so the impasse continues as Rhyl continues to receive a fraction of the visitors it used to enjoy.

Just recently, the now renamed council has just announced the closure of the nearby Sun Centre, Nova Centre and Bowling Centre. They have today hinted strongly that the future of the Pavilion Theatre is now also under threat. The former fun fair was demolished a number of years ago and has stood vacant ever since. It has the appearance of a town which has just been abandoned. In truth, it has.

The council today assures us that the best way forward will be a new Aquatic Centre being run by a combination of private sector and the local council. In all honesty, what kind of company in the private sector would seriously contemplate entering in to a business arrangement with our local council. Their CV in business in Rhyl reads like a car crash. Let's hope they won't be needed to organise any celebrations in the local brewery..

In truth, if the existing monstrosities along the sea front were just demolished, it would be a vast improvement on the current "vista". No matter how curious and forgiving the tourist, there's a limit to how many rusting, rotting dysfunctional buildings you can view. It would also have the added bonus of having even less need for local council involvement. Based on their track record over the last quarter of a century, that might not be such a bad idea.

I know it's radical but I wonder whether they've ever considered seeking the views and opinions of the people who actually live there or the people who visit. Maybe it's time for the people to reclaim their town from the ravages of local government before they build something else. I can but hope.

In the private sector businesses are judged on their performance. Enough said.  

NHS Superstores?

The decision to recruit the former Chief Executive of Marks and Spencer to advise our NHS managers is the latest evidence of the consumerist healthcare model coming of age. I don't doubt that Stuart Rose will have plenty of suggestions for the current managers but what is he being asked to achieve? Is it just saving money or is it improving services? Or is it the political ideal which remains a combination of the two?

Either way, I'm not sure I see the merit in this latest step. Granted, our NHS is facing huge logistical challenges which are being worsened by the day. Advances in medical science and our existing obsession with evidence based medicine mean that national guidelines now exist for virtually every symptom faced by your local GP on a daily basis. The litigation culture foisted upon us from across the pond has ensured that medicine is now operating in a more defensive manner than ever before. It has no choice. A doctor not adhering rigidly to national guidelines now faces the litigious consequences if he/she doesn't. That only speaks of the current national guidelines from the medical side of the fence though.

What is being ignored by just about everybody is the numbers of patients presenting to emergency departments and GP practices for spurious reasons. Recent estimates suggest that as many as 40% of A and E presentations are inappropriate. The knock on effect on the hospital is considerable with precious man power being needlessly swallowed up. Many of those presenting to A and E complain that they have been unable to get an appointment at their local GP. They might just be right! As far as I know though, nothing is being done to follow up these people.

We can only improve our current NHS when we are aware of it's major shortcomings. If GP opening hours are not insufficient, I suggest we need to look at that. Likewise, we also need to address whether we have enough GPs on the ground. For fear of sounding overly simplistic, an effective Primary Care will exert huge relief on the currently stressed Secondary Care sector.

Stuart Rose may know a lot about the logistics of running a business but I wonder if he has an understanding of the biggest stressors currently impacting on the NHS? Far too little is being done in the way of patient education. If more people were made more aware of the simple decisions they can make to promote healthy living, much of the current overload would be reduced. For some, it may well be too late as the damage may already have been done. That is why, we desperately need to be targeting our children - and their parents.

The decision to legislate against smoking in cars with children on board sounds like the nanny state. But there is a perfectly good reason for this legislation. Stuart Rose has been brought in because he is a businessman and, to all intents and purposes, the NHS has to be run as an accountable business. With one small difference. The NHS is the only business I know of which remains free at the point of access to every man, woman and child. If we're going to continue with this promise, we need to start attaching certain conditions. Joe Public needs to understand his/her obligations in that deal - and it is a deal. While autonomy remains a key ethical principle, there has to come a point when somebody draws a line in the sand at the "free at the point of access" bit.

Recent figures highlighted the cost of treating alcohol related illness in the North East of England. That just speaks of alcohol - not tobacco, not sugar and not any of the army of drugs now on offer. That also just speaks of the North East of England which is after all just a small part of the whole. Addiction though remains a part of human culture and behaviour and the current spending on mental health and medical education is woeful.

If we all picture the NHS as a long piece of pipe, it's time to avert our gaze from the A and E department at the one end and instead focus on the people entering the pipe at the other.

Trust the polls?

Comparing the 2015 general election to 1997 is frankly absurd. In 1997, there was no other option because after 18 years of Conservative government, the public needed fresh ideas. The media had blown up the concept of sleeze in a successful bid to topple the Tories. Since then of course, we have seen that sleeze is a feature of all political parties.

Major's victory in 1992 was thinner than a rizla paper and he spent the next five years achieving very little in the way of constructive legislation. He did sort out thew economy though. It was his administration which built the foundation upon which growth was achieved under Blair and Brown. That they spent it in so profligate a manner is another debate.

It's clear that many Liberal voters have defected to Labour just as many Tory voters have defected to UKIP. Come judgement day though, these waverers will be faced with the age old conundrum. Vote for the party which best represents my political principles or vote for the next best thing which at least has a chance of outright power. Going for the latter could return us to the days of majority government. Going for the former will make coalitions the political norm.

People will therefore evaluate the performance of this coalition and compare it to the it's Labour predecessor. On that basis, I can see more UKIP waverers returning to the Tory ranks and more Labour voters returning to their Liberal roots. The 1992 prediction is therefore the more realistic of the two. Such an outcome though will give us a government with one hand tied behind it's back and I would sooner see a eurosceptic coalition instead.

This coalition has been more of a disaster for Clegg than Cameron but that is usually the price to pay for being the junior partner. The age group who will punish Clegg the most is the students for whom he broke his promise on tuition fees. Historically though, this is the age group least likely to even enter the ballot box - never mind vote. For that reason, I don't think Clegg will come off as badly as people seem to think.

Miliband has several handicaps to overcome before he can start writing acceptance speeches. Thus far his proposals have been knee jerk to situations arising such as the recent floods and the energy bills. What he desperately needs is a radical idea of his own making which will make people sit up and think. He has yet to do this and need to soon if he is to realise his dream. In addition, he also has a shadow chancellor in whom the public harbours a lingering distrust. He needs to ditch Balls for Darling at the first opportunity or risk losing his chance of power. Balls is a toxic brand for Labour and Miliband's advisors must be screaming words to that effect.

Also, should the Scots go their own way, the Labour share of the vote will be badly hurt. Miliband has been very naive in sharing a platform with Cameron and Clegg to rule out the pound for an independent Scotland. Granted, the Tories are the toxic brand in Scotland but the Tories stand to lose the least should the Scots vote Yes. As 2015 draws nearer, a slim Tory majority is looking far more likely than a repeat of 1997. For one thing, Miliband hasn't a fraction of Blair's charisma and few politicians in history have had less charisma than John Major. Added to all of this is the undeniable fact that the economy is prospering under the vice like grip of this coalition. Timing is all in politics and it seems as though Miliband is fighting a losing battle.

Localism! But which version?

To be living in Denbighshire at the moment is to witness what happens when local government is given too much power without any recognised accountability. The Labour leader today pledged to back localism at the forthcoming local elections and beyond. But what exactly does he mean by localism? You won't be surprised to learn that several versions exist.

Miliband refers to a devolution of power from central government to local government. His was the government which did this more than any other between 1997 and 2010 so I suppose he simply intends to embark on more of the same. Nothing wrong with that per se except that it isn't always easy to see who is supposed to benefit. I had been under the impression that the winners were supposed to be members of the public. Where I live, that has recently become something of an aspiration rather than a reality. Whether our council is just typical of the national picture I 'm not sure but they currently seem intent on closing as many public services as they can. But maybe that isn't a bad thing either. As services become ever more scarce, people might have to divert their dependent gaze away from their local council and towards each other.

The latter broadly fits my understanding of localism. In the town where I live, there seems to be a simmering under current of people engaging with each other in terms of business ideas, social enterprise initiatives and ventures aimed at benefiting the local community. As I write, it's hard to gauge how big this group of people is but I've seen enough to know that it is growing. As people have become successively impoverished during the growing social inequality generated by our obsession with economic growth, they have understandably become more agitated. If you leave heat under a pan of cold water for long enough, the molecules become agitated and, in time, they begin to simmer. Eventually, they will reach boiling point.

I know many people who are contending with considerable heat at the moment and I suspect this is what is driving the local initiatives to which I refer. Whatever the source, the outcome is the key. We are fast approaching a straightforward choice between globalism and localism. In most communities, the former seems to be holding the advantage principally on account of its wealth advantage. For localism to seize back the initiative, it will just take sufficient numbers of local people with enough in common to forge their own route and turn their backs on globalism.

Before the old Gods were replaced by money, we know that most people existed by swapping goods and services through various systems of barter. In a piece last year, I highlighted the Spanish community of Marinelda to illustrate where I saw communities going in the years to come. Since I wrote that piece, my view has only been strengthened. I have never known so many ordinary people so utterly disinterested in the political system. I have every sympathy with them because the current system seems to have run out of ideas. Whether that political system is at a national or local level is largely academic because they are so difficult to distinguish.

It is said that the mobile phone giant Nokia fell from grace because it was being run by too many people from the same background with the same ideas and the same view of the world. Unable to consider alternative views, they were unable to cope with the threat of Samsung when it did come. The analogies are compelling. In a recent attempt to gain some insight in to what it was that local people would most want to see return to their high street, the leading response was very revealing. The majority expressed a desire for a dedicated market day. Hardly high tech I think you'd agree so what's the big attraction. Well, I would suggest it's people. There is nothing more basic or meaningful than real human contact and the street market is part of our heritage. This is the place where people come together to trade, to chat, to eat, to discuss and most importantly, to be with their fellow man. It will be interesting to see what my town will look like ten years hence. Will it be Tesco Express, Starbucks and Waitrose or will it return to it's ancestral roots? The people will decide...

Those who live by the sword!

The fuss this morning over the decision to dispense with Kevin Pieterson has baffled me. If we allow ourselves to just stick to the facts, it's hard to see what option they had but to sack him.

The recent Ashes tour has been analysed to death but certain basic facts stick out like a sore thumb. We didn't score enough runs and we didn't take enough wickets. The Australians had one bowler with sufficient speed to make the difference. Not one English batsman showed the technique or stomach to deal with that bowler. We need to accept that fact. What we don't have to accept though is our most senior batsman refusing to adapt his technique when the chips are so obviously down. That is exactly the time when the team need such a player to knuckle down and set the example.

Many people have refered to him being an individual or a maverick and that's all very well. There comes a time though where you have to remember your obligations to your fellow team members. That applies to any sport. Let's not forget that he will now go to IPL and earn shed loads of money in the only format of the game suited to his style. If he gets out to an irresponsible shot in IPL, nobody will even notice because that is the nature of T20 cricket. Test match cricket is a different kettle of fish.

I've read people comparing his record to people like Cowdrey, Hammond and Barrington. I almost fell off my chair laughing. He's nowhere near their standard. To start with, they all played their careers on uncovered wickets with a fraction of the padding protection worn today. They also played in an era when most sides fielded two spinners so had to have a solid technique to survive. All three of these players were noted for their ability to play the ball late and to keep it on the floor. They knew the golden rule of batting - you only get one chance and you can't make runs sitting in the pavilion. That is why Tendulkar became such a cult figure in India - there might have been better batsmen than him but few prized their wicket more! Pieterson may well have played over a hundred tests but he never learned that lesson. When he did encounter a top quality bowler last winter in Australia, his lack of progress showed. Had he sought to learn from his previous cavalier approach, he ought to have scored a minimum of 500 runs down under.

I salute the selectors for their decision because aside from anything else, it sends out the correct message to the team. The team! When you go out to bat, you do so for the team. We can't afford an "I'm alright Jack" approach from anybody and least of all from a senior player. As I say, if T20 is your thing, Pieterson is tailor made. For test matches though he is the sort of luxury which costs you dearly. Had he even attempted a modicum of contrition over some of those hideous dismissals, he might have given the selectors a tough decision. As it was, he did their job for them. England can now seek to regroup as a tight unit where the whole is more important than any individual - that has been the secret of all the best sides in test cricket history.

A stroll through Denbigh

Yesterday I went to Denbigh Castle with my wife and six year old son. I had been notified of a story telling session which was taking place in the recently opened £600,000 visitor centre. I saw the notification on facebook courtesy of a very hard working local Councillor. Social media is not all bad it seems.

Being residents of Denbigh, we have permit cards which entitle us to free access to the Castle. These cards are worth their weight in gold so if you're a Denbigh resident, I would urge you to take some identification (with your address on) to the library and get your card. I remember being taken there when I was my son's age and few things in life could fire a young imagination quite like Denbigh Castle. Nothing has changed.

Yesterday was the first rain free day we've had in a while. I was expecting hoards of people to be there but was sadly disappointed. CADW laid on the event and it was absolutely brilliant. Delivered by a lady whose enthusiasm left you feeling weak, we heard stories of Owain Glyndwr and Chirk Castle. My son had the opportunity to try his hand at playing medieval musical instruments. It was tailor-made for inquiring young minds and was therefore all the more sad to see such a disappointing turn out of young people. We also had ample time to take in the breathtaking views of the town and the vale before making our slow descent down Love Lane in to the town.

We are local so know the town well. Had we been visitors to the area - and I noticed quite a few when we were at the castle - we would have wanted to wander around this ancient town perhaps in search of a cup of tea or coffee and maybe even a piece of cake. We would have been very disappointed. Making my way home, I took photographs of the current vacant premises in the town and posted them on the "Not available in Denbigh" facebook group. With over 200 members after just seven days, it seems as though there is an ever expanding nucleus of locals passionate about this great town. I shared the photographs to serve as a graphic reminder of the great possibilities for us all on our own door step. The first rule of business is to open your door and we only encountered Lynn at "Make the most of" just above Cawthrays. If half of the current vacancies were filled, it would give locals and visitors seven more reasons to use our high street. If mnore of the existing businesses opened their doors on a Sunday afternoon, I'm sure it would have an impact. Granted, it might take time but I'm sure it would be worth it for all concerned.

The suggestions for what would bring people back on to the high street continue to appear and I would urge everyone to keep them coming and spread the word. The more people engaged, the clearer the picture will be of what people actually want. That seems a good place to start. Some people have suggested that the name of the facebook group has too negative a connotation. I'm all ears. I think the group will be most relevant if the title and suggestions come from the local community - not me. I'm just somebody passionate about the town. I'm just one person. When a community gets together, anything can happen.

I am certain that the Castle can and should play a pivotal role in bringing people back. When you've visited Denbigh Castle, there's only one way to go - down. That is when the high street will benefit - if it is ready to do so. In one week, the suggestions have been excellent and I've noticed separate little groups emerging of like minded local people with a common vision for a particular business opportunity. How great is that?