United for Peace of Pierce County, WA - We nonviolently oppose the reliance on unilateral military actions rather than cooperative diplomacy.

Phil Redmond, 58, is an English TV producer and scriptwriter and Liverpool native who was named deputy chairman of a group overseeing Great Britain's response to Liverpool's designation as "Europe's Capital of Culture 2008." -- The shaggy-maned Redmond's nomination led him to write a rambling meditation on the concept of cultural identity, published Friday in the London Financial Times.[1] -- His reflections conclude with some thoughts on the relation of cultural identity to the individual, on the one hand, and on the other hand, to the state. -- "As we drift into a digital society," Redmond remarked, "there is a creeping assumption that our identities are somehow owned not by ourselves but by the state. Through insistence that we have some form of electronic ID, we are slowly being electronically tagged and refusal to comply is met with threats of fines or exclusion. This is happening both in commercial and public arenas but the underlying concern is that, while the state has set out some parameters for protection of personal data, ownership of that data is vague. . . . The assumption seems to be that ultimate ownership rests with the state, as more and more legislation appears under the guise of, for example, preventing money laundering or enabling local taxation. . . . After our ancestors spent hundreds of years fighting for the right to own their own lives in the 'real' world, we need to do the same in the digital one. Having got rid of physical serfdom, we must not succumb to serfdom in cyberspace." -- For more on Redmond's background, see an article in the Sept. 12 Liverpool Daily Post on his selection to organize the cultural program for Liverpool as Capital of Culture 2008.[2] ...

I seem to spend most of my waking hours contemplating the concept of cultural identity at the moment, as part of my involvement with next year’s European Capital of Culture program. In case you missed it in all the London-centric hullabaloo around the 2012 Olympics, Liverpool has been designated Europe’s Capital of Culture 2008 -- though you could be forgiven for not noticing as the host city, sitting in the People’s Republic of Merseyside, has still yet to fully recognize the U.K., never mind the European Union. Still, having only been in the creative chair for a matter of weeks, one of my key tasks is to remind the nation that this rotational award -- rather like the Olympics -- cannot be back in Britain for at least 40 years, such is the predicted growth of the EU.

Like most things European, the concept is relatively simple but the devil is in the delivery. Each member state is asked to spend a year promoting both its indigenous and EU-wide culture. At the same time, a non-member state is invited to do likewise: in 2008 that will be Norway, with Stavanger its designated host city. The idea is that if we share our culture we become multicultural. And the more multicultural we become, the more collegiate, co-operative, and communal.

But what is culture? The EU’s own definition -- in Article 5: Decision 1419/1999/EC, should you want to look it up -- talks about the arts, literature, and shared lifestyle. But whose arts? Whose literature? Whose lifestyle? In short, whose culture? Any suggestions gladly received.

This question has a lot to do with the role of a nation’s cultural institutions themselves and that applies no more so than to our primary public service broadcaster, the BBC. I am having an interesting debate with the BBC at the moment -- a £4.4bn public institution, incidentally -- around why it is that it already has a task force in place to look at a 14-day sporting event in 2012, yet seems to have done very little preparation for a 12-month cultural event that is supposed to showcase the best of British and European culture. I have always been a supporter of the license fee mechanism but now I am beginning to be won over by the idea that that cultural fund should be allocated more widely than to a self-sustaining bureaucracy that seems to put global sporting rights ahead of its role as national cultural curator.

In Bristol recently I visited the Watershed Media Centre, partly because it was launched in 1982, the same year as Brookside, which I created. Here was another reminder of how cultural identity shifts through time. Bristol, like Liverpool, was once a big maritime community and where there were once docks stand the bars, restaurants, galleries, and apartments that now adorn most of Britain’s waterfronts -- a reminder that, for cities to survive, they cannot dwell on their past but must constantly reinvent their own future.

That future for many cities is no longer about being close to land, capital, or raw materials. Instead the drivers for investment and the means of production are now measured more in terms of lifestyle and quality of life. This is why the south-east -- and London in particular -- will always remain overheated and to some extent London will become more and more connected to a global rather than to a U.K. market.

Just as 25 years ago saw Bristol’s Watershed launched as the first media center in the U.K., so did Channel 4 become Britain’s newest terrestrial broadcaster, even if it was slightly upstaged by the launch of Rupert Murdoch’s Sky satellite system. It was interesting to reflect at Channel 4’s anniversary bash on October 30 which had had the greater cultural impact and which retains more of its original identity. I would suggest that both accolades go to Sky as its commercial sense and adoption of new technology -- seen in the development of pay TV for films and sport, for example -- have driven market change, whereas the restrictive nature of Channel 4’s public-service remit has forced it simply to follow. Ironically, priced out of film and sports acquisitions, Channel 4 has resorted to increasing amounts of so-called “reality TV” that has undermined its original remit to serve unrepresented minority interests. That restrictive public-service remit, which is also wrapped round the BBC and ITV, has itself distorted the market, giving Sky a fairly comfortable ride.

Isn’t it time, then, as we approach the digital switchover, to ask why we continue with this muddled thinking about mixing commercial television with public service? Shouldn’t we by now be culturally mature enough to dismiss the “market-failure” argument that continues to dog broadcasting? Just as this newspaper sits in a market that also supplies the *Daily Sport*, shouldn’t we now allow commercial television to be simply that: truly commercial? Freed from public service commitments -- or inhibitors -- the commercial broadcasters may just give Sky a run for their subscribers’ money and create a much more vibrant media landscape.

Thoughts on cultural identity, by necessity, lead to reflections on the very notion of identity itself and, increasingly, not just on how we define our identities but on who actually owns them. As we drift into a digital society there is a creeping assumption that our identities are somehow owned not by ourselves but by the state. Through insistence that we have some form of electronic ID, we are slowly being electronically tagged and refusal to comply is met with threats of fines or exclusion. This is happening both in commercial and public arenas but the underlying concern is that, while the state has set out some parameters for protection of personal data, ownership of that data is vague. For instance, do you, your doctor or the NHS and, by extension, the state, own your personal medical records?

The assumption seems to be that ultimate ownership rests with the state, as more and more legislation appears under the guise of, for example, preventing money laundering or enabling local taxation. This is a big subject for a big debate but the point is a simple one.

After our ancestors spent hundreds of years fighting for the right to own their own lives in the ”real” world, we need to do the same in the digital one. Having got rid of physical serfdom, we must not succumb to serfdom in cyberspace.

--Phil Redmond delivered the opening lecture, “Whose identity is it anyway?”, at BBC Radio 3’s festival of ideas, Free Thinking. Radio 3 will broadcast an evening of Free Thinking programming on Saturday from 8pm and every night this week from November 11 between 9.45pm-10.30pm. www.bbc.co.uk/freethinking

"Brookside" creator Phil Redmond was last night chosen to spearhead delivery of Liverpool's ambitious 08 cultural program.

The board running the company behind Liverpool's showpiece Capital of Culture year met yesterday and agreed that most of its members would stand down, leaving a streamlined body with the power to fast-track decisions.

University of Liverpool vice chancellor Drummond Bone stood down as chairman, but will stay on as a member of the new-look board of just five or six members.

It will be chaired by Bryan Gray, chairman of the Northwest Regional Development Agency, with city council leader Warren Bradley also on the new board.

The decision was made at what turned out to be the final meeting of the 14-member Liverpool Culture Company Board, itself a smaller version of the original 25-member board.

The members of the new board told the *Daily Post* last night that the unanimous decision was not linked to the recent shambles over the Mathew Street Festival, although privately it was acknowledged by some that the issue had a significant bearing on the timing of the changes.

Bryan Gray said it was a natural progression to the next stage following the signing off of the year-long cultural program for 2008 when Liverpool becomes European Capital of Culture.

Mr. Redmond, founder of Mersey Television, makers of "Hollyoaks" and "Grange Hill," will as deputy chairman, be responsible for the entire cultural program.

One of his key roles will be to ensure there is no repeat of the Mathew Street fiasco that led to worldwide adverse publicity for the city.

Cllr Bradley will also be a deputy chairman of the new board, taking charge of community issues and acting as the main link to the city's politicians.

Mr. Gray will be responsible for the finance side of the year-long festival. Prof. Bone said he had always intended to stand down as chairman of the board, once the 08 program had been finalized.

"At today's meeting we signed off the program, and now we go to the next stage of delivery of that program. We are announcing the program at the end of September. I believe we need a different strategy from now on. Now that the program is agreed we need a board that can react quickly and be focused on the delivery of the program," he said.

Prof. Bone added that Mathew Street had "exercised minds" that there were issues between the board and the culture company.

The Liverpool Culture Company, currently being run by chief executive Jason Harborow, will continue. Currently the city council's chief executive, Colin Hilton, is conducting an investigation into why Mathew Street went wrong. That investigation is still ongoing.

Mr. Gray, Mr. Redmond, and Cllr Bradley will meet in the next few days to hand pick another board member from the now disbanded board.

Cllr Bradley said: "The board met and agreed a program that will deliver the most successful Capital of Culture program ever seen, much bigger than the program in Glasgow a few years ago. We will have Bryan dealing with the finance side, Phil looking after the cultural program and I will be the conduit between the board and the communities of Liverpool.

"There is full support for what we have decided, and we will deliver something quite unique. People will be bowled over by what we have planned for our culture year. It is time to look forward and not harp on about what has happened in the past. The new board will be a springboard for 2008. We have three aims -- agree the program, deliver it, and have a legacy to take us beyond '08."

Mr. Redmond said existing board members not serving on the smaller board were likely to be used as advisers because of their skills and expertise.

"The key point is the signing off of the '08 program. The existing board system was bureaucratic and slow and it is time to move forward with a new slimmer board. It will mean I can pick up a telephone and we can make instant decisions rather than waiting for board meetings.

"We will be looking at '09, '10, and beyond, pulling together to create a cultural program for our city. I want to see us involving communities such as Norris Green, Dovecot, and Croxteth."

Mr. Gray said: "Our small group is going to make sure that Capital of Culture will deliver its promises."

Key board members are expected to meet several times a week to sign off projects linked to culture year. Mr. Redmond likened the new-look board to the new BBC Trust Board which overseas the broadcasting corporation.

PHIL REDMOND created the ground-breaking children’s TV drama "Grange Hill" for the BBC, and the Channel 4 soap "Brookside."

Born in 1949, he trained as a quantity surveyor, but gave this up to concentrate on a TV career.

BRYAN GRAY has been chairman of the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA) since April 2002. He was chief executive and deputy chairman of Baxi Group, and is now chairman of Baxi Technologies.