Issue 113 / April-May 2021

E D I T O R I A L
It’s often said that people from Merseyside are good talkers, but it’s
the buildings that say more than most. In every façade you can track a
running timeline of the city’s fate.
In the neoclassical grandeur you see prosperity through the trade
of human life. Areas like Scotland Road show the remnants of a once
swollen, cramped population moved on through slum clearance and lack
of work. Hollowed out churches serve as a reminder of conflict. Across the
water, Birkenhead’s waterfront wears the bruises of a declining shipping
industry. Facing back on the other side, post-war housing projects, such as
St Andrew’s Garden (The Bullring), reflect a time when municipal dreams
came before individualism.
It’s no different today. In the space of 15 years much of the inner city
stands unrecognisable. The early phases of this regeneration point to the
Capital of Culture makeover. Since then, the trend for developments have
been near uniform. Residential apartments and student accommodation
have pushed their way into any available spaces with the tenacity of
weeds nudging through pavement. Like much of the historical architecture
these buildings cast shadows upon, the socio-economic fate of the city is
contained in their presence.
The government’s council inspection report is undoubtedly a difficult
moment for the city. If whisperings on social media for the past decade
hadn’t already confirmed its findings, then the right-before-our-eyes
evidence was there; the shimmering clad pretence of build-at-any-cost
developments did little to charm a landscape washed out by central
government cuts.
The misdealing within planning, highways and regeneration appear to
be rife. Music venues and other cultural hubs are now in a more unforgiving
landscape due to these practices. Some have been squeezed out
altogether. But the public shaming at the hands of the Tories suggest an
endemic problem with cronyism at local government level, which doesn’t
provide the full picture. Liverpool rightly has to acknowledge the failures
of its council, but it’s important to face up to the actions that led us to
desperation and rampant opportunism.
Where the “awarding of dubious contracts” has seen many areas
of Liverpool change cosmetically, there remains countless skeletal
developments across the city – either failed or exhausted of funds. Their
bare concrete anatomies are the withered bones of austerity, a harsh
financial reality that Liverpool has swallowed for over a decade during
which its central funding
has fallen by almost 40 per
cent. When you push a city
to breaking point and due
diligence frays, opportunists
will find their way into the
cracks. The city had to find a
way of paying its way, but it
has instead been made to pay
the price itself. The imposed
commissioners in certain
areas will now only heighten
public distrust.
Trust is one of the
main issues that now faces Liverpool. Throughout the pandemic we’ve
seen other forms of opportunism through protest and the spreading of
conspiracy. With the added furore around the mayoral selection, politics is
now slipping to its lowest ebb off the back of the council report. Liverpool
deserves better than the hands it has been dealt both internally and
externally. And it’s looking further internally where we’ll find the figures
who’re worthy of our trust. Those who offer an alternative while aspects of
the council soul-searches.
These alternative leaders and decision makers don’t have to be
connected to institutional power. As has been covered in this magazine for
the past years, it’s those at the grassroots level who’ve been able to bring
about the most telling changes, rewriting narratives within communities
in the process. As Liverpool’s political framework is dredged, we should
remain hopeful that there is a new, alternative way to bring us through
the challenges ahead. Community leaders, facilitators, activists, artists,
musicians can and will lead us when we need it most.
Elliot Ryder / @elliot_ryder
Editor
“We should
remain hopeful
that there
is a new,
alternative way”
New Music + Creative Culture
Liverpool
Issue 113 / April-May 2021
bidolito.co.uk
Second Floor
The Merchant
40-42 Slater Street
Liverpool L1 4BX
Founding Editor
Craig G Pennington
Founding Editor
Christopher Torpey - chris@bidolito.co.uk
Publisher
Sam Turner - sam@bidolito.co.uk
Editor
Elliot Ryder - elliot@bidolito.co.uk
Digital & Memberships Officer
Matthew Berks - matthew@bidolito.co.uk
Editorial Intern
Lily Blakeney-Edwards - lily@bidolito.co.uk
Design
Mark McKellier - mark@andmark.co.uk
Branding
Thom Isom - hello@thomisom.com
Proofreader
Nathaniel Cramp
Cover Photography
Marieke Macklon
Words
Elliot Ryder, Lily Blakeney-Edwards, Sam Turner,
Matthew Berks, Sam Lasley, Megan Walder, David
Weir, Wil Baines, Leah Binns, Cath Holland, Julia
Johnson, Paul Fitzgerald, Remy Greasley, Andrew
Stafford, Jo Mary Watson, Ed Haynes, Sarah
McNee, RJ Ward, Lyndsay Price, Mary Olive.
Photography, Illustration and Layout
Mark McKellier, Marieke Macklon, Kate Davies,
Michael Kirkham, Joe Harper, Andrew Ellis, Abigail
Smith, Rosa Brown, Amy Cummings, Sam Batley,
Joel Hansen, Mark Loudon, David Zink Yi, Rob May,
Sam Vaughan, Ruby Tompkins.
Distribution
Our magazine is distributed as far as possible
through pedal power, courtesy of our Bido Bikes. If
you would like to find out more, please email sam@
bidolito.co.uk.
Advertise
If you are interested in adverting in Bido Lito!,
or finding out about how we can work together,
please email sam@bidolito.co.uk.
Bido Lito! is a living wage employer. All our staff are
paid at least the living wage.
All contributions to Bido Lito! come from our city’s
amazing creative community. If you would like to
join the fold visit bidolito.co.uk/contribute.
We are contributing one per cent of our advertising
revenue to WeForest.org to fund afforestation
projects around the world. This more than offsets
our carbon footprint and ensures there is less CO2
in the atmosphere as a result of our existence.
The views expressed in Bido Lito! are those of the
respective contributors and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of the magazine, its staff or the
publishers. All rights reserved.