Punishing London

Tuesday, 21 July 2009

Although it isn't currently online, there is apparently a A story has appeared in the London Evening Standard stating that government funding for housing in the capital has been slashed from £205 million to just £1·5 million — less than half a percent of what it was going to be.

It isn't a shortage of funds behind this: it is simple gerrymandering. At Conservative Home, it is also stated that such funding in the Labour heartlands of the north east will double, despite having a far lesser need.

Long-term readers of my writings elsewhere will be aware of the evidence I have presented showing similar gerrymandering of public funds for self-serving political reasons as they affect my home area (Medway), so this news will probably come as no great surprise to them. Just to encapsulate that in a sentence: Medway Council has some £28 million taken away every year, based on the Government's own funding formula of what is needed (not "wanted", not "wouldn't it be nice if…") in order to do the job.

That money goes instead primarily to Labour-run areas, many of which are profligate with your money and mine. Exactly the same is happening again with London. Under Red Ken, no doubt the funding would have remained intact; but with Boris as mayor it was an opportunity to take advantage of Labour's control of the national purse strings — in the form of countless billions of pounds of ever-increasing tax revenue — to abuse and manipulate that system for their own ends.

All very predictable, of course, as that leopard never changes its spots — but important to have documented and notified to as many people as possible.


4 Responses to “Punishing London”
Post a Comment | Post Comments (Atom)

JuliaM said...

"...important to have documented and notified to as many people as possible. "

Probably why they've made sure it isn't in their online edition, figuring bloggers for lazy sorts who won't mention it if they have to type it all out..

21 July 2009 at 05:47
John M Ward said...

Possible as a general rule, JuliaM; but the Standard tends to be very good, publishing all sorts of very useful (and usable) material online.

I suspect it's just an omission.

21 July 2009 at 12:09
GCooper said...

It would be nice to think that when McBean loses the next election, the government that replaces his corrupt junta will deliver a lengthy and satisfying tit for tat.

But, of course, it won't. For one thing, the Tories are miserably incapable of the sort of graft and malfeasance which ZaNuLabour excels at.

For another, the socialist media (ie most if it - led by the BBC) will make sure that the Tories are held to standards almost completely ignored since 1997.

21 July 2009 at 13:48
John M Ward said...

You are correct, GCooper — but I wouldn't want an incoming government to stoop to the levels exhibited by Labour, however strong the temptation might be.

Incidentally, I have now found the Standard article online, and have amended my post to link there.

21 July 2009 at 16:44