Today’s Guardian has a shocking report on the apparent political interference in major transport projects over the last year. According to the article, during the last 12 months, 75% of big transport projects approved in England have been situated in Labour-held constituencies. Transport minister Gillian Merron (who she?), in answer to a Commons question tabled by the Conservatives, said that the big schemes were approved in 118 constituencies held by Labour, 23 by the Conservatives and 17 by the Liberal Democrats.
Apparently, a similar political bias can be found with the National Lottery awards process. If one adds to this the “heat map” controversy over hospital closures and schools, is it any wonder that politicians are held in such low esteem by the public? Decisions on funding, for whatever government programme, should be based upon genuine need, not the need to collect votes. This shameful government should not be allowed to get away with such disgraceful behaviour.
January 24th, 2007 - 2:26 pm
Phil. You know this is a load of rubbish don’t you? For a start this was simply a report on the Guardian website about the Tories complaints without any comment or analysis. OK, lets think this through. Do we accept that most of this country’s transport problems are in urban areas where congestion and commuting are concentrated? OK, so at present most urban seats are held by Labour. Do the Tories propose building roads for the sake of it in Sussex and Somerset to maintain a political balance. It’s like Health. Presumably they taught you in medical school about the law of inverse healthcare provision, where those areas with greatest health need, the poorest, have the least health service provision and that this dates back to pre-NHS days? If this is going to change then there are going to be more closures in Tory areas. The Tories did suggest allocating funds on the basis of the levels of illness until they realised that this would mean more money to Labour areas and less to Tories. This is basic politics. Do the Tories mean it when they say they care about deprivation? If so then they should support funding moving to more deprived areas and not bleat about it. However, if they are still the party of privilige that exists to protect the most well of then they should carry on with this campaign. What are the Tories for? I think I know, when will they start to be honest with the electorate. Finally Phil it was the anniversary of the death of Bobby Kennedy last week. If you consider him a political role model then you have to accept that we need to concentrate the state’s resources in helping the most deprived communities to seize the opportunities for prosperity enjoyed by the majority. Don’t you agree with this? Are you in the right party?
January 24th, 2007 - 3:19 pm
Good afternoon Graeme. Happy New Year.
A few points:
January 24th, 2007 - 5:01 pm
1) If acute health services are increasingly less required as you say, which I agree with, then there will be a bigger excess of provision in the most afluent areas that are most served by acute services. These are more likely to be more Tory than Labour areas. I think you make the case for me. 2) The lottery was also about deserving based on need. If the Prudential (for instance) donates to charities that focus there work on where need is greatest then this is not a political decision designed to support Labour MPs. 3) Transport – actually the Thames Valley is doing very well with Junction 11 getting approved for a hugely expensive improvement programme whilst Reading station (the major rail bottleneck for London westwards rail services looking to get major investment. These decisions are based on merit and as the urban capital of the Thames Valley its not surprising they have been approved. Road resurfacing is a diffferent matter and is paid for out of the revenue budgets of the council which is the highways authority for that area. Finally the schemes cancelled by Prescott were mainly building new roads weren’t they. I think everyone agrees that massive road building in itself isn’t the answer.