Government wants to steal milk from children! Coalition wants to ban playgrounds! When-oh-when will the government call off its War on Kids? Well, that's been the hysterical tone of much of the coverage in recent days. Even allowing for the feather-headed excesses of August this is becoming silly.
No-one disputes that there will be some difficult decisions to be made in the comprehensive spending review this autumn. But while the coalition is still in the business of softening up the public for leaner times ahead there will come a point when ministers will have to fight back, pointing out that despite everything public spending is still rising. (Whether you think this a good thing is, for now, a dfferent matter.) As Guido says, Kirsty Wark seemed surprised when John Redwood pointed this out last night.
Nevertheless it is true. Public spending will increase from £600bn to roughly £700bn over the course of this parliament. That's a much slower rate of increase than we've endured these past ten years but a 15% increase over five years is still, stubbornly, an increase. Indeed, given the nature of the times, your man on the Clapham Omnibus might think 15% over five years a reasonable pay settlement.(Although, clearly, inflation eats into this.)
Granted, protecting the NHS budget and so on means that there will be tougher spending rounds elsewhere and granted too experience demonstrates that simply holding spending at current levels (in real terms) is also exceedingly difficult. But there is a considerable difference between keeping spending steady and slashing it just there's a noted difference between a hiring freeze and compulsory redundancies.
Which brings one to the matter of children's playgrounds. As Iain Martin demonstrates the scaremongering about this is becoming ridiculous. All that has happened is that £235m of spending on new swings and roundabouts has been cancelled. A failure to spend as much in the future as you had once planned is not a cut in existing provision. But to listen to some of the nonsense swirling about this you'd think the government was proposing a Greater Stornoway policy and planning to tie up swings across the country.
In any case - and here we touch on a still larger issue - why on earth is central government allocating money for new swings and slides anyway? Why should taxpayers in Hull be helping to pay for new playgrounds in Harrow? (And vice versa). If Harrow want to build new playgrounds then let them do so and find the money from their own funds.
This then is a small but telling indicator of how absurdly centralised Britain has become (and Tory governments must take some of the blame for this too). What ought, by any reasonable measure, be a matter for local councils has somehow been taken over by central government. Reversing this culture is one of the government's greatest challenges.
Which in turn means that, again, any real localist agenda must eventually address the question of local government financing. At present, to remind you once again, councils receive 85% of their funds from central government. A question for Eric Pickles and his pals: what should that percentage be at the end of this parliament?
Alas, the auguries are not encouraging. Council Tax may be unpopular but until councils raise more of their own money and become less dependent upon central government then real local accountability, to say nothing about addressing real local priorities, will remain a distant prospect. Local taxes should be higher and central taxes lower. Until that happens - until people start demanding more from their locally elected officials - then the notion that central government must always provide will endure unchallenged.
Filed under: ConLib (132 more articles) , Local government (103 more articles) , Spending cuts (623 more articles)
Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (4)
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
1 The unions versus the Department for Education — continued - Peter Hoskin
2 Cameron can no longer laugh off Ed - James Forsyth
3 Why reason doesn’t apply to the Eurozone - Fraser Nelson
4 The unions' lazy opposition to schools reform - Peter Hoskin
1 Cameron can no longer laugh off Ed - James Forsyth (65)
2 Let's get real about the fiscal situation - John Platts-Mills (51)
3 Gatwick competes in the disgrace Olympics - Fraser Nelson (42)
4 The need for a coalition attitude to growth - James Forsyth (42)
5 The 301 Group purge the 1922 committee - James Forsyth (41)
Andrew Sullivan
Ben Smith
Charles Crawford
Chris Dillow
Claudia Massie
Dan Drezner
Daniel Larison
Dave Weigel
Ezra Klein
French Politics
Global Guerrilas (John Robb)
Henry Porter
James Fallows
Julian Sanchez
Kerry Howley
Kevin Drum
League of Ordinary Gentlemen
Marc Ambinder
Matt Zeitlin
Matthew Yglesias
Megan McArdle
More than Mind Games
Mr Eugenides
Norm Geras
Our Kingdom
Outside the Beltway
Radley Balko
Reason: Hit&Run
Rod Dreher
Samizdata
Scottish Unionist
SNP Tactical Voting
The American Scene
The Plank
Tim Worstall
Toby Harnden
Will Wilkinson
Charlotte Gore
Iain Martin
Hopi Sen
Liberal Vision
Left Back in the Changing Room
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
normanc
August 12th, 2010 2:06pm Report this commentAn example of the absurd centralisation.
The local park I bring my son to recently had two of the large playthings replaced by brand new, heavy duty, expensive looking items. One was a type of weightlifting mock up that looked like it cost the price of a new house.
These must have been ordered and allocated centrally as the two items replaced were for younger children(both still in decent condition) and the two new ones for early teens. There are now no items for children under 10 at the park. Within a week a statement from the council appeared in the local paper apologising and letting us know that the new attractions would be replaced within 4 months by two more for the lower age group.
Not only are my taxes being wasted by the government & council but what I am paying for (use of playpark) has now been denied my son this whole summer.
Mycroft
August 12th, 2010 2:09pm Report this commentIt is all very well talking about increasing the local element in taxation, but that falls overwhelmingly on property-owners who are not necesarily in the best position to pay. The Council Tax is already quite bad enough. This is not a simple matter.
Andrea Gill
August 12th, 2010 5:08pm Report this commentWell there's the nice little Lib Dem policy called local income tax, similar to the Swiss system...
Anne Wotana Kaye 1
August 12th, 2010 9:25pm Report this commentWhat is the name of the PR company employed by DC and Clegg? It must be Mandelson & Milliband. Damn good job they are doing too, first the milk, and then playgrounds. What will be next? Free elementary school!
Back to top