Get Government out of London

Hard to miss the letter from 20 economists to the Sunday Times today, telling Alistair Darling that, when all is said and done, the so-called "clearly defined plans" for cuts aren't actually that clear and aren't big enough in any case.

But the government (whichever government is in after May) has a problem. Where do the cuts come? It's not just a matter of a large percentage of government spending being "non-negotiable"; the fact is, a large proportion of the "negotiable" area -- that in which the economists say the cuts have to come, is politically impossible to implement.

Now, obviously, I instinctively speak from the economists' side of the fence. But let's look at it from the politicians' point of view. Much of "discretionary" government spending is in parts of the UK where "government is the only game in town". The percentage of GDP in these areas that is down to state spending is over 70%. If you cut your discretionary spending here, all that you do is shift it over to non-discretionary spending. You don't actually cut your deficit that much at all. And, to make it worse, these areas have a higher multiplier effect (because the savings ratio is lower). It could actually be the case that cutting government spending in these areas would cause the deficit to increase, rather than decrease (sadly, the reverse is not the case -- increasing spending does not cause the deficit to decline, because the savings ratio tends to go up.)

That, from anyone's point of view, is not good news.

The UK is a strange place, in that the political centre is also the tourist centre is also the financial centre. Compare the UK with Germany, where no-one would claim that Berlin was the industrial powerhouse of the country, and not many tourists head off to Frankfurt or Hamburg for the weekend. Even France, where Paris is the financial, political and touristic centre, has a far more diffused spread of where GDP and earnings come from.

So, if you can't make more people be tourists outside London (despite serious efforts on all sides), and you can't move the financial centre any further than four miles down the road to Canary Wharf, what can you do?

Well, move the government. Not just poxy little shit things like the DVLA to South Wales. I mean the lot. Move Parliament, the PM's official residence, the entire civil service, out into the provinces, to a custom-built new "political centre". I suggest the outskirts of Birmingham, near the NEC.

Look at the advantages.
1) It will get rid of much of the "London-centric" accusations from the provinces (complete balls, since the government throws money everywhere but at London).
2) It will free up acre after acre of the most valuable real estate in the country, which could be converted into luxury flats and sold off.
3) It would reduce the price pressure on housing in London and would assist pricing in other areas.
4) It would ease unemployment difficulties in the Midlands.
5) It would reduce politicians' expense claims.
6) It would reduce pressure on Heathrow.


I look forward to one of the parties adopting this plan in their manifesto. What's the spread on how on how long I will have to wait?

_________________