Christmas Competition: How can we reduce inequality?

I want somebody to take away from me what I have and give it to other people.

I’m a pensioner in a comfortable place in the most comfortable part of the UK, the south-east. Our incomes are high relative to every other region of the UK; more of us own our own houses than any other region. Government policy persistently works to protect us and boost us more than any other region. One of the most important considerations for Liberal Democrat policy on inequality must be to reduce the very substantial difference in income, wealth and comfort between the south-east and everywhere else in the UK.

I do not ignore the substantial inequalities within this region as well as between it and others. The village I live in is very comfortable indeed. But it has its own food bank. The nearest town to me, Lewes, is decidedly affluent. However, it has three food banks. Nevertheless, the more pressing need, I believe, is to fix the massive inequalities between regions. There will be no substantial growth in the near future to enable a pretence that everybody can win. So that means that, if others are to do better, I, and people like me, will do worse. That is as it should be.

There will be many ways to do this. I focus here on two: infrastructure and general spending. In each case, I focus on one aspect out of several possibilities.

For infrastructure, there should be a primary criterion in the consideration stage of projects: how does this spending benefit the regions or the nations? This should apply, even if the project is in London or the south-east. The presumption should be that whatever money is available for infrastructure projects should go to the regions first. Some might object that London and the south-east still need money spent on infrastructure projects. Yes, they do, but for too long they have taken precedence over spending in the regions. That priority should be reversed. If that means I have to wait longer for an upgrade to my railway line, so be it.

We also need to be clear that any examination should concentrate clearly on what is the actual benefit to the region concerning jobs, income and the reduction of poverty. Hinkley Point, for instance, will cost a fortune, but only a small proportion of that spending will find its way into the pockets of local people. So there must be a robust and realistic measure of what the benefit to people in the region will be.

For general spending, I suggest the measure we need is simple, although sure to cause vibrations in high places. That is to re-establish proper and realistic funding to local councils. If money is tight, then it should go first to councils in the regions and nations. I will have to wait longer for my recycling to get up to scratch, and social care will still be stretched here, with painful consequences, for longer than it needs to be. So be it. My comfort has been bought at the price of misery in other parts of the country for far too long.

* Rob Parsons is a Lib Dem member in Lewes. He blogs at http://acomfortableplace.blogspot.co.uk

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

7 Comments

  • The sentence that reads “However, it has its” should read “However, it has its own food bank”.

  • Innocent Bystander 19th Dec '18 - 1:14pm

    “I want somebody to take away from me what I have and give it to other people.”
    Rob, Rob, you don’t have to wait for “somebody”. You can give it now. No one is stopping you.

  • Rob Parsons 19th Dec '18 - 3:38pm

    Innocent Bystander: I am talking about a structural realignment involving tens of billions of pounds a year. My ockets are not that deep.

  • Rob Parsons 19th Dec '18 - 3:40pm

    Joseph – with you completely, ad I’m very glad that LibDem policy is moving in that direction. But I only had 550 words, and others have very eloquently expressed the desirability of LVT.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarPaul Barker 20th Mar - 9:53am
    With May now asking for a delay of 3 Months & The EU demanding a concrete reason for delay another General Election now seems a...
  • User AvatarCatherine Jane Crosland 20th Mar - 9:36am
    David Raw and Lorenzo, thank you so much for your supportive comments. I'd just like to make it clear that I was not actually offended...
  • User AvatarYeovil Yokel 20th Mar - 9:26am
    If it’s in the Daily Torygraph, Richard Underhill, then it must be true.
  • User AvatarDavid Becket 20th Mar - 9:21am
    Looks as if it has been kicked into the long grass, not a single press release on this major issue, and cannot find anything on...
  • User Avatarchris moore 20th Mar - 9:18am
    Excellent article and subsequent comments and links. Thanks to the Davids and others.
  • User AvatarDavid Hughes 20th Mar - 9:17am
    Regarding the difficulties of 'whipping' this group, the task in fact fell to Jo Grimond from the point of his first election in 1950 until...