In many ways, London represents a triumph of liberalism.
London is a city where people from all backgrounds come to make their home. A city of dynamism and enterprise, closely intertwined with the global economy. A city of remarkable history and forward-thinking culture. A city thriving as a cosmopolitan melting pot, with strong communities and individuals free to be themselves.
It is for precisely these reasons that certain politicians denigrate the capital, portraying it either as a suspicious, crime-ridden hellhole or an effete hub of snooty, overprivileged elitism. Or sometimes all of these at the same time.
I vehemently disagree with their illiberal views, but at least I can understand why reactionary populists target the capital.
What perplexes me, however, is the government’s attitude.
London is undoubtedly a UK success story. In economic terms alone, the capital accounts for almost a quarter of the UK’s entire economic output. London creates a surplus for the Treasury of upwards of £40 billion – providing much-needed money for housing, education, social care, and other public services across the country. London’s wealth creation is vital to the UK’s prosperity.
But ministers and their officials give every impression that their feelings towards the capital are lukewarm, at best.
In recent years we have seen the explicitly anti-London policies associated with ‘levelling up’, leaving London excluded from various funding streams and opportunities.
Although ‘levelling up’ is no more, the current government still seems to prefer highlighting investment it makes outside the capital, and reluctant to acknowledge both London’s needs and crucial contribution to the UK.
London’s devolution settlement is 25 years old and in need of modernising. Compared to other major cities around the world such as Paris and New York, London’s devolved powers are fairly pitiful. Greater Manchester and the West Midlands have more advanced devolution arrangements than the capital. Why has London been left behind?