Warming to his mendacious theme, last week, the prime minister made an even more outrageous claim.
According to Mr Cameron, the cuts made by Labour councils are all politically motivated. In the Tory fairy tale, the good King Cameron and his noble Prince Pickles eliminate nasty waste and evil back office staff and don’t cut any services for their grateful subjects. But the dastardly Lord Labour has other ideas. He wants to overthrow the king and rob the prince of his princely banquet. So Lord Labour happily sacks his loyal staff and deliberately stops services for his long-suffering people, so that they will rise up and depose the king.
The audacity of this fairy tale is breathtaking. In (s)Toryville, the cuts to council services have nothing to do with Prince Pickles’ 28 per cent reduction in council funding (a cut that the Prince embraced with such relish that it angered the other Tory barons around the king’s table). The cuts have nothing to do with the decision to frontload those cuts. Tory councils cut waste and Labour councils cut services. They support their residents and we look to give King Cameron a bloody nose. This isn’t just a tall tale – it’s also a cynical lie.
Of course it is right to cut waste and unnecessary bureaucracy before cutting staff and services. But if Cameron’s claims are true, wouldn’t it make sense for Labour councils to cut frontline services as deeply as possible? The deeper the cuts, the bloodier the nose. So, why are Labour councils changing the way they deliver services, to protect their residents from the cuts? Why are Labour councils sharing services with neighbouring authorities? Why did Waltham Forest Labour vote to reduce our councillors’ allowances just a year after Tory Barnet doubled theirs? This doesn’t seem to fit the fairy tale at all.
However, there is one way that the government’s council cuts are intensely political. Consider the nine London boroughs with the largest cash reductions in their government grants: Islington, Haringey, Tower Hamlets, Hackney, Newham, Southwark, Greenwich, Lambeth and Camden. Spotted the link? Every single one is a Labour borough. In fact, of the 10 biggest losers, nine are Labour. Of the 10 smallest losers, seven are Tory. This is what makes Cameron’s claim of political motivation so wrong. The one truly politically motivated decision has been the way that councils have been punished because their residents had the temerity to vote Labour.
The government has spread the cuts according to political affiliation, not need. But it has also used its council cuts to start the process of dismantling the concept of local services provided by local government. Last week, Eric Pickles proposed a requirement that councils would have to give community groups three months’ notice if a reduction in council funding would threaten the group’s activities. Many community groups do a fantastic job on a shoestring budget, but why should they be protected in a way that councils and schools have not been? Protecting community groups means that deeper cuts will have to be made elsewhere – probably in the budgets for vulnerable children and adults.
Mr Pickles seems to be saying that services provided by the voluntary sector are somehow more worthy and more deserving of protection than those provided by councils. Isn’t that politically motivated? The idea that vulnerable people can be served exclusively by voluntary bodies is a notion that exists only in fairy tales. Yet, in the king’s tale, this is the kind of selfless, objective, non-political decision that only Tories can make. Not for them the ideological objection to local government providing local services. Not for them the political decision to impose the deepest cuts on Labour councils, where the need is greatest.
Of course there is room to abolish some waste and unnecessary bureaucracy; and of course councils need to reform. But to suggest that the cuts that Labour councils are being forced to make are all politically motivated is to enter the realm of fantasy. In fairy tales, everyone lives happily ever after. In the real world that seems unlikely, as the government’s political lies and political cuts, not Labour’s inability to innovate, will cause the people to rise up and overthrow the king.
oh blimey, Tory Story have been sitting round that table again and they’ve found a box, tipped it out, oooh look 70,000 broken action men , drug addicts & drinkers ,and they cost how much! oh lordy no that’s not right ,we could fix them up move them over here like this and look …they could pick tomatoes in Norfolk or sweep the street in Kingsington etc now the immigrants won’t be here (they’re under the table) But real people examined individually as a jury does with crime may show good reason . Tories imagine there is to be no downside to a society like ours ? there is much to be stressed about and people deal with that in different ways some shove an orange up their bottom or come to the window with a shotgun in their hand to be shot by police ,most of course drink and take drugs.Both available on every street corner and supermarket. Suppose a teacher has a breakdown and drinks because his school is so rough because all the Church schools in the borough (who’s parents are not religious even) have creamed off the better behaved children who’s to blame there? Or supposing ,well you get the picture ,many people have no chance .In the 80’s a barrow boy mentality could take one straight to the City ,but now we all know the stats for 16-24 year old especially black youth out of work/school /college . Yes in that 70000 there must be some straightforward shirkers as the PM points out to the poor aggrieved Taxpayer but he needs to find out exactly how many first.
& look at how all those food sales are helping retail ,so we have something to thank the fatties for!
and well,whaddaya know, this morning Bishop (of Oxford I think) anounces that Church Schools will look at taking only 10% of churchygoreallys so that they can take a better cross section that truly reflects the community because that is more Christian ! Well good on yer Bish,but will that really happen? will it won’t it will it won’ t it will it won’t it………………………..