Levelling Up - more than a slogan or another Con con?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vic
  • Start date Start date
Anyone just listening to 5Live will have heard a lass from Stockton on Tees who runs a marketing agency and runs a foodbank - they distribute food stuffs to charities - she was perplexed by the distribution and allocation of levelling up funds which are meant to help the most deprived areas. In Middlesbrough and Tees Valley the two highest priorities identified are Eaglescliffe and Yarm.

Anyone familiar with the area knows this is a joke - Eaglescliffe is about the 2nd most affluent area ( and oddly the home of the Stockton South MP ) and Yarm is home to current and former MFC footballers ( oh and also Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen )

Tory to the core - they take your money so their mates can benefit
 
Vic said:
Just a reminder that one of the first things the Coalition did in 2010 was abolish the Regional Development Agencies.
Click to expand...

They did, which meant it was very difficult to bid for EU regeneration funding, which was match funded, meaning if a region was successful in winning EU funds, in order to draw it down the money needed to be match funded 50/50 by central government.

Of course central government didn't want to cough up. Quick fix, get rid of the agencies that bid, hence no bid, hence no money, hence no obligation to match fund.

Our poorest regions lost untold millions in regeneration funding as a consequence.
 
Has anybody got anything good to say about this or even believe that the poorest regions will actually get decent funding?
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Has anybody got anything good to say about this or even believe that the poorest regions will actually get decent funding?
Click to expand...
You won't hear anything good on this site about anything with this government.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Has anybody got anything good to say about this or even believe that the poorest regions will actually get decent funding?
Click to expand...

On the C4 News it was established that in the last 10 years the govt had removed £454per person from funding. Levelling up reverses that by restoring............wait for it ............ £32 per person...............
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Has anybody got anything good to say about this or even believe that the poorest regions will actually get decent funding?
Click to expand...
The intention is good and that would normally earn it universal acclaim, but it would take substantial money for many decades to achieve. It could and probably should come from within and from everyone if the idea is to truly unite the country. But how many are prepared to pay 5% extra in taxes each month for the foreseeable to make that happen? Indeed. Instead, the Government is looking to rely on external and private investment, which makes one wonder what they will be offered in return.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Has anybody got anything good to say about this or even believe that the poorest regions will actually get decent funding?
Click to expand...
Order. Order. Any more hilarity and the thread gets pulled.
There's more chance of the Net releasing an unredacted Gray report...Nil.
The "plan" took over 20 minutes of cross-checking marginal tory seats, as they, and only they, will get a penny. If any cash went anywhere else johnson would be flirted quick-time by the ultras in the cabinet, aided and abetted by the msm.
 
Gabriel said:
The intention is good and that would normally earn it universal acclaim, but it would take substantial money for many decades to achieve. It could and probably should come from within and from everyone if the idea is to truly unite the country. But how many are prepared to pay 5% extra in taxes each month for the foreseeable to make that happen? Indeed. Instead, the Government is looking to rely on external and private investment, which makes one wonder what they will be offered in return.
Click to expand...
I’m prepared to offer the extra on my wage but are the well off on theirs? From what I see, what they are proposing they just can’t deliver because they know there’s not the buy in, which is shown by the lack of in-depth strategy within the White Paper.

There‘s no good intention here, the only intention is to move the talk on by promising change in 30 years.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
I’m prepared to offer the extra on my wage but are the well off on theirs? From what I see, what they are proposing they just can’t deliver because they know there’s not the buy in, which is shown by the lack of in-depth strategy within the White Paper.

There‘s no good intention here, the only intention is to move the talk on by promising change in 30 years.
Click to expand...
They just don't have the money. As I posted earlier in this thread, the idea is to achieve the kind of productivity levels that Germany has managed since reunification, yet that has taken almost 30 years of everyone paying an extra 5% per month. England in that time has instead championed itself as a comparatively low-tax country, but that has led to enormous underinvestment and ever-widening disparities. Look at the furor that proposed increases on NI and fuel bills are creating; there just isn't the culture to accept tax hikes even if they were universal.

I think deep down the intention is good, and I'm sure all politicians, no matter their hue, would agree that it should be done. How it is done, alas, is where any agreement starts to unravel.
 
The perfect fumble said:
They did, which meant it was very difficult to bid for EU regeneration funding, which was match funded, meaning if a region was successful in winning EU funds, in order to draw it down the money needed to be match funded 50/50 by central government.

Of course central government didn't want to cough up. Quick fix, get rid of the agencies that bid, hence no bid, hence no money, hence no obligation to match fund.

Our poorest regions lost untold millions in regeneration funding as a consequence.
Click to expand...
There were all sorts of small pots as well, e.g. Coalfields Regeneration; small schemes that made a difference, funnelled mostly to the more deprived areas.
 
Gabriel said:
They just don't have the money. As I posted earlier in this thread, the idea is to achieve the kind of productivity levels that Germany has managed since reunification, yet that has taken almost 30 years of everyone paying an extra 5% per month. England in that time has instead championed itself as a comparatively low-tax country, but that has led to enormous underinvestment and ever-widening disparities. Look at the furor that proposed increases on NI and fuel bills are creating; there just isn't the culture to accept tax hikes even if they were universal.

I think deep down the intention is good, and I'm sure all politicians, no matter their hue, would agree that it should be done. How it is done, alas, is where any agreement starts to unravel.
Click to expand...
And that’s why it’s just a fairy tale from the current incumbents, used as a way to move the narrative on, as the timing shows.

So, in reality, and if you are prepared to use it in this way then it has no substance at all so negates the ‘good intentions’ that you suggest.

Looking at the furore over taxes and energy prices, you seem to put it down to a cultural issue when it’s far more than that. The only cultural thing that can be said is that those who are doing well can call it ‘Cultural’ whereas those, and there are many, cannot see it any other way other than ‘Surviving’.

I’m unsure if you are playing Devils Advocate or trying to reason to people as a Johnson supporter, either way, you are well worded but seem very much on the governments side. Which, I have no problems with, that’s why we have a forum for debate, but it would be nice not to hide the hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top