The UK, master of figure manipulation
When one looks at the history of Cornwall and its treatment by all parties, one can see what those parties have planned for Cornwall. The same can be applied to other places too but lets dwell on Cornwall now. A recent report says:
”…there continue to be some challenges. Uppermost among these is the persistently poor wage levels commanded by those who work in C&IoS (Cornwall & Isles of Scilly). Data relating to employees suggest that median levels of gross weekly earnings were actually unchanged in C&IoS between 2008/10 and 2013/15. Nationally, they increased by about 5% over the same period, and by 2013/15, median gross weekly earnings were over 30% higher across England as a whole than in Cornwall. This is a significant differential, and the fact that it appears to be growing is a real cause for concern.”
Now that we see this, we can why the Tories are so desperate for a Devonwall constituency. They want to do the same thing they’re doing with the NHS, to mention that £trillions will be spent towards any problems. What they don’t mention is that those extra £’s will be spent on bureaucrats. “Yes we’re so kind that we’re going to spend all this extra money on the NHS. Psst Bob, here’s an extra £10 billion for keeping quiet so that we can continue on our plan to privatise the NHS”. The same will be possible by combining the whole south-west region to create a Devonwall- the rich will grow richer for keeping quiet, while the poor become poorer. Its all about figures of course, by mentioning extra money being spent we suppose any problems will be dealt with, but they won’t, they’ll be swept under the carpet. By creating a Devonwall, the poorer area’s such as Cornwall will be conveniently erased from any reports, instead any report will dwell on the south west region as a whole. So long as area’s in the south west grow they’ll put off any negative drops that occur elsewhere in the region. Cornwall will continue on its downward drop with no mention of this atall. Good eh? Manipulation of figures at its best.
The same could be said of elected mayors, which Cornwall was told it didn’t need but now is told it does. Why are the area’s that have elected mayors getting incentives, while the area’s that say no are told they’ll get no funding? As seen with the creation of Cornwall Council, too many local people objecting to matters dictated by the almighty Westminster can slow down events and cost money. While Westminster dwindles in its office deciding what areas get what and which areas are left for the vultures, local people can get quite emotional and this can cause problems if those people happen to be politicians. What better way to deal with this than to go over the heads of those people and politicians completely? Just have one person, lets call them a mayor, to decide everything. After all, one person is so much easier to bully, of course bullying isn’t neccesary when they’re part of your party. So those area’s that have just elected a mayor will now be watched to see what happens. But do area’s have a choice to have a mayor or not if Westminster decides to cut or halt funding for them if they say no? The notion of being a united kingdom seems distant when the leaders of your kingdom acts in such a dictatorial manner. How dare people have voice.
