What is the GLA for?
At last!
I have now found out what the "Greater London Authority" (GLA) is for.
Apart from acting as lackey for the European Union, that is.
Mrs. Thatcher had this right when she abolishedKen Livingstone the GLC back in the 1980's.
London is a collection of villages that as a consequence of urban sprawl have merged into one great metropolis. However, the villages are still there, and to a lesser extent, so are the villagers...
... and we prefer to manage our municipal affairs locally, it is quicker, cheaper and allows for competition between those villages.
On the occasional situation where a pan-London infrastructural project is being planned (such as Crossrail), it is not inconceivable to imagine the local municipalities coming together by delegation, say one or two delegates from each borough, to co-ordinate the project, and fund it. Certainly the actual co-operation required for that construct missed something, since it never seems to become a reality, despite the permanent building sites around the various stations.
So, GLA not needed there then. And it certainly isn't required for the purposes that neither Boris Johnson (as mayor) nor the current nasty little incumbent and son of London bus driver Sadiq Khan have been seen to oversee and mismanage. Namely the oversight of public transport or the erection of public art.
Johnson should carry on with the national public will, to ensure that the nation leaves the EU to its own devices and return the nation to its sovereign status, and as soon as that is complete, move to disassemble its faux nation destroying assemblies, like those seen in London, Manchester and other once fine cities across the nation.
Newcastle was the only city where the people were consulted and they firmly rejected it, as would the others had they been given the opportunity.
In other words, the only statue that needs to be put in a box is Mr. Khan and his fellow travellers, like Andy Burnham, they cost us a fortune and have nothing to offer.
I digress, it would seem that the purpose of such bodies as the GLA is to deface the city and attempt to erase its history along superficial political lines, depending on the colour of the current incumbent.
Or am I missing something?
Oh... And Roger Scruton for the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square!
I have now found out what the "Greater London Authority" (GLA) is for.
Apart from acting as lackey for the European Union, that is.
Mrs. Thatcher had this right when she abolished
London is a collection of villages that as a consequence of urban sprawl have merged into one great metropolis. However, the villages are still there, and to a lesser extent, so are the villagers...
... and we prefer to manage our municipal affairs locally, it is quicker, cheaper and allows for competition between those villages.
On the occasional situation where a pan-London infrastructural project is being planned (such as Crossrail), it is not inconceivable to imagine the local municipalities coming together by delegation, say one or two delegates from each borough, to co-ordinate the project, and fund it. Certainly the actual co-operation required for that construct missed something, since it never seems to become a reality, despite the permanent building sites around the various stations.
So, GLA not needed there then. And it certainly isn't required for the purposes that neither Boris Johnson (as mayor) nor the current nasty little incumbent and son of London bus driver Sadiq Khan have been seen to oversee and mismanage. Namely the oversight of public transport or the erection of public art.
Johnson should carry on with the national public will, to ensure that the nation leaves the EU to its own devices and return the nation to its sovereign status, and as soon as that is complete, move to disassemble its faux nation destroying assemblies, like those seen in London, Manchester and other once fine cities across the nation.
Newcastle was the only city where the people were consulted and they firmly rejected it, as would the others had they been given the opportunity.
In other words, the only statue that needs to be put in a box is Mr. Khan and his fellow travellers, like Andy Burnham, they cost us a fortune and have nothing to offer.
I digress, it would seem that the purpose of such bodies as the GLA is to deface the city and attempt to erase its history along superficial political lines, depending on the colour of the current incumbent.
Or am I missing something?
Oh... And Roger Scruton for the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square!
 |
| Sir Roger Scruton by Pete Helme |
Why?
Because he was one of the few people that currently call themselves "conservative" who understood that conservatism is something that grows locally, and thrives on local nurture and self management.
Comments
Post a Comment