Red Ken, along with most businesses in London is in favour of building Crossrail, which appears to be a good idea from what I can see.
Problem is, the GLA can't or won't just borrow the money and get on with it, and repay the interest by slapping a precept on Council Tax and Business Rates. Oh no, Red Ken's "... only concern is that the Treasury will take too cautious a financial view and put too much strain on the financial contribution London has to make".
If the project benefits London, why shouldn't we Londonders pay for it?* Or maybe he fears that the benefits will not justify the costs, and he's hedging his bets?
Answers on a postcard.
*The same goes for flood defences and anything else that boosts land values in a particular area, of course. If you buy a house on a flood plain, you can pay for your own flood defences!
Once I dipt into the future
4 hours ago
2 comments:
Is there a consensus for this among London taxpayers (of whom I'm not one)?
Yes, businesses are dead keen (more potential employees, more potential customers) and I guess commuters are pretty keen as well.
It appears that the gains far outweigh the costs. So then it is just a question of who pays for it. Those who benefit directly or "the taxpayer"?
Post a Comment