Never heard of New Towns Polly?
Rent was always the glitch in the benefit system, and Beveridge never found a logical answer. Well, here at last is a final solution he never considered: put all poor people in distant dumping grounds where nobody wants to live because there is no work, then call them workless scroungers, lacking in aspiration for the children they have taken out of class to throw together in schools where nobody’s parents work.
I’m surprised (not really) that Polly ignores the experience of the New Towns. I was born in Harlow in 1966 and grew up there in the Seventies at the same time as Jason Cowley (former editor of the New Statesman). He had this to say, with which I agree;
When I lived in Harlow, in the 1970s, a trip to the town centre – known locally as The High – was always something to cherish. Built on the highest part of the town, it seemed to offer everything an energetic young boy could want in those days: department stores, an Olympic-size swimming pool, a hi-tech sports centre, a dry-ski slope, a skating rink and a golf course set in a landscaped park through which a river meandered. It even had its own water gardens, at the gateway to which was a Henry Moore sculpture of a family – which, my father told me, symbolised all the new families that had started in the 1960s when Harlow was known as “pram town”.
In those days Harlow was a vibrant place, with utopian yearnings. It was one of the new towns built after the war, centrally planned but with its own distinct local identity. It had new model housing estates – many built using experimental materials and modish techniques – a central business district, designated green wedges, pubs named after butterflies and roads named after political heroes (Mandela Avenue, and so on). It had a leftwing council, a progressive, liberal intelligentsia, which congregated around the excellent local playhouse, eight comprehensive schools and a well-funded network of children’s playschemes and recreational sports facilities. It was a well-organised town, with a tough, resilient, wised-up local population, many of whom were aspirational former East Enders.
Indeed, my parents were two of them, and I had a fabulous education at a proud and strong Comprehensive school. Four of my sixth-form associates went to Oxbridge, and, after my sister, I became the second member of my family (tenth-generation Huegenot refugees) to attend University.
Harlow was superbly designed by the master-planner Sir Frederick Gibberd (his dream has been described as a rhapsody on the welfare state) and ushered in the ever-present now by building Britain’s first pedestrian precinct AND its first residential tower block. Harlow was the future when the future was bright.
My point, which I am leading up to, is not that Harlow’s failure was down to the overbearing dominance of England by London, although I believe it was: In the eighties, Harlow became an urban warehouse, servicing the needs of the greedy capital with goods and labour and otherwise ignored by the metropolitan elite, ceasing to be a meaningful town in its own right and becoming just a deprived district of outer London (The health of people in Harlow is generally worse than the England average. The levels of statutory homelessness, GCSE achievement and people diagnosed with diabetes are worse than the England average. The incidence of violent crime is higher than the England average – Dept of Health Profile 2009). It’s Little New Jersey to London’s Manhattan.
No, my actual (rather small) point is that when the aspirational poor were previously shunted to distant dumping grounds, the biggest error was in not sending us far enough away from people like Polly Toynbee and her metrocentric ilk; those for whom if it doesn’t happen in London, then it doesn’t really happen at all.
Poor William Hague. From yesterday’s Observer;
The government is moving swiftly to change the law on universal jurisdiction to abolish the ability to bring private prosecutions for international crimes in the UK.
The foreign secretary, William Hague, has said the coalition government is already examining the law in detail, amid fears that the threat of arrest is preventing high-ranking Israelis from visiting the UK. “We cannot have a position where Israeli politicians feel they cannot visit this country,” Hague said. “The situation is unsatisfactory [and] indefensible. It is absolutely my intention to act speedily.”
Use of universal jurisdiction in the UK has attracted controversy after several high-profile attempts to obtain arrest warrants for senior Israelis, including the deputy Israeli prime minister, Ehud Barak, and the opposition leader, Tzipi Livni.
I don’t think they’re going to feel welcome outside Israel for some time now. But at least Mr Hague has adjusted his tone;
“I call on the government of Israel to open the crossings to allow unfettered access for aid to Gaza, and address the serious concerns about the deterioration in the humanitarian and economic situation and about the effect on a generation of young Palestinians.”
As Israel seeks to minimise the damaging fallout from its attack on the Gaza aid convoy, the cracks in the propaganda facade are already evident. From Haaretz;
Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Monday that the organizers of the Gaza aid flotilla were to blame after at least 10 activists were killed when Israel Navy commandos stormed the ship…. Barak voiced regret for the deaths, but called the flotilla a political provocation by and said the sponsors of the flotilla were violent supporters of a terror organization.
Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said earlier Monday that the organizers of the Gaza aid flotilla have connections to international terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Al-Qaida, and called the aid convoy a violent and provocative attempt to break the blockade on Gaza.
Ayalon, speaking at a press conference at the Foreign Ministry, said that Israel found weapons aboard the Gaza flotilla, which were used against IDF troops.
From the IDF spokesperson;
According to reports from sea, on board the flotilla that was attempting to break the maritime closure on the Gaza Strip, IDF forces apprehended two violent activists holding pistols. The violent activists took these pistols from IDF forces and apparently opened fire on the soldiers as evident by the empty pistol magazines.
From the website of the IDF;
During the boarding of the ships, demonstrators onboard attacked the IDF Naval personnel with live fire and light weaponry including knives and clubs. Additionally, one of the weapons used was grabbed from an IDF soldier. The demonstrators had clearly prepared their weapons in advance for this specific purpose.
So who’s lying, the Israeli government or the Israeli military? That’s a rhetorical question, by the way.