![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
aumentouI was in St Helens - my home town - the other week, and I heard some interesting statistics.
as background, St Helens MBC normally compares st helens to westminster, a similar area by various demographic considerations. I do appreciate that st helens and westminster are nothing alike, but in terms of population, average age, size and so froth they come out quite close. St Helens MBC has been doing this since the 80's, when they were demonstrating tory funding bias. St Helens has since thatchers reign had about half the budget of westminster - despite having similar population demographics and paying roughly the same amount of tax.
recently council tax went up. St helens (which still has only half the funding westminster has, and now under a labour government*) council claimed that if they had westminsters funding, they could not only not have increased it, they could have given everyone a £1000 rebate.
*well, I say labour, but it is blair... I suppose its a safe labour seat, theres really no point doing well by his faithful voters, since next time they will vote labour anyway.
secondly, St helens is the most religious** borough in England.
** most religious = greatest church attendance. Technically, greatest religious building of your faith attendance, but St helens has neither ethnic minorities or any non-christian faiths.
thirdly, 51% of working men in St Helens are paid less than £10,000 per year - gross.
read that sentence again if you didnt find it shocking. You probably didnt quite understand the impact. That means more than half of the working men of ALL age groups - not just the school leavers or anything sensible - are on less than £180 a week net.
This explains why st helens is shopping mecca for places that sell really cheap stuff. Its the only place Ive ever been that wilkinsons is undercut on screws and nails. It also explains why st helens has so many council houses, and a very high pub density.
So what I wonder sometimes, what I want to ask when people with faith in democracy, people who think our society is in some way morally superior because its leaders are voted in 'by the people', is:
How come St Helens is represented in parliament by a former tory? How come he had never been there before he was nominated as candidate? How can he represent people who are extremely poor and live in an impoverished northern borough which EXPORTS cash to the south while running stupid levels of unemployment and debt when he has an MP's salary of 40k plus and his own business? How can he understand their needs as regards council housing and bus services when he has five big houses and a chauffeur? Has he ever been on a bus? How can a man who votes whichever way blair tells him represent a group of people who on the whole want higher pay for firemen, more benefits, public ownership of services and possibly their coal mines reopening?
and the answer is, he cant. He doesnt.
british democracy is a sham.
as background, St Helens MBC normally compares st helens to westminster, a similar area by various demographic considerations. I do appreciate that st helens and westminster are nothing alike, but in terms of population, average age, size and so froth they come out quite close. St Helens MBC has been doing this since the 80's, when they were demonstrating tory funding bias. St Helens has since thatchers reign had about half the budget of westminster - despite having similar population demographics and paying roughly the same amount of tax.
recently council tax went up. St helens (which still has only half the funding westminster has, and now under a labour government*) council claimed that if they had westminsters funding, they could not only not have increased it, they could have given everyone a £1000 rebate.
*well, I say labour, but it is blair... I suppose its a safe labour seat, theres really no point doing well by his faithful voters, since next time they will vote labour anyway.
secondly, St helens is the most religious** borough in England.
** most religious = greatest church attendance. Technically, greatest religious building of your faith attendance, but St helens has neither ethnic minorities or any non-christian faiths.
thirdly, 51% of working men in St Helens are paid less than £10,000 per year - gross.
read that sentence again if you didnt find it shocking. You probably didnt quite understand the impact. That means more than half of the working men of ALL age groups - not just the school leavers or anything sensible - are on less than £180 a week net.
This explains why st helens is shopping mecca for places that sell really cheap stuff. Its the only place Ive ever been that wilkinsons is undercut on screws and nails. It also explains why st helens has so many council houses, and a very high pub density.
So what I wonder sometimes, what I want to ask when people with faith in democracy, people who think our society is in some way morally superior because its leaders are voted in 'by the people', is:
How come St Helens is represented in parliament by a former tory? How come he had never been there before he was nominated as candidate? How can he represent people who are extremely poor and live in an impoverished northern borough which EXPORTS cash to the south while running stupid levels of unemployment and debt when he has an MP's salary of 40k plus and his own business? How can he understand their needs as regards council housing and bus services when he has five big houses and a chauffeur? Has he ever been on a bus? How can a man who votes whichever way blair tells him represent a group of people who on the whole want higher pay for firemen, more benefits, public ownership of services and possibly their coal mines reopening?
and the answer is, he cant. He doesnt.
british democracy is a sham.
