How the cuts would have fallen

Published: 12 May, 2011

• HAD Sally Gimson, been successful in the 2010 parliamentary elections as the Labour Party candidate for South Leicestershire, instead of trailing third, one does wonders what she would have had to say about the cuts intended by a Labour government (Stand up for the Libraries, Letters May 5). 

Her party, based on their manifesto and budget, were planning to cut public spending by the equivalent of 80 per cent of what the coalition’s is cutting, for the Labour government had woken up to the fact that they were spending £5 for every £4 of tax they collecting and the sources of borrowing were drying up.

Of course, we only have to look at Camden to see how the cuts would have fallen. Given the opportunity to avoid cutting services to the most vulnerable, by way of an alternative budget proposed by Conservative councillors and signed-off as manageable, by the council’s director of finance, Labour councillors chose to put politics before people. 

From her letter last week, it is clear that Ms Gimson thinks it is better to let services go to the wall rather than see them provided by the private sector at a cheaper price. 

In short, for those on the left, it’s better to lose the libraries than lose the argument. 

KEITH SEDGWICK
Gospel Oak, NW5