George Monbiot is correct that cuts in public services cost far more than the money saved (It hurt when I crashed my bike into a pothole – and it taught me the true price of austerity, 4 October).
I am a trustee of a small charity in Kent, The Social Justice Network, which runs a number of projects, including supporting refugees and their families to settle locally. Recently we welcomed a family of 10 (parents and eight children aged five to 16) from another county. The council had worked hard to house the family in its area but was unable to, despite having accepted its duty to do so. As a result of a forced move of nearly 100 miles at 24 hours’ notice, the father lost his job and is now benefit capped. Removing the two-child limit would make this family only marginally better off as they would still face the family benefit cap.
Organisations including the Department for Work and Pensions, Canterbury city council and Kent county council (KCC) worked with us to find schools, healthcare, benefits, food banks and free English classes for the parents, which were essential if they were to find work, settle and contribute to society. However, they were turned down for bus passes by KCC (which said there were no funds for this). The parents had no means of transport to get to the local adult education centre (funded by KCC) nearly three miles from their home.
As a result of not attending, they were kicked off the course. The family has since been rehoused, but for three months they were not learning English, not employed, not settled.
They are one family among thousands, trapped in poverty and isolation by disjointed policies that are ostensibly about money, but which fail to acknowledge the true cost.
Jeremy Cross
Canterbury
George Monbiot’s excellent article on the actual cost of potholes does not mention one infuriating aspect of the whole sorry business. Road maintenance has been outsourced for decades by council authorities to private contractors on the basis, one assumes, that it looks cheaper on the council’s books. But private contractors appear to have little interest in doing a good, lasting repair. What they want to do is a cosmetic “throw-and-go”, which deteriorates rapidly. This is the basis of their projected income stream – repeat purchase – as it is for any business.
It’s no use blaming the contractors, as they are only doing what any business would do when faced with a tender system that always favours the lowest quote. The council, in turn, is similarly trapped in a system where it wants to keep council tax as low as possible and economise wherever possible on the cost of services. There is little interest in undertaking longer-term cost analysis because it might reveal myopic decision-making.
Monica Hall
Farnborough, Hampshire
Politicians pride themselves on their realism, yet they invariably choose the more expensive option over the cheaper one. In this example, doing nothing over doing something, for fear of financial overspend. The same meanness applies to the two-child benefit cap. The spirit of the Dickensian workhouse is alive and kicking in contemporary Britain.
The reason is the embedding of neoliberalism in mainstream political thinking. As for Margaret Thatcher, so for Keir Starmer: there is no alternative. A ramshackle Britain is the price worth paying, as low taxes mean the freeing of entrepreneurial talents of the wealthy. That plus the belief in transferring state enterprise to the more capable hands of private management. As a citizen of this country, I have yet to see any of the benefits of neoliberalism materialise.
Derrick Joad
Leeds
George Monbiot’s analysis of the negative financial, as well as physical, effects of potholes highlights the repeated failure of governments to appreciate the economic‑growth benefits of maintaining and improving the country’s transport links. There is an old Chinese proverb that every prime minister should have on the wall of No 10: “If you want to get rich, build a road first.”
Colin Burke
Cartmel, Cumbria
Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
