"Michael Bell" wrote in message
...
In article , Michael Bell
wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
Michael Bell:
But I am also aware of the political dimension of projects like
Crossrail
and Thameslink, which won't benefit Londoners very much, far less
than
the projects I discuss above. Crossrail and Thameslink can never be
viable in terms of paying back their capital, and they can only be
justified in cost-benefit terms if they attract vast number of NEW
travellers into London. A decision to build them at government
expense is
a decision to abandon the rest of the country and concentrate all
development in the South - East. As a Northerner, I am against that.
And
maybe you should be too. Remember what happened to capitals which
get too
far out of step with their countries, like Paris in 1871. The Paris
municipality ("commune" in French = "municipality" in English: our
failure to translate this word has led us to serious
misunderstanding of
this event) was crushed by the provinces.

Think hard!
[snipped]

John Prescott, before the labour victory of 1997, proposed a new
North-South Shinkansen going London - Birmingham- Potteries - Manchester -
Leeds - Newcastle - Edinburgh - Glasgow. Let us say this route is built
and
whatever other steps are necessary to enable this new megalopolis to
function
on the same level as London are taken - what would your reaction be?

Totally agree with you, except it should be
London-Birmingham-Potteries-Manchester-Leeds-Glasgow-Edinburgh-Newcastle....
..

Scotland's largest city, Glasgow, is more important than its 2nd city,
Edinsmugsboresville, which (due to an accident of history) is now its
'capital'.