Positive: Bike Lights Playful Everywhere Greggs vs. Pret Guardian comment generator Consult less, do more! More things for Leeds! Cartoons PubQuest: Birmingham

Politics: Industrial Strategy. Counting households. 1. Counting households. 2. Leeds Growth Strategy 1. Imagination not needed. Part 1. Imagination not needed. Part 2. Imagination not needed. Part 3. Calderdale Digital Strategy The Value of Time Inclusive growth. NIMBYs cause the housing crisis Innovation on buses. Fifa and the right Ward explorer Income by MSOA Heathrow and localism In defence of the € The BBC in Manchester What works (growth) Maths of inequality GDP mystery Liberal protectionists 5 types of EU voter Why Birmingham fails Who is London? Researching research Heathrow Car free Birmingham North-South divide: we never tried Imitating Manchester Asylum responsibilities The NorthernPowerhouse Centralism and Santa Claus STEM vs STEAM Replacing UK steel The State of the North, 2015 Adonis is wrong on housing The Economist & Scotland The Economist & The North The future of University BBC Bias? Yorkshire backwards London makes us poor Northern rail consultation What holds us back? Move the Lords! Saving the Union Summing it up

Tech: Tap to pay. Open Data in Birmingham Defending Uber BusTracker Building a TechNation How the UK holds back TechNorth GDS is Windows 8 OpenData at the BBC SimFlood SimSponge See me speak Train time map Digital Health Leeds Empties Leeds Site Allocations Building a Chrome extension I hate webkit Visualising mental health Microsoft's 5 easy wins Epson px700w reset Stay inside the Bubble

Old or incomplete: Orange price rises Cherish our Capital 1975 WYMetro Plan Dealing with NIMBYs Sponsoring the tube Gender bias calculator MetNetMaker Malaria PhD Symbian Loops Zwack Kegg Project The EU Eduroam & Windows 8 Where is science vital? The Vomcano 10 things London can shove Holbeck Waterwheel

Are inequality and London the reason the UK has the poorest regions in Northern Europe?

A response to this blog post, also left as a comment on that site.

I too retweeted the map. Having read this piece after a break I am further convinced that it was right to do so. I think you have missed they key point being made by many retweeters and I hope that you will reconsider your view in that light.


The issues you take with the map seem confined mostly to the text in the bottom right corner. You raise reasonable issues, but they are of almost no importance.

Is London the richest region in Europe, or is it just the fifth richest? That doesn’t change the map, it’s just a small detail.

Is PPS based on a single national purchasing power a perfect way to measure wealth in regions of unequal countries? Not really, but the only reason it is a poor measure in the UK is because the nation is so unequal. Either way we have proved, and you do not dispute, the UK’s high regional inequality.

The map should force the reader to ask how the poorest regions of the UK became, and remain, the poorest in Northern Europe – despite existing in similar geographies as their varied continental equivalents. There are plenty of regions that act as controls for the historic underinvestment and industrial decline of the UK’s regions but we see that France’s North-East, Germany’s East, and Sweden’s South have outperformed the UK. Why?

Let me borrow your analogy of a class of Year 1s.

We’ll travel back to post-war Europe and take two identical classes of ten happy, hopeful, but slightly malnourished year 1s. We’ll call one class Northern Europe and one the UK. To the Northern European class, we’ll give each child a carton of milk every morning. To the UK class, we’ll give the prefect called London ten cartons of milk and let him distribute it.

The map is showing the result a few years later of that experiment.

In one room sits a podgy London with milk dribbling down his cheek and a cohort of slightly malnourished classmates. In the other room a more equal and overall more healthy cohort of Europeans – none having quite reached London’s weight, but most quite close – play nicely.


The analogy is stretched, but it shows how inequality, the underperformance of the UK as a whole, and the leading wealth of London are just different symptoms of the same underlying, historic, and sustained bias.