Nothing wrong with that, except that:
1 Our council tax bills just keep rising, irrespective of "savings"
2 One major cost, defined benefit pensions for all council staff, is never touched
Anyhoo, Nanny's local councils have come up with a jolly wheeze to save some money; they are going to start turning off street lamps.
Needless to say, Nanny is also keen to emphasise the "green" "benefits" of this "initiative".
How funny that "green" is the new mantra of our lords and masters in the councils. Do not fall for that, it is merely a good excuse for them to brow beat us and impose more rules, regulations and taxes.
Councils in certain parts of the country are experimenting with turning off some street lights, the trials are ad hoc - each is doing it differently.
- Buckinghamshire has selected sites that are "low-risk" and has added solar road studs, extra signs and road markings.
- Gloucestershire County Council will be turning off 36% of its lighting part-time, but not on main traffic routes or areas of high crime.
- Essex is carrying out "part-night lighting" trials in Maldon District and in Uttlesford.
When the blackouts were in place (1914/18 and 1939/45) the level of crime (robberies, rapes, assaults etc) and accidents skyrocketed.
Would Nanny and her chums in the councils care to tell us why, in 2008, things are going to be different if we are put back to blackout conditions?
The Police Superintendents' Association thinks that the idea is bollocks, and says that good street lighting deters crime and reduces accidents.
To paraphrase Sir Edward Gray, on the eve of the First World War:
"The lights are going out all over Britain, they may not be lit again in my lifetime."
Look what happened to the country as a result of that disaster!