Departments told to find £30bn of assets for 'jumble sale'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A sell-off of land and property worth £30bn was announced yesterday by the Chancellor in a massive "jumble sale" of government assets which may include the Royal Mint.
A sell-off of land and property worth £30bn was announced yesterday by the Chancellor in a massive "jumble sale" of government assets which may include the Royal Mint.
Mr Brown said he wanted each department to look in their attics for unnecessary items they could sell. Buildings, car parks and even school playing fields may not be off limits.
In a surprise announcement yesterday Mr Brown instructed ministers across government to "rationalise" their use of buildings and land, and place extraneous assets on the auction block to swell the Treasury coffers. Whitehall ministries, including the Department of Culture, have up to 2010 to draw up a list of saleable items.
"I have asked Sir Michael Lyons [professor of public policy at Birmingham University] to work with each department to rationalise their use of property and land and, where necessary, arrange sales and disposals. I can tell the House that the objective I am setting is an overall total of £30bn of asset sales," he said yesterday.
The announcement will revive memories of a similar Treasury move in the year after Labour first came to power when each government department was asked to draw up a "register" of publicly owned assets they could sell off.
The "Doomsday Book" included government assets worth £300bn and departments were warned they could lose out in future spending rounds if they did not sell enough of the "family silver". The policy led eventually to the controversial part-sale of the National Air Traffic Services, and the Commonwealth Development Fund.
This time the Ministry of Defence, which owns thousands of acres across Britain, including shooting ranges, is likely to be asked to look at its property portfolio more closely.
The Department of Transport will be dusting off its records to see if it has any spare railway sidings left over from before the privatisation of British Rail it could sell. The Foreign Office, which still owns a string of elegant period buildings overseas, may be asked whether today's ambassadors need such grand surroundings. Selling palatial embassies, and forcing diplomats to move into new-build office blocks overseas, would bring in millions.
But moves to sell off historic buildings and art are expected to be fiercely resisted and the Treasury could face claims that it wants to sell Britain's heritage.
The Department of Culture is custodian of an enviable art collection, including a Lowry and valuable examples of Brit art, which decorate embassy and Whitehall walls. But moves to sell any portion of the Government Art Collection, which has accumulated in value thanks to prudent buying by its curators, will be deeply unpopular.
MPs have warned in the past that the Government has disposed of assets at below their market value, allowing buyers to sell on their purchases at a huge profit.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments