written by marzi

So, it’s official – Manchester is better than London. Or at least, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit, it would appear that this is the case. Indeed, our capital city fails to make even the top 50 of the worlds’ most liveable cities, according to the Economists’ survey. Manchester, on the other hand, fairs better, coming in at 46th position and was the only British city to make the top 50. London falls short in 51st place. The survey’s measuring criteria included factors such as healthcare, culture, environment and infrastructure; factors which, apparently, are rather poor in our nation’s capital city. The most liveable city was Vancouver, Canada, followed by Vienna, Austria.

So, what inhibits London’s liveability? Is it the packed tubes, trains and buses? Or running the daily gauntlet in order to commute to work? Or is it the sky-high house prices that stymie even the most eager first-time-buyer from purchasing their first grimy studio apartment with a shared bathroom? Well, of course, London is no picnic. As a Mancunian who has lived there for a number of years, it admittedly takes a little time to adjust. However, notwithstanding the city’s shortfalls, London simply has a certain ‘buzz’ about it that is absent from many other cities in the world, including, I would say, both Vancouver and Vienna. London’s huge range of restaurants, bars, museums, art galleries, theatres, music concerts, and exhibitions all add to this “buzz”. To use Samuel Johnson’s often cited quote: “When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life.” And as much as we like to moan about the tube, oh how I miss it now I’m back in rainy Manchester, where public transport is, in my opinion, shocking! So, I guess, when it comes to London, you have to take the rough with the smooth.