I agree that on the likely outcome of this continuous series of reportages - that your blog suddenly will be no more - but the reason, I think, will be different. Not so newsworthy.
It’s that Michael will stop answering your 3am calls for computer tech help.

He told us in the past, remember? He requests undemanding, illogical and unquestioning love as prerequisite for his repair services.

“Transport for London”: it’s a take on “infrastructure development” mantra, so popular in Washington these days. The variation of government roadmaking of the 30’s. Actually, it’s worse than that: in the 30s at least they were building dams, investing into the country’s energy resources. Now their idea of energy is elephant dung’ fuel.

"undemanding, illogical and unquestioning love as prerequisite for his repair services”

I wouldn’t say I demand it. Merely that it would be nice occasionally, and then only from certain people, not generally including Brian.

Filling large buildings that have been built as political projects with government workers is a tried and true method of providing only barely hidden subsidies, of course. The WTC in NYC was a classic example, and the Queen Victoria Building in Sydney was another. (The QVB is now a prestigious building full of private tenants, but it only took about 100 years to get there). I am not sure I have seen it happen before the building has been built before though. I would have hoped most of the political will behind this building would have departed with Ken, but apparently not.

Oh, so Michael, you’re NOT an equal opportunity bastard, per Brian’s elegant expression. Nice to know there is still some healthy discrimination out there.

Government tenants leases: I only had experience with US policies, so London might be different - but I think government bureaucracy is the dragon that eats his own tail; once they put the machine in gear, it will roll on by inertia even when the initiating push no longer there. When I was involved in courthouse design, the possibility that a new judge (some of them were elected officials, albeit with no construction budget of their own to direct) will change (or cancel) some construction decision was much more probable than the same happening in the Mayor’s office. Once the City (or County, or any municipality) have it in their next year’ budget, there must be some extraordinary circumstances (like ...having no revenue!) to cancel contracts.

I’m sure you already know this, and put it down to my missing a nuance, but Transport for London or TFL’s been around for years - http://www.tfl.gov.uk/

At present, the bulk of their stuff is crowded as of old into 55 Broadway, which was great when the network was 1939-size. But there’s about another six offices in other people’s buildings scattered around London, including some in the marvellously-named Empress State Building. If this happens - HUGE if - there might be something to be gained by having everyone under one roof. If that’s what they have in mind. If not from a libertarian point of view. But I’m not a libertarian etc. and so forth.

Personally think the thing looks frightful and hope they don’t build it. I may be back in London for 2012, and if so, I don’t want this in my line of sight every five minutes.