A simple stat for you to start: there are four mentions of 'rural' in the Budget document released by the Treasury today (available here) and 13 for 'cities'.
Some readers will recall that not so long ago, in the autumn of 2011, the government released its first stab at trimming down Britain's onerous planning regulations. The National Planning Policy Framework, or NPPF as it became known, was seen by the coalition as a useful new weapon in its battle to control the deficit - more houses, more wealth, more growth.
While some might have you believe that the biggest threat facing the countryside is the government's as yet unpublished and yet-to-be voted-on White Paper on planning (otherwise known as the National Planning Policy Framework or NPPF); in truth the biggest danger to our much-loved green spaces is the slow and seemingly irreversible decline of the rural economy.
There have always been those opposed to progress. But we're not talking about the Galileo or the Industrial Revolution here - we're talking about 40 minutes off the journey between London and Birmingham - at a cost of £17 billion of public money! And, when no-one can be quite sure of the scheme's success, it does all seem like a little too high a price to pay.
The digital divide between urban and rural areas grows ever wider; with towns and cities basking in fibre-optic internet speeds and a variety of different providers offering competitive rates, while those living in the countryside have to contend with the net going down everytime someone calls their home telephone.
Since I first wrote about the Battle for Planning Rights for this website just two weeks ago, the war of words on the Government's draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has steadily intensified, reaching fever pitch in the past week now Parliament has returned.