Skip to main content

There is an alternative and the British Chambers of Commerce spell it out.

Today the Prime Minister, David Cameron, adopted the strategy of economic madness. Whilst his Business Secretary, Vince Cable, has described the loss of the triple A status as being largely 'symbolic', Mr Cameron once again nailed his colours to its mast. It is a bit like crashing a car into at a tree and then declaring that it indicates they were travelling in the right direction. Mr Cameron continues with the line that there is no alternative. This is wrong, blind, foolish, obstinate and rather arrogant. It rejects advice from those economists who call for a change in direction.

The economy is in a bad shape. It is insufficient to point to the odd 'green shoots', the odd indication that things might turn out all right in the end. The coalition is missing its targets by a wide margin, and with the current strategy, austerity is set to last at least until 2017 and beyond. A decade of austerity will leave the economy considerably weakened, the poor poorer.

Nor is this a party political issue. Groups across the political spectrum, and of no political colour, have called for a strategy for growth.  Today, in light of the absence of growth, the British Chambers of Commerce has called for immediate action to stimulate growth. This would be a major change of direction. Growth should be the objective, and not simply cutting the deficit.

The Director General of the BCC said today:

"The Chancellor should seize the opportunity in next month's Budget to be radical, and introduce measures that creat“e an environment of enterprise, stimulate export growth, kick-start infrastructure projects and create a structure of business finance which supports growing companies. Above all, these measures should create confidence. Our own research shows that firms across Britain believe they can drive growth this year, but they can’t do it alone. The government must be bold and do all it can to boost confidence so that businesses can create jobs, wealth and ultimately long-term growth.”

The government strategy is counter productive as blind austerity reduces revenue it becomes more difficult to cut the deficit. It is bad economics and bad for the country. There is an alternative.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,