sábado, 3 de abril de 2010
TEc debate motion: "Has New Labour failed?" Here's how I see it.
My opinion expressed here may only be judged as that of an outsider looking in.
I do not live in the UK but did spend around a year there between 1999-2000 besides a permanent interest in the country.
Unfortunately I have to agree with the motion and stress that the rose has wilted badly.
It is not about Iraq (failure) or Sierra Leone (success) or any other policy undertaken at home or abroad.
The full picture must be rolled out encompassing every relevant policy detail on it - by omission or commission - to assess on balance.
New Labour swept back to power after a long 18-year 'break' riding on a massive wave of support and sympathy.
Having dealt with the left-wingers from within - who had noticeably lost touch with what might be summed up as the workings of modern economy - New Labour had every gloss and glamour heaped on its rising star Tony Blair not least.
13 years on the UK is only just beginning to emerge from its deepest recession ever following a period of unprecedented unbroken growth constantly portrayed as exemplary.The triumph of free-wheeling capitalism under New Labour's stewardship.Britain could even stand tall compared to continental laggards like France or Germany.
The recession is of course not to be entirely blamed on the government of the day - anywhere for that matter - but surely over the years New Labour did everything to broadly confirm a free-for-all type of handling of the economy.This led to Britain's clearly overblown financial services sector becoming the main driver for worthless speculation-based paper growth rather than tangible wealth creation.
Which probably directs us to structural problems that would have needed much greater attention.
Here's the big catch however: how to find a proper balanced role for government and public policy in a country whose two main parties basically shared the same view regarding minimal State intervention?
In principle I too share such a view but never to the extent that even regulators, institutional whistle-blowers and entities who by definition should exercise their authority when seen fit became excessively complacent and very much part of the problem instead.
In actual fact should such bodies have delivered on their duties and banking, finance and the economy might not have sunk to the depths they did.
The free-market economy is a marvellous invention, one that has proved to work best towards wealth creation.
Just as important is the existence of a system of checks and balances necessarily put in place by government on behalf of the much wider interests of the public.
New Labour's upside and achievements are there for the British people to determine.
It would seem to me that more was to be expected of a renewed Labour government.
Against such high hopes a sizeable delivery shortfall exists no doubt.
Lastly, there is a perception that New Labour exhausted itself in power unable or unwilling to inject new energy into British society.
Perhaps a stint in the opposition will help it recover breath and fitness.
I do not live in the UK but did spend around a year there between 1999-2000 besides a permanent interest in the country.
Unfortunately I have to agree with the motion and stress that the rose has wilted badly.
It is not about Iraq (failure) or Sierra Leone (success) or any other policy undertaken at home or abroad.
The full picture must be rolled out encompassing every relevant policy detail on it - by omission or commission - to assess on balance.
New Labour swept back to power after a long 18-year 'break' riding on a massive wave of support and sympathy.
Having dealt with the left-wingers from within - who had noticeably lost touch with what might be summed up as the workings of modern economy - New Labour had every gloss and glamour heaped on its rising star Tony Blair not least.
13 years on the UK is only just beginning to emerge from its deepest recession ever following a period of unprecedented unbroken growth constantly portrayed as exemplary.The triumph of free-wheeling capitalism under New Labour's stewardship.Britain could even stand tall compared to continental laggards like France or Germany.
The recession is of course not to be entirely blamed on the government of the day - anywhere for that matter - but surely over the years New Labour did everything to broadly confirm a free-for-all type of handling of the economy.This led to Britain's clearly overblown financial services sector becoming the main driver for worthless speculation-based paper growth rather than tangible wealth creation.
Which probably directs us to structural problems that would have needed much greater attention.
Here's the big catch however: how to find a proper balanced role for government and public policy in a country whose two main parties basically shared the same view regarding minimal State intervention?
In principle I too share such a view but never to the extent that even regulators, institutional whistle-blowers and entities who by definition should exercise their authority when seen fit became excessively complacent and very much part of the problem instead.
In actual fact should such bodies have delivered on their duties and banking, finance and the economy might not have sunk to the depths they did.
The free-market economy is a marvellous invention, one that has proved to work best towards wealth creation.
Just as important is the existence of a system of checks and balances necessarily put in place by government on behalf of the much wider interests of the public.
New Labour's upside and achievements are there for the British people to determine.
It would seem to me that more was to be expected of a renewed Labour government.
Against such high hopes a sizeable delivery shortfall exists no doubt.
Lastly, there is a perception that New Labour exhausted itself in power unable or unwilling to inject new energy into British society.
Perhaps a stint in the opposition will help it recover breath and fitness.
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário