Yesterday it was Jeremy Warner in the Telegraph realising that his right wing thinking had been wrong.

Today it is Peter Orborne. I quote at length because candidly this could have come from the blogs of the Tax Justice Network, Nick Shaxson or even here:

“It is not just the feral youth of Tottenham who have forgotten they have duties as well as rights. So have the feral rich of Chelsea and Kensington. A few years ago, my wife and I went to a dinner party in a large house in west London. A security guard prowled along the street outside, and there was much talk of the “north-south divide”, which I took literally for a while until I realised that my hosts were facetiously referring to the difference between those who lived north and south of Kensington High Street.

Most of the people in this very expensive street were every bit as deracinated and cut off from the rest of Britain as the young, unemployed men and women who have caused such terrible damage over the last few days. For them, the repellent Financial Times magazine How to Spend It is a bible. I’d guess that few of them bother to pay British tax if they can avoid it, and that fewer still feel the sense of obligation to society that only a few decades ago came naturally to the wealthy and better off.

Yet we celebrate people who live empty lives like this. A few weeks ago, I noticed an item in a newspaper saying that the business tycoon Sir Richard Branson was thinking of moving his headquarters to Switzerland. This move was represented as a potential blow to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, because it meant less tax revenue.

I couldn’t help thinking that in a sane and decent world such a move would be a blow to Sir Richard, not the Chancellor. People would note that a prominent and wealthy businessman was avoiding British tax and think less of him. Instead, he has a knighthood and is widely feted. The same is true of the brilliant retailer Sir Philip Green. Sir Philip’s businesses could never survive but for Britain’s famous social and political stability, our transport system to shift his goods and our schools to educate his workers.

Yet Sir Philip, who a few years ago sent an extraordinary £1 billion dividend offshore, seems to have little intention of paying for much of this. Why does nobody get angry or hold him culpable? I know that he employs expensive tax lawyers and that everything he does is legal, but he surely faces ethical and moral questions just as much as does a young thug who breaks into one of Sir Philip’s shops and steals from it?

Our politicians – standing sanctimoniously on their hind legs in the Commons yesterday – are just as bad. They have shown themselves prepared to ignore common decency and, in some cases, to break the law. David Cameron is happy to have some of the worst offenders in his Cabinet. Take the example of Francis Maude, who is charged with tackling public sector waste – which trade unions say is a euphemism for waging war on low‑paid workers. Yet Mr Maude made tens of thousands of pounds by breaching the spirit, though not the law, surrounding MPs’ allowances.”

And then consider this (and I’ve chopped quite a lot that is just as good, but this is important stuff for the change in culture it represents):

The Prime Minister showed no sign that he understood that something stank about yesterday’s Commons debate. He spoke of morality, but only as something which applies to the very poor: “We will restore a stronger sense of morality and responsibility – in every town, in every street and in every estate.” He appeared not to grasp that this should apply to the rich and powerful as well.

The tragic truth is that Mr Cameron is himself guilty of failing this test. It is scarcely six weeks since he jauntily turned up at the News International summer party, even though the media group was at the time subject to not one but two police investigations.

These double standards from Downing Street are symptomatic of widespread double standards at the very top of our society. It should be stressed that most people (including, I know, Telegraph readers) continue to believe in honesty, decency, hard work, and putting back into society at least as much as they take out.

But there are those who do not. Certainly, the so-called feral youth seem oblivious to decency and morality. But so are the venal rich and powerful – too many of our bankers, footballers, wealthy businessmen and politicians.

Of course, most of them are smart and wealthy enough to make sure that they obey the law. That cannot be said of the sad young men and women, without hope or aspiration, who have caused such mayhem and chaos over the past few days. But the rioters have this defence: they are just following the example set by senior and respected figures in society.

Something has gone horribly wrong in Britain. If we are ever to confront the problems which have been exposed in the past week, it is essential to bear in mind that they do not only exist in inner-city housing estates.

The culture of greed and impunity we are witnessing on our TV screens stretches right up into corporate boardrooms and the Cabinet. It embraces the police and large parts of our media. It is not just its damaged youth, but Britain itself that needs a moral reformation.

The Tax Justice Network has been at the forefront of such arguments for a long time.

And yet we still see, only this week, the tax profession openly excusing abuse.

No, nothing excuses rioting. But nothing – and I mean it as much – excuses tax haven activity, tax avoidance and tax evasion either. Nor the abuses of corporate Britain.

We have a long way to go – and we must start at the top.

 

Now that’s what you call a speech.

And a right sentiment.

Hat tip: Compass

 

I’m already a little riot weary.

I’m bored of having to say I condemn rioters: doesn’t everyone?

I’m bored also with those who say that there is a political divide on this issue: that the left are wrong to blame cuts and the right are wrong to say that’s not true.

The reality is that in a small number of communities, and for a small number of people (I suspect we’re talking 5,000 or so rioters at most) the veneer that holds people within social constraints of compliance spectacularly failed at the weekend. That’s the one fact we have: there was a break down in law and order. After that there is speculation. And there should be reasoning about how we go forward, and less of the blame game.

There’s certainly very good reason for saying blame should not be part of today’s exchanges in parliament. That’s because it would be hard to put a fag paper between the Tories and New Labour if blame were to be levelled. That’s because, if we look for areas of agreement amongst the speculation, most seem to see this rioting as an exercise in mass looting; of materialism out of control, and most seem to recognise that there was in the police response an initial lack of conviction, reflected in no small part by the immediate lack of appreciation of the situation by many in our political leadership.

The reason for the materialism is not hard to find: for thirty years excessive consumption has been promoted as the definition of well being by governments of both left and right. This is the consequence: that people want without entitlement. That may be wrong, but when day in day out people are bombarded with advertising messages whose sole purpose is to make them feel dissatisfied with their current possessions and which say that if only they had what, for many, is unattainable then they would become the human being they aspired to be, that some feel alienated is surely not something we should be surprised by? Isn’t the whole of society stressed by this messaging, and wouldn’t we all (think about it for a moment) be so much better off without it?

Second, the reason for the inadequate response is not hard to find either. For the same thirty years or so we have endured neoliberalism – a social construct that says that whatever politicians do they make people worse off because markets can always do things better, and that they should as a result leave well alone. So they did and we have seen the result. They left the police alone to get on with things – but the police have after years of such uncertainty also lost their confidence. And only with great reluctance where the politicians dragged back into the arena of leadership where they belong, and in which they feel so uncomfortable.

I agree with those who say society has failed. On ethics. On parenting. On schooling. And also on leadership. But that’s because for too long we have really believed there is no such thing as society., And that greed is good. And this is where it, inevitably, leads.

These are big themes in my forthcoming book – the Courageous State. Both are core to the arguments I make in it. As is my blaming neoliberalism as a whole (adopted by left and right alike: let’s not make this personal or particular) for this malaise. Because I think we have the right to do that.

And we have a right to look for something different - for leadership, for courage, for politicians who act on conviction. For politicians who will stand up to the market and say it can get things seriously wrong and it is the job of the state to not just correct for that but to actually stop it doing such things.  And for action to bring the excesses of some in society under control so that the differentials which fuel the resentment of those who have no prospect of ever fulfilling the dream that they are told (so inappropriately, and so incorrectly and so unethically) they must have are reduced to levels that are acceptable, because it inequality, not just of outcome but of hope that fuel so much that is wrong in society.

And we have a right to expect the end of looting too: the looting of the feral speculative economy of the real economy in which most of us live and work. Because when we look at looting then the looting of the bankers has to be addressed. As does the looting of the state’s tax revenues by so many who have now captured services the state should supply for private gain and so obviously enrich themselves unjustly at cost to all others in the process. Yes, those are issues I address too.

I’ll never condone rioting, looting or criminality. Ever.

But please don’t ask me to condone neoliberalism either. Because we all deserve something so much better than that. And today if parliament is to do anything useful it should agree that the political consensus in this country has to change; that we now have to agree that we really do need a strong, confident state, and that we do need to tame market excess, but that in the poorcess we can deliver something much more powerful, much more important and much more compelling. That is people who can achieve their potential, communities that are strong, identification with society and a sesne of purpose.

Yes, the Courageous State is about all those things too.

Now I’d better go and finish writing it. It’s due out in late September.

 

David Cameron said this today:

“For me the root cause of this mindless selfishness is the same thing I have spoken about for years: it is a complete lack of responsibility in parts of our society.

“People allowed to feel that the world owes them something, that their rights outweigh their responsibilities and that their actions do not have consequences. Well they do have consequences.

“We need to have a clearer code of values and standards that we expect people to live by and stronger penalties if they cross the line.

“Restoring a stronger sense of responsibility across our society in every town in every street in ever estate is something I am determined to do.”

But he has to mean it of banking.

And of some media companies.

And of politicians too.

Because only then is it meaningful.

I utterly condemn the rioting.

But I condemn the excesses of banking, or media companies that broke the law and MPs who did the same thing too.

Unless those with power act responsibly how can we expect the powerless to do so? There has to be leadership. Then we get the right actions from those who we expect to follow.

Can we have that leadership, please?

It’s what I’ve been asking for here for a long time.

 

This comes from here, and I don’t think he’ll mind (read from bottom up, of course):

 

Simon Jenkins is the sort of annoying columnist with whom you have on occasion to seriously agree and sometimes seriously disagree. I guess that’s a merit.

This morning he’s on form, arguing that local response is needed to the riots we’re suffering. As he puts it:

There is no substitute for proper, open, responsive democracy at any tier of government. There can be no localism without some discretion over taxation and resources. There can be no big society without a vote. Curing any community’s woes is not the job of the police. Leave it to them and trouble will simply recur.

In other words, community matters but it has been undermined in the UK and that process does have consequences for a lack of identity with place.

I think he is right.

Neither Labour or Tories have got this right. It’s a big issue to be addressed. What it says is Courageous States are confident enough to delegate power. We’ve not been there.

 

This morning there will be thousands of business owners, large and small, facing the devastation of their premises.

None of these people deserved the trauma they will face.

Some will face the loss of their livelihoods and all they have worked for. Nothing can really replace that.

But that’s not to say nothing can be done by the government today, because much could be, and needs to be. It needs to be done for those facing an immediate crisis. It needs also to be done to prevent this crisis turning into commercial disaster for the areas affected by the crimes of the last few days with untold consequences for all innocent people in those communities who will already be living with fear.

The crisis I am referring to is one relating to insurance. Some of those who have lost livelihoods and businesses will not be properly insured: that’s a fact of life. Of course, as these losses were criminal damage the government can be called upon to pay, but this morning it has to be made very clear by Vince Cable or even David Cameron that resources will be thrown at meeting claims from those who have lost to ensure lives can carry on as soon as possible. It’s the least the government can do.

More than that; the government now needs to make clear it will bear these costs and that massive hikes in insurance premiums cannot be justified as a result. Many businesses in inner city areas are marginal at best. Tipping them into loss making, or even preventing them trading by denying them insurance, would be a catalyst for yet further social issues in such areas and must not be allowed to happen. Firm action to support communities in these areas requires swift action by government on the issue of business insurance this morning.

This is something the government can do today. It is something it should do.

And lease don’t suggest that this just creates moral hazard: rioters don’t think like that. But people this morning will be facing real loss.

 

Some parts of London burned this weekend.

It’s important not to overstate things: I lived very near Brixton and in the cordoned off are in 1981 and to be honest, life went on despite those riots. It will this time too, but that’s not to diminish their significance. Crime has happened, people have been hurt and both are to be regretted: as important though, causes have to be understood. It’s just too glib to say this is criminality. Of course there is some of that, but when the normal social fabric that prevents crime has failed it has to be asked why.

That fabric has failed in my opinion because of feral capitalism: the capitalism that this blog has described over recent years, where a tiny elite have looted society to increase their wealth at cost to all the rest of us. They’ve done so by capturing banking, capturing regulation, capturing the economics profession and by capturing states themselves (and most especially tax havens) from which to launch their attack on the well being of the vast majority.

That attack has worked. In 1980 58% of UK GDP went to labour. Now it is 53%. Real wages stagnated. Those of an elite grew, massively, and that same elite extracted value from those in work by extending them excessive credit – credit they now demand be repaid whether there is capacity to do so or not. And they have captured UK politics to reinforce their claim.

That has left millions alienated. They have no hope. Some rioted. I don’t condone it. But they did it anyway.

And they did so because they maybe implicitly understand that there seems no way out of this mess right now. Even Julian Glover, a LibDem commentator for whom I rarely have much time seems to have now realised the error of that parties Orange Book ways when writing in the Guardian this morning, saying:

Five centuries ago in Europe, Protestants and Catholics vied to define the route to salvation – but both thought they knew a way. Two centuries ago, in the long shadow of the French revolution, conservatives and radicals tussled for ownership of a future that they both thought they could make brighter. In the last century, cheerleaders for the free market disputed the apostles of Marxism. Each was sure theirs was the remedy for present ills. The crises we face in the summer of 2011 are no less sharp or scary, but what’s missing is leadership, not so much by people as by ruling ideas. The best, as Yeats said, lack all conviction.

He’s right. My answer will be in my forthcoming book – the Courageous State.

But there’s another one available right now. It’s to follow the leadership being given by Israel. They’re not leaving a few discontents to riot; they’re taking to the streets en masse. As the Guardian notes:

An estimated 300,000 people took to the streets on Saturday to press their demands for social justice and lower living costs in the largest demonstrations over social issues ever seen in the country. Despite scepticism that turnout could surpass previous events, almost twice as many people joined marches in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and other towns and cities.

Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, was forced to respond to the spiralling protests with the establishment of a committee to “listen to the distress” and recommend action.

Our government and police are trying to kill off the right to demonstrate in this country – but it is possible, it can work, and I strongly suspect that this next year will see millions on the streets of the UK demanding change.

Yes we need new ideas.

But we also have to make them heard.

We need hope.

Our children need hope.

Our world needs hope.

Each of us has to deliver our small share of it.

And mass action may be a part of delivering it.

But it must be peaceful mass action. Because that’s what delivers real change.

When hundreds of thousands of people stand up and simply say “no – you can’t do this in my name – I want something better – and I expect you to deliver it, or move aside for those who can” then the world tilts a little on its axis.

And it’s very clear it needs to do that, right now.

 

I am pleased to be one of the signatories to the campaign launched today for ‘public juries’ intended to help take power away from the tiny elite who control it in the UK.

The campaign is explained in the Guardian, and laid our in detail as follows:

Something is unraveling before our eyes. From bankers to media-barons, private interests have bankrupted and corrupted the public realm. Power, for so long hidden in the pockets of a cosy elite, has been exposed. Those who wield it have been found wanting – in scruples, in morals and in decency.

Things are now in flux, but will not stay so for long.

Without decisive and sustained action, power will fall back into the hands of a small elite who have their own, and not the public’s interest at heart.

They want to prevent public revulsion turning into public action. But, it’s time for real change. Things cannot be allowed to turn back to business as usual.

Britain can no longer be just the plaything of a handful of powerful, remote interest groups treating the wider public with contempt.

The current press and political scandal is not an isolated event.

It’s the third crisis in quick succession.

First, the bankers and their bonuses, then some politicians and their expenses and now there is the press, profiting from peoples’ pain, grief and private lives.

These crises share common origins.

Left to their own devices politicians, bankers and media moguls could not regulate themselves.

They share a common culture in which greed is good, everyone takes their turn at the trough, and private interest takes precedence over the public good. They have protected each other and left the British people with a financial and political crisis.

They do what they can get away with, not seeming to care for the common life of our country. And, they are scared of only one thing. Us. The public. If public organisations and citizens are vigilant, that elite won’t be able to get away with it again. With the right checks and balances we can put the public interest back into the heart of the system.

Only we, the public, can hold power truly to account by testing whether what happens is in the public interest.

To work out how to do it we call for a new Public Jury for the British public interest to propose reforms of banking, politics, media and the police.

The Jury would be made up of 1,000 citizens drawn as a random sample of the electorate. It will be a jury of our peers. We do not need yet another inquiry in which one elite asks another elite to tell them what cannot be done.

The Jury will be funded out of the public purse, with a paid secretariat with the resources to commission research and call witnesses.

It will have the power to require attendance where persons will be asked by the public to explain themselves.

Reporting within a year of its launch the convention will study and report on:

• Media ownership and the public interest

• The role of the financial sector in the crash

• MP selections and accountability

• Policing and public interest

• How to apply a ‘public interest first’ test more generally to British political and corporate life

 

Signed by:

Greg Dyke

Henry Porter

Lord Stewart Wood

Lord Smith of Clifton

Baroness Helena Kennedy QC

John Kampfner, Index on Censorship

Philip Pullman, author

Gordon Roddick

Caroline Lucas MP, leader of the Green Party

Professor Zygmunt Bauman, Leeds University

Professor Francesca Klug OBE

Professor David Marquand, Mansfield College, Oxford University

Professor Kate Pickett, University of York

Professor Richard Grayson, University of London

Ann Pettifor, Prime Economics

Peter Facey, Unlock Democracy

Deborah Doane, World Development Movement

John Christenson, Tax Justice Network

Richard Murphy, Tax Research LLP

Charlie McConnell, Schumacher College

Professor Tim Jackson, University of Surrey

Guy Shrubsole, Public Interest Research Centre

Richard Hawkins, Public Interest Research Centre

Alan Mac Dougall, PIRC

Neal Lawson, Compass

Martin McIvor, Renewal

Gavin Hayes, Compass

Andrew Simms, nef fellow

Will Straw, founder of Left Foot Forward

Clifford Singer, Other Taxpayers Alliance

Dave Prentis, General Secretary, Unison

Heather Wakefield, Unison

Polly Toynbee, The Guardian

Madeleine Bunting, The Guardian

Laurie Penny, journalist

Heather Savigny, UEA

Professor Judith Marquand, Wolfson College, Oxford University

Professor Alan Finlayson, University of Swansea

Professor Jonathan Rutherford, Middlesex University

Professor Danny Dorling, University of Sheffield

Professor George Irvin, University of London, SOAS

Professor Prem Sikka, University of Essex

Professor Richard Wilkinson, Emeritus Professor of Social Epidemiology

Professor Stefano Harney, QMUL

Professor Peter Case, Bristol Business School

Owen Jones, author of Chavs

Howard Reed, Landman Economics

Stewart Lansley, research fellow, University of Bristol

Professor John Weeks, SOAS

Jenny Jones AM, Green Party

Jeremy Leggett, founder and CEO, Solar Century

Tamasin Cave, Spinwatch

Professor Victoria Chick, UCL

Ruth Potts, The Great Transition, New Economics Foundation

Stewart Wallis, executive director, New Economics Foundation

Rajesh Makwana, director, Share The World’s Resources

To support the call for a People’s Jury for the British Public Interest go towww.compassonline.org.uk