I noted this in the FT this morning:
Fortunately for the UK, the previous coalition government at least pushed infrastructure higher up the political agenda in a way that would have been unthinkable under former prime ministers Gordon Brown or Tony Blair. For this, business should be grateful. But the new government should go one better. Both the CBI and the BCC are calling for a new independent body to decide on infrastructure needs and priorities, detached from the political cycle. Next Wednesday would be a good time for the government to announce one.
The paragraph is the conclusion of an article by Sarah Gordon entitled 'Infrastructure is too important to fall under the spell of politics'. And yet the call is blatantly political, as is Gordon's article (which is also blatantly wrong in its analysis of Blair and Brown).
The call should instead be seen as just another in the ongoing cycle of demands from business that a wide range of decisions be removed from political control. So, the Bank of England was. The NHS has been passed over to local boards of the great and good. And the ACCA has called for there to be only one budget a parliament so that tax can be taken out of the democratic arena. And now the demand is that infrastructure spending should also be handed over.
The trend is unmistakable and is clearly an assault on democracy. We're seeing it in Greece, but don't have any doubt it is happening here in the UK too, done by nice people in suits.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Although it begs the question, will democracy ever provide governments that make decisions for the common good rather than for its own ideological agenda and/or businesses’ vested interests? The current system catastrophically fails to represent the electorate and it’s no wonder voter disengagement and political illiteracy is rampant.
The aim is clear, as you say. Time the people understood what is at stake, though I fear it is too late to reverse it easily. As for “nice people in suits”: funny definition of “nice”
He means gentlemen. Didn’t we cover this before?
With the events in Greece of the past week or so I think the extent and depth of the assault on democracy has become explicit, Richard, but certainly in relation to decision making in various policy areas its been around for a long time and it doesn’t just come from corporate individuals and entities either.
For example, one of the drivers of the development of arms length government agencies (such as DVLA) was to remove the “burden” of ministerial responsibility from ministers. Once a public service was delivered by an agency then a minister could always blame the management of the agency if anything went wrong – as happened a few years ago with the Borders Agency. And this despite the fact that ministers might meddle on a regular basis with the work of an agency and/or make decisions that impact on its work without much effort at checking out what the resource implications are, or indeed whether it can be implemented. I understand Jeremy Hunt is a regular interferer in the operational side of the NHS, for example.
With regard to infrastructure specifically, a few years ago I was involved in a BBC/OU co-production called Built in Britain that looked at both the historical and contemporary development of the UK’s infrastructure. I have to say that the view that infrastructure planning and development should be taken out of the political arena was a common view – and not just from big business. Indeed, the third runway fiasco currently being played out once again illustrates why so many people feel this way, I think.
But ultimately I think much of this situation comes down to the fact that we are now gifted with a wealth of cowardly politicians who want to avoid at all costs being associated with making decisions that might then are subsequently make them unpopular, and particularly with the right wing press and their readers. Consequently many in government are more than happy to outsource responsibility to a supposedly independent body without a moment’s thought as to what that does to our democracy (in which many of them have little interest anyway, apart from in the run up to an election).
As a resident living near a proposed HS2 station, I’ve become extremely wary of the phrase “infrastructure investment”. HS2 is implemented by HS2 Ltd, an arms-length body, which exists only to steamroller its objective through affected communities with propaganda & obfuscation.
All “independent” bodies, the House of Lords, Public Accounts Committee, etc., that have examined HS2 find it nonsense, yet on it trundles, supported by MPs, driven by private sector lobbyists. Meanwhile, the Midland Mainline electrification is axed, a scheme that would deliver half the journey time savings of HS2 for less than a fiftieth of the cost. The private sector chooses big-ticket items over small to make more money. Yet, it is the small-ticket items that benefit local residents.
If Government ministries were once objective agents working for the common good, they are now just salesmen for the private sector, pushing propaganda & obfuscation. (It’s surprising how little the Department of Transport knows about capacity & congestion when the public send it FOI requests. Yet it produces sales brochures of false claims to accompany public consultations.)
The democratic process is inverted. I’m witnessing first-hand the private sector impose an unwanted big-ticket scheme on residents, through lackey councillors following party political directives, instead of theses councillors lobbying for schemes actually wanted by residents (e.g. to reduce local road traffic congestion). Democracy is already dead.
(Apologies to Richard for wasting his time.)
You are right to be suspicious
HS2, like welfare ‘reform’, appear to be no more than a vehicle for semi-legitimising the transfer of money from the public purse into corporate bank accounts, no doubt to be divvied up by the crooked businessmen and corrupt politicians involved at some later date. Still, if no-one complains, what else can be expected?
The Third Great Enclosure Movement proceeds apace. Politics by any other name, with the corporate state undermining the democratic element of the state.
‘Democracy’ does rather get in the way of the efficient redistribution of wealth upward and offshore. At least, I should say Democracy ‘could’ get in the way. Hence, the five-D mode of political discourse – Distract, Divert, Disguise, Deny and Deceive.
‘…by people in nice suits.’
You misplaced that adjective. It’s possible there should be a replacement adjective modifying ‘people’ but I’ll leave that to you!
Regrettably we are not a democracy! That is why there is such political disengagement. We need some form of proportional representation sharpish otherwise the right of (whatever it was) somewhere between a third and a quarter of the electorate – now the Tory majority – to dictate to the rest of us with their supposed ‘mandate’ will lead to ever more disillusionment.
The resultant improved engagement from the electorate would (especially without the idea that they have to join a party to get anywhere, when few agree with any one party) I suggest, lead to a decline in the horrid people in nice suits…
By the way the horrid people in nice suits all get paid a fortune – unlike MP’s so it would also be good for the taxpayer if there were many less of them!
It sounds like a wish for the UK Round Table of Industrialists to replace its European counterpart in the event of Brexit.
“For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone”
David Cameron.
It says it all really. Now “they” won’t leave you alone if you are law abiding.
“they” cannot stop gross acts of terrorism.
“they” cannot stop robbery, rape, murder or mayhem.
“they” cannot do anything about tax avoidance and evasion on a colossal scale.
“they” can, however, make dying people attend health inquisitions conducted by private companies, and carried out by non-doctors and non-nurses who ignore qualified medical information.
Now “they” are going to enquire why you are not breaking any laws?
I should watch out Richard; “they” are coming to get you (and us)
And now a certain Mr Hunt is going to have the cost of your prescription printed on your meds, with “paid for by UK taxpayers” printed alongside it.
THIS is democracy….
I am used to the idea that I am unacceptable to the elite
I come across it every day