One quote of the day comes along, closely followed by another. This is from Ivan Horrocks on the blog yesterday:
I've no doubt whatsoever that this government even more so than the previous one will be remembered in history as one of the most incoherent and deliberately incompetent policy makers ever. But then again, I suspect very few of those in government, or their supporters in general, care very much about that. If the UK Tory party's version of disaster capitalism delivers the neoliberal nirvana they so long for their job will be done.
I would recommend the whole comment: Ivan is an expert on policy implementation. I think the comment is an objective assessment.
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!
I have maintained that the Conservative Party under Cameron have a consistent and coherent policy agenda, and they continue to implement these policies cosistently and competently: maximise the concentration of wealth, grind the poor, and enrich their friends whenever opportunity presents itself.
The latter policy objective, being somewhat opportunistic in its execution, is the weakest in terms of coherence.
In all other cases, it is the excuses which are inconsistent; not the policies, nor their execution. This emergency, that manufactured crisis – debt especially – those failing services, the pressing need for savings, the constant shock of discovering in the morning papers that some group of vulnerable human beings are actually lying, scrounging scum, defrauding the welfare system…
And yet, time after time, the policy response is the same: maximise the concentration if wealth, grind the poor, seek opportunities for profit.
…It is simply not possible to lie on thus scale without inconsistences emerging. And yet, the Conservatives still have supporters. Voters, even; and it all worked superbly in the 2015 election. I’m not so sure that our government are at all incompetent at this, either.
Given Ivan’s comment on delivering a neoliberal nirvana, I would say that he sees it too: and yet, he still falls into the trap of criticising the Conservatives for failing in their excuses, rather than succeeding in their objectives.
Nile. Thanks for the comment. I don’t disagree with you at all and I certainly hope I haven’t fallen into any trap of accepting the Tories excuses for policy failure blinding me to seeing they are succeeding in their objectives. I suspect the basis for our disagreement comes down to terminology.
What you refer to as a policy agenda I see more as an ideological project in that it underpins and informs policy. This project is consistent and coherent at least in the broad terms you set out above.
The focus of my comment was on the actual policies and/or broader developments within and across the various policy domains of government that constitute the detail of the ideological project and policy agenda. From the evidence I see here the picture is very different. Thus, while I agree that a policy such as welfare (social security) reform is driven in large part by an ideologically informed wish to punish/grind the poor (an objective on which they are clearly succeeding) my point about incoherent was that there has been very little if any thought put into how the objectives and outcomes of that policy might or will impact on other policies and policy domains (or if there has been some thought it has been wilfully ignored). The same can also be said for environment and energy, health, transport, housing, indeed even for the so called Northern Powerhouse pet project of Osborne’s, which from what I can see of the proposals is again riddled with contradictions, potential conflicts and inconsistencies and is thus as far as I would see it both incoherent and thus an example of incompetent policy making.
One of the consequences of this, as I noted in the longer comment from which Richard drew the exert for this blog is that we are now seeing multiple negative impacts that are interrelated and cross cutting in terms of policy areas/domains, and as such they are going to be far more damaging, harder to deal with, and far, far, longer lasting, should any government try to do something about them (which I strongly suspect this government doesn’t, hence my closing comment about a neoliberal nirvana).
So, I would agree that the project that underpins the policies is coherent and consistent. But in practice (and this is what I see most of in the work of my students) we have is an approach to the policy process across government and public services – including the NHS – that is more atomised and fragmented than at any point since 1945 and probably since 1914. Practically speaking a lot of this is due to the blanket application of funding cuts with little or no regard for impact. Allied with this is another strand of the ideological project, of course: the belief that by definition government and public service is to big, wasteful and lazy and thus has a great deal of fat to be cut from the carcass. To finish on an analogy, the problem the citizens of this country now have is they have handed the carcass over to a man with an ideological vision and a very big knife but no eyes.
I did suggest there was no real difference in the stated opinions
And I think you have clearly demonstrated that
What is being labelled as the “neo liberal nirvanah” may well be merely a means to an end.
Neo liberalism has effectively stalled Capitalist regeneration by breaking the incentive for productive Capitalist investment in a further cycle/wave of technologies by surpressing wage levels and putting the serfs back in our places in favour of locked in rentier extraction of existing technologies and arrangements through trade agreements like TTP TTIP etc. Think of the feudal penalties for killing the King’s deers applied accross all economic transaction and activity from which value can be extracted. Whether it’s copywriting of digital technologies, DNA, medical and plant patenting, land, anything that can be commodified including money itself,the name of the game, the end itself, is the re emergence of a rentier economy which might appropriately be described approves neo feudalism.
Osbourne et al know exactly what they are doing.
I have a lot of respect for Ivan but I agree with Nile.
There is a dark logical methodology at the heart of Tory policy at the moment.
I think the two positions are actually rather close
Yes they are Richard but to say that those in the present Government ‘know not what they do’ is not credible in my opinion. What I and Nile see is deliberate.
It would be nice to think that they are witless, and maybe it makes dealing with these people and the problems they cause more bearable for some.
Maybe it helps us to retain OUR humanity in the face of these onslaughts?
OK, I can live with that. Just.
But how can the victims of these policies turn the other cheek when they might be going hungry?
For how long will they have to suffer whilst the counter narrative is being reasonable?
How long before the victims of these policies – feeling abandoned – become part of the problem by cheering on similar things happening to others having had their jealousies whipped up by the likes of Osbourne and Farage resulting in yet more levelling down of wealth and opportunity.
Sorry to be bellicose but the day is later than we think. It will be interesting to see what we will be saying in 2019/20. Even good men sometimes have to consider doing the worst of things in order to fight for justice.
Calling a spade a spade is the least of them.
I agree with Nile also. From the point of view of the tories implementing policies that wholly benefit the better off, I believe they have been more than competent.
I do believe that it is wholly deliberate as well. They care little about the damage their policies will surely do as long as those who donate to the tory party benefit to the absolute maximum.
Stevo, watching and listening to Tories such as Cameron, Osborne, Johnson, et al. often brings to my mind the scene in the film Goodfellas, when the character played by Joe Pesci is being pleaded with to show some forgiveness and humanity to someone he is just about to do extreme violence to. At which point Pesci’s character calmly says: “You’re confusing me for someone who gives a f–k.”
I think that just about captures the Tory government’s mindset.
it looks as if the Corbyn phenomenon can probably only exist as a grass roots movement (momentum) and not effectively as a parliamentary party -this is sad as it means change will be a very slow, grinding process from the grass roots. This could take years by which time the project of wealth extraction and economic cleansing will have gone much further down the road. I will soon be tearing up my Labour Party Card (I’ll give’em a few more months) as I can see change via Parliament is now hopeless. The Corbyn phenomenon was a nice ‘holiday’ from the hegemony of neo-liberalism and probably worth it on that basis.
I would suggest talking to your PLP first
And through them to your labour MP if you have one
Simon, surely what has sustained the Corbyn phenomonon thus far is the fervent hope of a lot of people is that principle will eventually outgun the selfish and principle-free propaganda that we all have to suffer. If those who have supported Corbyn give up in the face of opposition, sadly too much of it from neo-liberal Labour MPs who don’t seem to want to let the people have their say, they will be contributing to his demise. That so many who want real and lasting progress to a fairer and more principled politics so frequently visit this website, where Richard constantly demonstrates his commitment to the cause, is surely a positive sign that they’re up for the fight. Don’t give up.
Hi all,
A propos:
A friend lent me a copy of a 1974 paperback, “A Shocking History of Bristol :six episodes of scandals, swindles, shambles, bungles, ferocity and force” by Derek Robinson.
Here is the TOC :
White Slavery
Quaker-Bashing
Fighting Fits
Black Slavery
It was a riot
Crusted Port
It is a hilarious read. It is also frighteningly familiar – especially the combination of callousness, cruelty, and incompetence of the powerful. Also familiar is the disappointing behaviour of the masses.
Quakers come out of it very well, but, were subject to unbelievable levels of persecution.
Note ye.
Best regards from Bath
Quakers had a very grim time in the West Country.
Everything said about the utter incompetence of the Tories and Osborne in particular is true. But what drives me mad is that Labour are not gathering the evidence of the tremendous waste caused by Tory policies, such as the whole disastrous Lansley bill for the NHS, PFI (yes, also much beloved by misguided Brown), Royal Mail, housing, MOD procurement disasters, IT failure after failure – all of which have made it impossible to sustain acceptable service delivery levels despite targets, incentives and monetary sanctions.
Add to that the lunatic privatisation drives in utilities, health services, London housing stock, while taking huge swathes of money out of local government.
Add to all this the complete failure to reduce the deficit.
Add to this the belittling of the UK in comparison with China, for example, despite the fact that our GDP/head is three times that of the Chinese. I actually believe that Cameron and Osborne are ashamed of the UK and its people; otherwise, why the contempt?
Why hasn’t Labour added up the numbers and the lack of goodwill and destroyed them in teh media? What are they waiting for? We are running out of time, dammit.
Resources