Opinion: Dr. Balls makes the right diagnosis, offers the same old failed prescriptions

Leading commentators on the political economy must have been flattered to hear many of their principles and policies given lip service by Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls this week in his speech to the Labour party conference. Flattered only to be deceived, sadly, as lip service is all he paid; underneath the rhetorical support for a reformed political economy promoted by the likes of Will Hutton, the Institute for Public Policy Research, Ha-Joon Chang and others, Balls’ prescription for the UK economy amounts to little more than tinkering with the same old policy levers that haven’t worked in the past.

Mr. Balls’ speech was riddled with apparent contrition for Labour’s role in the crisis we face, but the apologies were more for political errors (that undoubtedly cost them electoral support) than for a decade and more of Blairite economic policy (that equally undoubtedly cost the country its prospects for the foreseeable future). There was a mea culpa for failing to regulate banks sufficiently, but still no recognition that the broader economic crisis has its roots not just in a simple regulatory failure but more in multiple failures that go to the core of the peculiar version of capitalism that New Labour remains wedded to.

The reliance on a bankers bonus tax to fund the only real policy presented in the speech (housing and ‘100,000 jobs,’ although for whom and doing what remains unclear) exemplifies Labour’s inability to wean itself off its dependence on the financial services sector. So Dr. Balls, do you want banks to stop rewarding failure, or continue to hand out paying exorbitant bonuses that fed into the near-collapse of the entire capitalist system as it represents much of your revenue stream? This contradiction was at the very heart of Labour’s term in office – a dependence on impermanent revenue to shore up public spending, whether from one-off windfall taxes or volatile financial speculation. There’s a depressing failure of imagination here that means Balls’ only recourse is to call for more of what’s failed in the past.

The centrepiece of Balls’ “5 point-plan for recovery” appears to be the tired old cut in VAT. Never mind that is predecessor as Labour Chancellor tried this to very little effect (according to consumers and the Institute for Fiscal Studies there was a marginal, 1.2% boost to consumption that naturally reversed when VAT rose again). After much fanfare, Labour’s answer to the greatest economic crisis in living memory is to cut the price of (mainly luxury) goods we’ve realised we can do without by a few pence – this is supposedly the great stimulus the nation’s economy needs. I need not labour the point (pun intended) that this rather lame tinkering is once again more of the same, more of what’s failed in the very recent past. I’ve little doubt that temporary supply-side tweaks such as national insurance holidays and reduced VAT on home improvements will help a little, but for how long will the effects last? How will they make the UK better equipped to whether the gathering economic storm?

To give credit where it’s due Mr. Balls does recognise the need for economic growth as we try and turn the corner. Again, to give him credit, he also recognises that expansionary fiscal contraction is unlikely to crowd in record private sector surpluses and drive the investment in jobs that the country needs. The trouble is that what he proposes has little or no chance of sparking said growth, at least not on the equitable, sustainable and green basis that is needed. The diagnosis – that the UK economy isn’t growing or creating jobs at anywhere near the required rate – may well be correct, but the prescription is far from adequate.

Go back to the leading thinkers I mentioned, and the proposals for a fair and sustainable economy that they have made. None of what Balls said makes these proposals any more likely to be implemented. For some time now I and others have called for a change of direction away from George Osborne’s Plan A – not towards Labour’s Plan B, which appears less adequate the more we learn about it – but to a Liberal Democrat Plan C. Ed Randall argued for a new, better-orchestrated round of Quantitative Easing (QE) that expressly supports small businesses not just bank balance sheets. This should form just one part of a Plan C (and I don’t apologise for overusing that phrase) that goes much further, combining short-term boosts to investment by crowding in private-sector surpluses with a radical overhaul of our financial system and more long-term boosts to worker security and our skills base. Such a Plan C realises that cutting the deficit using only direct approaches – reducing spending and raising taxes – won’t be as effective as a Kay-sian oblique approach that puts dynamic and sustainable economic growth at its centre.

Read more by or more about , , , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/25449 for Twitter and emails.

7 Comments

  • Prateek, I couldn’t agree more.

    As you point out, from Balls there “…was a mea culpa for failing to regulate banks sufficiently, but still no recognition that the broader economic crisis has its roots not just in a simple regulatory failure but more in multiple failures that go to the core of the peculiar version of capitalism that New Labour remains wedded to.”

    I’m sure that your plan C has some important supporters in high places, who are a little shy of saying so in public. It also has some significant public support – in important places. Adam Posen, of the MPC, has made some very interesting observations about policy defeatism and How to Do More, which your readers might be interested in taking a look at; I think they will be well rewarded for their trouble.

  • Bill Kristol-Balls 29th Sep '11 - 4:49pm

    Instead of giving tens of billions to the banks in the vain hope that somehow they’ll lend to business and it’ll trickle down to the rest of us we should use QE to give a £1,000 time limited voucher to every household to get a bit of demand going.

    I will personally use my voucher to invest in high-end British manufacturing and retail by purchasing a Bowers & Wilkins Zeppelin Air from John Lewis.

    Furthermore I will buy the new Kasabian CD to support the British creative industries and import it onto my iPod (legally thanks to Vince) to listen to on my new speakers.

    Then, in order to express my solidarity with those working in the alcoholic beverage industry, I will then acquire as much Bulmers cider as I can with the money left over and hold a small gathering of close friends, which in turn should stimulate the local kebab shop and taxi owners.

  • Bill Kristol-Balls 30th Sep '11 - 9:38am

    Sorry you’re not keen on my idea Matthew but Martin Wolf in the FT seems to think it has some merit –

    “Personally, I would favour the “helicopter money”, recommended by that radical economist, Milton Friedman. This would be a quasi-fiscal operation. Central bank money could pass via the government to the public at large.”

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/045aab84-e61c-11e0-960c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1ZQGH29al

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?




Recent Comments

  • User AvatarJayne Mansfield 3rd Sep - 7:30am
    @ PSi, I don't think that I have said that people should not be held to account for inexcusable failings, or if my post can...
  • User Avatariantha kirkup 3rd Sep - 4:48am
    Hi Daisy, pleased to learn you are standing for president, locally I find your enthusiasm contagious and I am sure that will carry over to...
  • User AvatarEddie Sammon 3rd Sep - 1:01am
    This has the potential to get nasty and I don't like what I'm seeing. The UK and the EU need to be careful not to...
  • User AvatarJoe Bourke 3rd Sep - 12:31am
    John Dunn, Ukraine has a great deal to lose as a consequence of deteriorating relations with Russia and has sought to maintain its export trade...
  • User AvatarEddie Sammon 3rd Sep - 12:04am
    Liberals should continue arguing unfashionable causes, whilst not necessarily putting them in the manifesto. When it comes to Sterlingisation and the EU: I think Scotland...
  • User AvatarFrankBooth 2nd Sep - 11:55pm
    Tim13 - you suggested it was the cue for rump UK and Scotland to join the Euro. You'd have to deal with the implacably opposed...