Plan C: The Social Liberal Forum’s economic prognosis

There has been a very welcome recent revival of policy thinking in the Liberal Democrats, despite the large cuts to the party’s official policy research staff. This has included a new think tank (Liberal Insight) and good work by Richard Kemp and the local government sector in encouraging imaginative plans for making use of the new legal powers going to local government.

Added to this is the Social Liberal Forum’s further foray into economic policy-making, following up on some of their successful events with their first policy pamphlet. Prateek Buch’s “Plan C – social liberal approaches to a fair, sustainable economy” tries to do just what it says in the title, and impressively includes a foreword by Will Hutton.

That foreword sets out a liberal challenge to improve capitalism – making it better by making it more liberal and, in particular, attacking concentrations of power. As with Jonathan Porritt from a green perspective, Hutton wants a better capitalism, not socialism or communism.

None of the individual policies listed are particularly new for Liberal Democrats – having not just a Green Investment Bank but a National Investment Bank, expanding the Youth Contract, increased workplace democracy and so on all have been the meat and drink (or lentils and fruit juice) of party conferences for years.

The pamphlet’s strength is not in producing reams of new policy, but in pulling together many different ideas into a few clear strands: job creation, a fair and efficient financial system and making workplaces more liberal through greater workplace democracy and fair conditions of work.

It has little time for George Osborne’s Plan A, branded a predictable failure, or Compass’s Plan B – “neither politically nor economically credible”.

Plan C’s emphasis on creating jobs through investment and infrastructure fits well with Keynes’s own policy advice of the 1930s. Keynes then emphasised the need not for simply higher spending in times of recession but for extra spending specifically on investment (as he saw that as the great unstable, non-self-correcting factor in a recession). Investing in infrastructure is far more Keynesian than cutting VAT.

Although technical at times, the pamphlet is very readable and keeps jargon to a minimum. It also includes a round-up of further reading, particularly useful as the pamphlet is a little short at times of specific evidence as to why individual policies would be effective. The upside of that is that it is quicker and easier to read as a result, and so likely to reach a wider audience.

It is more an academic policy document than an attempt to form a coherent and effective political message. There is much merit in both approaches, so that is no criticism but Liberal Democrats should beware slipping into the “Plan C” terminology of its title. Plan A, B, C, D, E… has a logical abstract progression about it, but for political messaging it is flawed – C sounds instinctively worse than A or B. Prateek’s previous flirtation with A pluses and A stars would have been better to stick with.

That is however only worth worrying about if the ideas in the plan make an impact rather than disappearing quickly into the thick foliage of forgotten political writings. It is certainly good enough to deserve the former rather than the latter fate.

You can get Plan C for the Kindle from Amazon here.

* Mark Pack has written 101 Ways To Win An Election and produces a monthly newsletter about the Liberal Democrats.

Read more by or more about , , , , , , or .
This entry was posted in Books.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/27511 for Twitter and emails.
Advert

7 Comments

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 ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarJohnTilley 26th Jan - 2:16pm
    To answer my own question -- this Home Office Report indicates that in the previous year only 23 people we convicted, not all of them...
  • User AvatarJohnTilley 26th Jan - 2:07pm
    malc 26th Jan '15 - 11:10am malc, you make a number of valid points. In my comment I tried to make some comparison between what...
  • User AvatarJohnTilley 26th Jan - 1:48pm
    Mile Biden ".,, I am quite sure this is not on the radar – that is why I wrote it! " Do you know what...
  • User AvatarSimon Oliver 26th Jan - 1:44pm
    yes, 150 years of study and an unprecedented 97% scientific consensus is a high degree of uncertainty for some.
  • User AvatarSIMON BANKS 26th Jan - 1:20pm
    I hesitate to criticise John Knox, for fear of being consigned to hellfire, but Burns' version scans better.
  • User AvatarGwyn Williams 26th Jan - 1:07pm
    Alex is a formidable debater and advocate. He never slavishly adopts the Party position. His opinion is listened to because he uses his talents to...