Nick calls for cross-party Council of Financial Stability

Hmmm, well I have my doubts about this one. Not the idea: that’s obvious and right. Of course we need to build political consensus in order to carry through the tough spending cuts any party (or parties) which finds itself in government will have to implement.

Only myopic Labour/Tory tribalists will try and pretend a government with the support of one-in-five of the electorate can decimate (in that word’s literal sense) public spending to bring the deficit under control with any kind of legitimacy.

No, the problem I have with Nick Clegg’s idea is this: the name, ‘Council of Financial Stability’. No doubt it will do what it says on the tin, but there’s something inescapably bureaucratic, corporatist and 1960s about it. Before long, we’ll be promising to bring back the Department for Economic Affairs and ‘Neddy’. And, no, I don’t have a better suggestion. (Not a serious one, anyway: Cuts-u-Like?)

But enough of my cavils. Here’s the significant bit: what Nick said in his speech at the London Stock Exchange, co-hosted by the WWF and CentreForum:

Government-as-usual will not, cannot, command the legitimacy to make the big decisions before us. The scale of the changes required is so great it will require a different way of taking decisions too.

“The standard model, of Governments elected with a minority of popular support, cooking up fiscal plans behind closed doors in Whitehall, imposing cuts from on high is a recipe for Greek-style social and industrial strife.

“So we need to find new ways to arrive at decisions so that politicians put the long term national interest above their own short term interests and actively involve the public in the decisions taken.

“The Liberal Democrats would establish a cross party Council for Financial Stability.

“We would invite the economic spokespeople of all the major parties, the Governor of the Bank of England, and the Head of the Financial Services Authority to join the Council.

“The purpose would be to force the politicians to put the long term national interest ahead of their own narrow political interest, and agree the basic timetable and scale of deficit reduction in the years ahead.

“Agreeing that timetable according to sound economic tests, like those Vince Cable has already set out as a means of judging when to begin the process of fiscal contraction:

“The rate of growth; the level of unemployment; credit conditions; the extent of spare capacity in the economy; and the cost of Government borrowing.

“This would not prevent political parties from arguing about what changes should be made to taxes and in public spending, or which areas of taxation and spending should be immune from any change, but it would force the whole political class to come clean and tell the people of Britain what the scale of the changes actually will be.

“With a structural deficit now estimated at £80bn, and market confidence shaken by the unwillingness of the politicians to spell out what they’re committed to achieving, it is essential that politicians of all parties demonstrate that they will no longer play games with the stability of Britain’s long term financial reputation.

“Including the monetary and banking authorities will also allow for a more coherent debate about the interaction between monetary and fiscal policy. As well as the role of the financial services sector in underpinning, not undermining, growth.

“Crucially, given that the full elimination of the structural deficit will almost certainly take more than one parliament, an agreed approach on the overall scale and timetable of fiscal consolidation will provide both the British public and the markets with the assurance that a consistent and responsible approach will not be hijacked by politics in the future.”

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

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.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

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

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Neil James Sandison
    Liberalism has evolved over the centuries with many different names and alliances .That is good in terms of development of progressive politics . We are clearly...
  • Mark ValladaresMark Valladares
    @ Peter, Having briefly looked at the Legatum Institute report that you refer to, whilst I take your general point, their scoring system is a bit quirky. Mid...
  • Peter Martin
    @ Joe, Yes there is poverty in London but that still doesn't change the fact that London and the SE of England are where the wealth is. There would be less p...
  • expats
    I watched the programme and almost choked on my G&T when hearing 'an investor' stating that the public sector couldn't run anything efficiently... Despite ...
  • Mark ValladaresMark Valladares
    @ David, Thank you for raising this. I find myself wondering whether or not we need to think about how social care is provided (and by whom) just as much as ...