David Cameron has shifted his justification of austerity away from necessity and towards ideological desire. When elected in 2010, he pretended the budget cuts had been forced by the economic crisis, rather than being a means of prolonging it. Now he is plainer that he wants the old Thatcherite ideal of a smaller state. I suspect that this also the real desire of Nick Clegg and the "Orange Book" Liberals.
I think the best way to respond to this is to say: what we need is an effective state, which demonstrates value for money in doing what we want it to do. One example of this would be in waste collection where the amount of money spent is reduced dramatically by switching from landfill towards more recycling, or other higher rungs in the waste hierarchy.
Sadly, some of the people I speak to have what might be seen as an ultra conservative approach of just resisting any form of change. Particularly people on the Looney Left seem to think that spending more and more public sector money should be seen as a good in itself, which seems to me just as silly as the Thatcherite idea that public spending is bad in itself. I also think that adopting such a line plays into Cameron's hands because it sounds like a defence of waste rather than a defence of value.
No comments:
Post a Comment