Skip to main content

Nick Clegg and Economic Liberalism

Slowly, slowly we progress: Nick Clegg's speech on the economy, while I was away in Estonia, was reasonably trenchant, especially in claiming the mantle of Economic Liberalism.

I think the stuff on the Banking system was very much to the point:

"The truth is, the British banking industry is cosseted and closed. It is not truly competitive.
For years it’s been almost impossible to get a new banking licence. New banks are usually just a subsidiary of existing banks.
And the Northern Rock episode has demonstrated that it’s also nearly impossible to stop being a bank.
The government and regulators are too afraid to let a bank fail.
Unless we lower the barriers to market entry and market exit, we will not have a truly competitive banking industry that can eradicate the poor service and high charges consumers currently face.
To make true competition possible without jeopardising customers, deposit protection needs to be beefed up, and widely publicised, to protect individuals’ deposits and give them confidence in the banking system.
Deposit protection should be peer-funded by the banks themselves, as in the US.
And then we need to look at making banking truly competitive again: allowing new entrants in more easily and allowing failure too.
Whatever happens, the Bank of England also needs – at a senior level – to secure greater expertise in relation to the workings of the financial markets."

This is good, and the other thing that impressed me was that the thread of the speech was very clear. He set out the key principles and then showed how policies flowed from them. The key ideas: open markets, competition, are all reflected in the specific policy agenda that he put forward.

Nick Clegg is increasingly impressive: he has a clear agenda and a clarity of thought which marks out a definate direction. At a time when Gordon Brown has broken all his golden rules, and when Cameron seems to go out of his way to obfuscate and hide whatever his political agenda actually is, such directness is particularly refreshing, I think.

Comments

Newmania said…
Yes I`ve seen Nick Clegg speaking a couple of times and he does not frighten to horses, in fact he would be at home in the moderate wing of the Conservative Party were in not for his utter disdain for the people of this country and their wish to remain a nation. That is where we part company and sadly as anything he suggest is bound to involve some awfully clever reason for us to cease to be a country one is bound to be cynical.
I must say if Insurance is anything to go by the flood of EU licensed competition has been a disaster and utterly misunderstood , of course , by the regulatory bodies supposedly in charge and hidden from the consumer .
The problem with Nick Clegg is that he is not representative of the Liberal party who had to hold their noses to elect him and he cannot take them into coalition of any sort except with Labour. I saw this clearly in Islington and I see it again now in Lewes .
.I `m staggered that the Lib Dems have allowed themselves to get into this position if they were not second class socialists I could live with a Conservative Liberal administration which in many ways is the natural majority view of England certainly

As ever it all comes down to Europe , I think it would help here if the pros stopped lying and started persuading .I think such a debate would be lost but it would draw some of the bitterness out of it , have you seen what they are doing in Parliament now and this is after sayig we would not debate the matter because there was going to be a referendum !!


I may have veered off course there a bit
Cicero said…
Well, I could blog about Puffins in St Kilda, and you would still blame the shortage of sand eels on "Europe" :-)

Of course I totally reject your allegation that Lib Dems want to destroy the UK. I think that the blustering, obessional Europhobia that Many Tories have is bordering on the downright weird.
Newmania said…
I see 16 Lib MPs are rebelling over the Party edict to save Brown and it could be there will be a referendum after all
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie. 

The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship. 

The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and the j…

Breaking the Brexit logjam

The fundamental problem of Brexit has not been that the UK voted to leave the European Union. The problem has been the fact that the vote was hijacked by ignorant, grandstanding fools who interpreted the vote as a will to sever all and every link between the UK and the European Union. That was then and is now a catastrophic policy. To default to WTO rules, when any member of the WTO could stop that policy was a recipe for the UK to be held hostage by any state with an act to grind against us. A crash out from the EU, without any structure to cope, was an act of recklessness that should disqualify anyone advocating it from any position of power whatsoever. That is now the most likely option because the Conservative leadership, abetted by the cowardly extremism of Corbyn, neither understood the scale of the crisis, now had any vision of how to tackle it.

Theresa May is a weak and hapless Prime Minster, and her problems started when she failed to realize that there was a compromise that w…

The rumbling financial markets

Security specialists use a variety of ways to address the risks that they face: and these risk assessments are made in the certain knowledge that the actors in the system hold only incomplete information. Although much mocked at the time, Donald Rumsfeld’s categorization of “known unknowns” and “unknown unknowns”, is now generally recognized as a succinct summery of his strategic quandaries.
By contrast, actors in the financial markets have a more sanguine assessment of the risks they deal with: they divide them into two kinds of risk: quantifiable and unquantifiable. Unquantifiable risk is not generally considered, since there is usually no financial profit that can be made except from pure supposition. Therefore for the purposes of the financial markets, any given event is priced relative to its level of probability, that is to say its quantifiable risk. 
Depending on the market, higher levels of risk generally carry higher prices, lower levels generally lower prices. Clearly such an…