The economic crisis has given Britain a wonderful opportunity to cut public spending and reduce inefficiency in the public sector, writes Simon Clark
I almost drove off the road on Saturday when I heard that Labour leader Ed Miliband had compared the fight against government cuts to Nelson Mandela’s stand against apartheid.
Did he really say that? If he did he’s a fool.
Well, according to yesterday’s newspapers, this is what he actually said:
“We come in the traditions that have marched in peaceful but powerful protest for justice, fairness and political change.
“The suffragettes who fought for votes for women and won. The civil rights movement in America that fought against racism and won. The anti-apartheid movement that fought the horror of that system and won.”
Shadow Welsh Secretary Peter Hain, a man who knows a thing or two about the struggle against apartheid, told Sky News: “He is not comparing today’s march or today’s cause. People over the ages have stood up and marched in a peaceful and a dignified way for justice and for decency and that is what he was saying.”
Nice try, Peter, but it won’t wash. If Miliband wasn’t comparing the current campaign to the suffragette movement, the civil rights movement and the anti-apartheid movement, why mention them? Those were highly emotive issues and to include them in a speech at a demonstration against cuts in public expenditure was at best foolish, and at worst sick.
Miliband is entitled to oppose government policy but his weasel words stink. I’m not one of those who believe that Labour should be held wholly accountable for the state of Britain’s finances, but I know this:
One: Labour was in office when the current mess occurred and while the problem is not confined to Britain (far from it) it happened on Labour’s watch and the likes of Ed Miliband must take some responsibility for the hole we’re in. (He was, after all, a close colleague of Gordon Brown for several years.)
Two: not a single Labour government has ever left office without leaving the economy in a worse situation than it inherited. Not one. It therefore ill behoves any senior Labour politician to lecture others about fiscal management.
Three: as others point out, George Osborne’s plans are really just a souped-up version of Alastair Darling’s own proposals.
What I find so frustrating about Saturday’s rally (and the Government’s inability to defend with gusto what it is doing to solve Britain’s problems) is the fact that cuts in government spending, irrespective of the financial situation, are long overdue.
The fact is, I want to see less not more government. That means a leaner, more efficient public sector and fewer public sector workers. The Government shouldn’t need an excuse to reduce public spending because it is the right thing to do.
Circumstances have given David Cameron the excuse he needs to implement cuts in spending, but will he take this once in a lifetime opportunity?
There is the small problem of the Lib Dems, many of whom are as keen on public spending as any dye in the wool socialist, but I suspect that the bigger problem lies in the fact that, in the modern world, relatively few politicians genuinely believe in smaller government.
Famously, the British governed India (population 300-350 million) with just 1,200 civil servants. By all accounts, British rule in India was highly efficient.
God knows how many civil servants there are in Britain today (let alone public sector workers) but in 2009 the Ministry of Defence alone employed 85,730 civil servants. (The Daily Telegraph reported that “While Britain has just two active troops for every civil servant in the Ministry of Defence, France has almost five, Spain has almost eight and several smaller countries have many more”.)
Clearly there is a huge amount of waste and inefficiency in the public sector which is staffed by hundreds of thousands of unelected mandarins (the same mandarins who draft tobacco control regulations).
Don’t be fooled by Ed Miliband, the TUC and everyone else involved in Saturday’s rally in London. The economic crisis has given Britain an unexpected but wonderful opportunity to cut public expenditure and reduce inefficiency in the public sector.
Long term the benefits should include lower income tax and less government interference in our lives.
Demonstrate? We ought to be celebrating.
Simon Clark is director of The Free Society