YOU'RE FIRED!

 

The new series of The Apprentice is

likely to feed into  yet another, somewhat

depressing picture of Lord Sugar's take on

what it takes to become a successful

entrepreneur. It reflects the past, rather

than the future.

As usual, the series will be reality

television dressed up as a master class in

wealth creation in mainly retail sales

environments. The programme will

feature often delusional, egocentric

contestants and prima-donnas, who

seem possessed of a desire for celebrity

in a highly charged and combative

atmosphere.

 

Lord Sugar sets his contestants tasks that

reflect not a vision of a future in which our

performance in world markets and economy

will depend on creating and developing new

technologies.Tnstead ,they will reflect more

rudimentary business concepts, developed

in his past as an electrical goods trader.

Times have moved on and we should inspire

our young men and women to look beyond

Lord Sugar's world. The urgent need now,

as never before, is for high-end design and

manufacture to take centre stage. James

Dyson is the kind of role model we need to

to motivate our talented young graduates to

lead a renaissance in making and selling

innovative products to global markets.

 

DAVID CAMERON AND THE TORIES

THE MORE THINGS CHANGE, THE MORE THEY STAY THE SAME

What is David Cameron for? Is it saving this
economically imperilled nation, which is
experiencing the deepest recession for a hundred
years, or, acting as an instrument of social change?
The formation of the Downing Street Policy Unit 
underlines that question. It is a conundrum to which
the Prime Minister, generally to the left of  many of
his Party, seems unsure of the answer.

The appointment of Jo Johnson, the Orpington MP, to
head the Unit, to harden - the word unfortunately implies
sclerosis - Tory thinking and build bridges with back-
bench malcontents, is a step in the right direction. It is
to be hoped that this will mark a turning point for the Tory
leadership. 

Vacuous words have been aplenty: on Europe,
immigration and the tsunami of socialist legislation coming
out of Brussels, gold-plated by civil servants, who are
politically averse to the Tories. Lack of strong leadership
by the Conservative high command led to the departure of
Steve Hilton, the Prime Minister's director of strategy,
and other key advisers, whom the Tories could ill-afford
to lose. They left because of what has appeared to be David
Cameron's growing reluctance to act on their advice,
influenced by the unrealistic welfare objectives of the
Liberal Democrats and, perhaps, by his own social
liberalism.

So, what will be different when the new policy unit
proposes similar Thatcher, free-market solutions to those
proposed in the past, but not translated into Government
policy? We have been here before and the arrival of 
Lynton Crosby, the Australian political strategist, will
do little to save the Conservatives if they are perceived to
be not really sure of what they stand for.  

This uncertainty is set against the background David
Cameron knowing that he has little chance of achieving
growth before the General Election. Continuing in
government post-2015 will depend on making
common cause, either with the Liberal Democrats,
who could well decide to tip the electoral scales for
Labour, or, indeed, UKIP.

The Prime Minister is, at heart, a pragmatist, rather
than a leader in the Thatcher mould, driven by principle,
capable of inspiring and taking the country with him.
Groucho Marx would have had it in one: "If you don't
like my principles...."  Influenced by focus groups he
trims his sails according to the political weather,
attempting to be all things to all people. 

Coerced by the Liberal Democrats he is bringing
fundamental change to our society in ways that are not
understood by his Conservative Cabinet colleagues or
the rank and file of his Party. They see their country
becoming a place that they hardly recognise.

TIME RUNNING OUT FOR THE CONSERVATIVES AND THE COUNTRY

George Osborne's strategy for addressing the
catastrophic consequences of the previous
goverment's addiction to increasing public debt
is running out of time.

As became evident this week, the Chancellor's
task has been made even more difficult by the
confusing intervention of IMF chief, Christine
Lagarde. Having backed Osborne's austerity
programme - this year the UK Government's
public spending will still exceed its income
by over £100bn - she now suggests more public
spending to stimulate growth. 

Ms Lagarde also cautions that the US, which the
IMF predicts will expand at twice the rate of the 
UK economy next year, should "fix the pace" of
its fiscal adjustment. She suggests there should be
smaller up-front cuts and that the deficit reduction
needs better planning. The Federal Reserve's
Ben Benanke should take due note and continue
doing precisely what he has been doing. 

The Chancellor is mindful of the truism that you
cannot spend your way out of debt. While
supply-side reforms should be accelerated, the
view of Mark Carney, Governor-elect of the BoE 
that economies need "fiscal anchors"will come
as welcome support, as will Moody's
confirmation of the UK's AAA credit rating.

The views of a lawyer turned economist aside,
the Government's ability to get things back on
track continues to be frustrated by the
disproportionate influence on David Cameron
of junior members of the Coalition Cabinet.
Since it was formed the Lib Dems appear to
have been engaged in the politics of
symbolism, rather than effective measures
needed to raise GDP and rebalance the economy.

The Lib Dems have not been about growing the
national cake, but producing from it the maximum
nomber of crumbs, distributed on the basis of
what they consider is social justice. The country
might be going bankrupt, but at least everything
is fair.
  
Conservative attempts to create a credible
road-map to achieving national solvency and
improved public services are littered with Lib
Dem obstacles to progress. Some obvious
examples are their defence of the 50p tax rate,
Vince Cable's suggestion of an annual wealth tax,
his calls to make EU employment law even more
draconian for small businesses, together with
intransigence over free schools, health and
immigration policies.
 

Having won 57 seats at the General Election

compared with the Conservatives' 307, never has

there been more a case of the tail wagging the

dog. It is time for David Cameron to show Nick

Clegg and Vince Cable who is running the

Government and do what is right. Losing the

next election will be the final nail in the coffin for

the Conservatives and the country.

.

US's EVOLVING TIES WITH EU

The Obama Administration's recent untimely

intervention over Britain's future membership

of the EU may indicate an ideological turning 

point in re-framing America's relationship

with the EU. 

 

A free enterprise economy operating in an

open, representative democracy led to the

rise of the United Sates as the pre-eminent

global power. It has underpinned the defence

and economies of western countries since

the Second World War.

These values are everything that the EU is

not. Its Commission, far from reflecting the

will of the people, represents an unelected

and unaccountable elite.The introduction

of the flawed single currency, the

monumentally wasteful Common

Agricultural Policy, largely unaudited

capital transfers to the twenty-five

recipient countries, funded by Germany

and the UK, are manifestly antithetical to

that for which what the US has always stood.

However, in warning the UK against leaving

the EU, perhaps the US Assistant Secretary
of State for Europe and Eurasia reflects a

possible drift of the US Government into the

kind of EU mindset, which US Republicans

fear. For economic and other reasons,

President Obama may have come into line

the with the social, political and economic

values of the US's largest trading partner,

using its 'special relationship' with the UK

as a convenient means to an end.

This is not without its risks. With almost all

western economies flatlining, how long before
the EU Commission begins to insinuate its

social objectives into US policy as a quid

pro quo for trade, with predictable economic

and geo-political consequences?

 

 

NOT THE TIMES NEWSPAPER

GREECE, CYPRUS, PORTUGAL -
CASE FOR RE-INTRODUCING
ORIGINAL CURRENCIES


The divergence between the weak and
stronger economies of the EU's single
currency continues to grow. Until the
inevitable fiscal and political union occurs,
should weight be given to the
re-introduction of the original currencies
in these countries. They would function
in tandem with the euro, allowing Greece,
Cyprus and Portugal to become more
competitive.

In the 1990s, Argentina experienced similar

problems to those of Greece and other weak
members of the eurozone. In that country the
peso was fixed and freely convertible with
the US dollar from 1991 to 2001. After a
period of deceptive success, sustained by
massive foreign loans, the currency
collapsed, resulting in civil unrest and a
surge in poverty. The decoupling of
the peso from the dollar allowed Argentina
to return to growth.

In finding a solution to Greece's economic

problems and those of the eurozone's
other weak economies, we should remember
that from 1979 to 1999 economies, now part
of the eurozone, functioned within a dual
currency system - the ECU which was the
common currency and a domestic one in
each case. The system was stable and
satisfactory, allowing countries to exchange
using a common currency, while checking in
each country uncontrolled expenditures
abroad and the flight from the domestic
currency.

A move to reintroduce a dual-currency
system would boost competitiveness,
generate growth and reduce sovereign debt.

NOT THE TIMES NEWSPAPER

MISSING, PRESUMED LOST - THE IRON

CHANCELLOR RETURNS


This week will see the former boom-and-bust, Iron
Chancellor make one of his rare visits to Westminister -
having perhaps visited on two other occasions to
represent his constituents since 2010. He will be
paying his respects at the funeral on Wednesday of
Baroness Thatcher, the Iron Lady.

Iron being the chosen metaphor for expressing the personal
attributes of both, we should perhaps question whether the
quality of metal used in fashioning the former was equal to
to the latter.

Were forty-eight consecutive quarters of  'endogenous'
growth, based on reckless spending and near national
bankruptcy equal to the iron resolve of our greatest
peacetime Prime Minister, who saved Britain from
socialism and changed the geo-political map of
much of the world?

What is also fascinating to ponder is the fact that both
Gordon Brown and Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of
Nations, were born in Kilcaldy. Therein lies a paradox:
the one invented free-market liberalism, while the other
did everything he could to destroy it. Our children will
be paying the price for generations to come.

PRESS FREEDOM

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Nowhere

is this more pertinent than freedom of expression in

a free and democratic societ.It is a right over which
the the deliberations of the Privy Council cast an

ominous shadow.
 

Freedom of expression is embedded in the First

 Amendment of the US Constitution. The incredulity

of those in the United States and beyond will only

grow as what lies behind the Royal Charter, in  

whatever form, is revealed.

The view that a Royal Charter would avoid the

illiberal pitfalls of statutory regulation is founded

more in hope than than expection. Even with the

supposed safeguards included in the somewhat

ambiguous aim of the Charter, that of not creating

a regulator, but instead establishing the body that

will oversee one, it is difficult not to be fearful that

this will  curtail the ability of the press to expose

and hold to account.

 

At the Leveson Inquiry, Rupert Murdoch predicted

that in a digital age printed newspapers could

disappear within ten years. Lord Mandelson

suggested that the Inquiry's remit tended to have

an historical, rather than contemporary,

significance, with the printed media migrating

increasingly online, beyond the control of any

regulator. 

The majority of the press was not involved in the

hacking scandal and those who were are or are

likely to be serving prison sentences. Driven by

the interests of the Hacked-Off lobby group, with

the press excluded from any negotiations, a

powerful marker has been put down which will

surely affect the ability of newspapers to do what

they have been doing since the abolition of the

Star Chamber in 1641.

Certain commentators have alluded to the

Jesuitical control of press freedom in

dictatorships. The enactment of the Royal Charter

would render the Government similarly responsible

for controlling freedom of expression by

extrapolating from particular instances of press

intrusion value judgements with regard to wider

press coverage, especially in investigative

journalism.These are features of a totalitarian

state.

Had the Royal Charter been in existence, it is

unlikely that press coverage of the illegal invasion

of Iraq, the unexplained death of Dr David Kelly,

extraordinary rendition and MPs' expenses would

ever have seen the light of day.   

.

NOT THE TIMES NEWSPAPER

THE NHS - INFINITE DEMAND,

FINITE RESOURCES

 

When the National Health Service came into
existence in 1948, Lord Beveridge could not
have envisaged how in the world in which
we now live, the NHS's culture of healthcare
for all would attract such global interest.

Communicating the NHS's world-class

expertise and humanitarian ethos to the

billions watching the Olympics' opening

ceremony last summer, director Danny

Boyle, brilliantly articulated the third most

important concern of everyone on the

planet - healthcare.

Boyle's stunning visual representation of the

ideals of the NHS has brought a flood of

inquiries from around the world. Possible

partners are asking if the UK would be 

interested in the commercial possibilities

of capitalising on the brand through joint-

ventures.

The use of such marketing terminology tells
us something of the link between state and
private provision. Potential purchasers of
the NHS's global expertise are mindful of
the reality that funding infinite demand for
healthcare from finite resources is an
impossibility. They know that a
combination of public and insurance-funded

private provision has to be the answer.

Without universal health insurance, delivering

high-quality healthcare to ageing populations

is unworkable. Beveridge's prediction that

healthcare expenditure would reduce as the

population became more heathly with
improved medical care, has always been a
false premise, given scientific advances and
increasing longevity.

If, through a similarly realistic and open

approach to how healthcare is delivered in  

other countries, the finances and standards of

provision within the NHS would be
transformed - helped by the inflow of billions

from marketing this priceless expertise

 

 

         THE EU - LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE

 

When David Cameron and Angela Merkel meet en famille

this week-end, perhaps they should consider matters other

than the redundant question of re-structuring the EU to

allow subsidiarity in key areas for its members. The

German Chancellor is quite clear that she wants more

rather than less Europe, so any significant changes are

not going to happen. Likewise, any such move

transferring sovereign powers back to Westminister is 

a dead duck. More specifically, they should be 

addressing the economic inconsistencies of the deeply

flawed EU project.

The asymmetrical, opaque and unaccountable financing of

the EU budget - not signed off for the past eighteen years - 

involves Germany and Britain providing the majority of

money transfers to the seventeen recipient member states.

Little wonder there is no shortage of other countries wishing

to join a club where they will continue to be paid substantial

and increasing sums for being members.

From a UK perspective with the national debt predicted to

continue rising until 2017/18, the Prime Minister, should

revue the cumulative £100bn cost of the UK's EU

membership, to which has to be added the aggregate sum

of £320bn for the implemention of red tape.This, of course,

pales into insignificance when compared with Germany's

contribution. But how long can this last when Germany,

along with the other twenty-six other member states, is

running a negative debt to GDP ratio and experiencing

nil growth.

The answer lies in the European Central Bank's continuing

to print money, until rising inflation heaps further misery

on harsh austerity. And herein lies an economically suicidal

madness. The European Central Bank bales out Greece

and Cyprus which are heavily indebted to Germany. So,

who provides the money for the bail-outs? You've guessed

it - the Bundesbank. 

By 'more Europe', Angela Merkel means a politically and

economically integrated  federal Europe, precisely

what the EU founding fathers always wanted. It was

their intention that it would be controlled by a German-

French axis. However, now that the French economy is

almost on life-support, that leaves Germany, the EU's

paymaster calling the tune.   

David Cameron knows that any re-casting of the UK's

relationship with Europe will be extremely difficult.

Britain makes a growing and unrealistic contribution to

the EU budget - funded by borrowed money. It has a large

and increasing trade deficit and declining exports to the

EU,  while those to rest of the world are increasing. Now

is the time for the Prime Minister to let the people decide

in his promised referendum,.not in the next parliament,

but at the 2015 General Election.  

 

 

NOT THE TIMES NEWSPAPER

GENDER QUOTAS, AN UNWISE

EXPERIMENT

The ongoing debate about the under-

representation of women in Britain's 
boardrooms should be re-framed to consider
the low female presence in science and
engineering, where the UK's economic future
lies. Addressing the imbalance requires a
cultural shift in education, not EU-imposed
gender quotas, which would give rise to
tokenism. 

Only one fifth of female students take physics
at 'A' level and one third mathematics. This is
reflected in those studying the subjects at
university. It is, therefore, unlikely that many
women will be qualified to rise to the levels
of seniority in advanced engineering demanded
across the piece by EU proposals to change
the gender balance in Britain's board-rooms.

Commentators and Government ministers

refer to the glass ceiling. They say that while

women have made headway in being

promoted in FTSE 100 companies, this has

been mainly at a non-executive, rather than

the more demanding operational level.

In order to change the gender balance at

the top, girls should be encouraged to make

different choices in the subjects they study

at school. Create the necessary pipeline

from which women will emerge to take up

senior positions on merit. Failure to accept

this reality with talk of glass ceilings and

EU-imposed gender balance is vacuous

and will not improve Britain's eonomic

performance.

 

NOT THE TIMES NEWSPAPER

THE BBC, A ONCE GREAT INSTITUTION

THAT HAS LOST ITS WAY

Tony Hall, the newly-appointed BBC Director General,
can think what he likes but a gagging order will prevent
him criticising the vaguely Orwellian way in which the
corporation is funded and how it operates. 

In the past year alone, some three thousand people a
week are reported to have come before the courts for
the non-payment of the TV licence fee. The penalty can 
be a fine of £1,000 and possibly imprisonment. Some
will, of course, refuse to pay because they feel that the
BBC is merely the propaganda arm of the Labour Party
and some will simply not have the money. Then there
will be those who look at the TV schedules - eighteen
repeats today alone - and come to the conclusion that
the £3.56bn the BBC receives annually from the licence
fee represents increasingly poor value for money.

We need only look at the still unfolding Savile scandal
to realise that the corporation's travails are a powerful
metaphor for incompetence, profligacy, corruption and
worse. It is a great institution that has lost its way. The
BBC appears to have all but abandoned its role, as Lord
Reith intended :an impartial public-service broadcaster,
educating and enriching the fabric of our changing
society. Instead, it has become a number of
disfunctional and unaccountable fiefdoms,
contemptuous of any criticism with regard to how it
spends public money in competing with the commercial
media in a pointless ratings' war.

The recent appointment from a shortlist of one of 
former Labour cabinet minister, James Purnell, as
head of digital and strategy, underlines the BBC's
admitted left-wing bias. Westminster watchers will
remember that he was responsible for Labour's last
election campaign. His undoubted talents will, no
doubt, be used in attempting to secure victory for Ed
Miliband in 2015.

Mr Purnell's annual salary of £295,000 will come
from the BBC's compulsory levy on over two
thousand licence-fee payers. This does not take into a
ccount a generous, two-year salary pay-off, should he
decide to leave for whatever reason.

As we have seen from other examples, this is only the
tip of the iceberg with the upper echelons of a
self-serving senior management safeguarding its own
interests, not those of the licence-fee paying public, a t
ime of real austerity.