On the capture of government by special interests...

****

If we assume that the airline companies will try to capture the Civil Aeronautics Board, it makes sense to assume that professors will try to capture the National Science Foundation, teachers to capture the Department of Education, environmentalists to capture the Council on Environmental Quality, and civil rights activists to capture the Office for Civil Rights.  The plausibility of this assumption is sometimes obscured by calling agency-interest relations of which we approve “citizen participation” and agency-interest relations of which we disapprove “capture,” but the issue is very much the same whatever rhetorical label we choose to employ.

Absolutely - and public health lobbies will capture the Department of Health!And, of course, bankers the treasury.

We need to remember this at all times. Government and bureaucracy is never neutral, seldom innocent and is inevitably corrupted by the people and organisations it regulates. The solution isn't more government. The solution isn't some weird thing called 'better regulation'. The solution isn't more so-called democratic oversight (as if the people the democracy puts there are innocent, uncorrupted paladins).

The solution is less government, less bureaucracy and less regulation.

...

No self-interest here at all then?

****
What do you think?

A new support service for charity chairs is aiming to launch in the spring.

The proposed organisation, which is likely to be called the Institute of Chairs, is intended to serve as a source of support and information for charity chairs and help to improve the workings and governance standards of charities.

The organisation is being set up by the governance consultants Ruth Lesirge and Rosalind Oakley, and was unveiled at a meeting at the Charity Commission’s offices in London earlier this month.

Does look just a little like a ramp for a consulancy! (And please no jokes about "charity chairs"!)

....

Union in self-interest shocker!

****

Construction workers union, UCATT is in a tizzy at a trial being undertaken by Home Housing Group that incentivises tenants to do their own small repairs:

A government scheme to encourage tenants to carry out their own repairs has been branded ‘dangerously flawed’ by trade union Ucatt.

The construction union said tenant cashback, which will allow tenants to claim back up to £500 for carrying out small DIY jobs, could expose tenants to asbestos or other health risks.

Steve Murphy, general secretary of the union, said: ‘Councils and housing associations employ qualified repairs and maintenance workers who should be undertaking this safety critical work.’

Concerns have also been raised about the quality of the work that might be carried out by tenants.

None of this concern, of course, has anything to do with the possibility that housing associations and councils might need fewer repairs and maintenance workers if the scheme is a success!

....

"Everything is within the state, nothing without the state" - today's marcher motto

Back in the 1980s – that age evoked so charmingly by Ed Miliband recently – the word “alternative” was captured and held prisoner by the forces of the left. To be an ‘alternative’ comedian wasn’t to be funny (although some were this doesn’t include Ben Elton) but to be ‘left-wing’, ‘progressive’ and above all else against “The Tories”.

In the end the alternatives weren’t really alternatives at all – there was much talk of “defending”, “fighting”, “mobilising”, “organising” and, of course, “striking” but little of substance as to the alternative being proffered.

Now, we find the same voices crying out, a coalition of the self-interested and the prejudiced descend onto London disrupting the pleasure of tourists, the weekend of locals and the choices of visitors. To achieve what is unclear except that this is a march for the “alternative”.

 For some, such as the Unions the alternative is for ordinary people to pay more taxes and for government to cripple future generations with debt so their members can continue to consume what the nations earns (and remember, dear reader, that public servants – however valued – are solely consumers, they do not produce wealth or income) regardless of the interests of those who are producing that wealth.

For others – the spoiled children of UK Uncut in the forefront – the aim is to disrupt and annoy, to make a petty point and to adopt again that squadrista role of doing what the government refuses to do (not that they will succeed in this, of course) in “maintaining services”.

Behind all this lurks to prejudice, the hatred of business and enterprise. People clutch at a specious belief in the moral superiority of public service and wallow in ugly envy of others fortune. These people – who somehow believe, like Mussolini, that “everything is within the state, nothing is without the state” – are screaming for the good state, be it motherland, fatherland or the nanny, to care for them, coddle them, provide for their every whim and need. And to take the money for it off those “other” people.

This March for the Alternative is the political equivalent of a toddler’s tantrum.

....

Diageo lines up with the puritans in calling for higher duty on beer.

In what can only be described as an orgy of self-interest, the booze manufacturers and their representative organisations are leaping about trying to sound all good and righteous in submissions and representations to the current Treasury review of alcohol duty. At the forefront is Diageo in calling for higher duty on beer and wine:

Diageo wants to see "full equivalence" between all kinds of alcohol, so that one unit is taxed at the same rate, regardless of the drink. The strongest drinks would therefore pay the highest level of tax. Diageo is proposing the move as a way of staving off political pricing on drinks such as alcopops and strong cider, targeted by health campaigners for encouraging binge drinking.

Now all this is just a little disingenuous of Diageo – makers of eight out of the top 20 spirits brands – since such a change would raise the level of duty on beer and wine considerably. Presumably Diageo think Guinness can take the hit while they increase profits on higher margin spirit and spirit derived brands.

All this has brought a robust response from the beer business with Wetherspoons’ boss, Tim Martin weighing into the drinks company branding them, “a bunch of morons” and this position has been – more moderately – supported by others:

Kristin Wolfe, head of alcohol policy at SABMiller, said: "Excise tax 'equalisation' is a ruse for making high strength alcohol cheaper relative to low strength alternatives," she said. Ms Wolfe pointed to the lower production costs associated with spirits. "Unless spirits are taxed proportionately higher, they can be sold at a much lower price per unit." Mark Hunter, head of Molson Coors in the UK, branded Diageo's call "self-serving".

What should concern us is that booze businesses appear to be lining themselves for a scrap that is essentially over market share within a declining industry. Oh yes, did we mention that alcohol sales have fallen year on year for six years?

And the effect of Diageo’s representation – if implemented – would be a further discouragement for the pub trade. On top of the smoking ban, a further increase in beer duty (dubbed ‘equalisation’) would undoubtedly push a further bunch of long-established pubs from marginal viability into closing.

That any booze producer is calling for any increase in tax is wrong. Yet the prohibitionists, puritans and health fascists will seize on Diageo’s proposal as another little nail in the coffin of the pub. And this time it will be the drinks industry hammering in the nail.

All this despite the welcome discovery that drinking helps us live longer!

....

A thought on morality (inspired by St Trinian's)

***

Am surprisingly cheered by the moral message of “St Trinian’s: the Treasure of the Frittons”. But first this isn’t a film review – those turgid think pieces about, what is in the final assessment, just a piece of ephemeral entertainment. However, the central message – captured by the lyrics of the St Trinian’s song, “Defenders of Anarchy” (sung for our delectation by Cheryl, Kimberley and co):

Check out our battle cry
A song to terrify
No one can stand in our way

We are the best, so screw the rest
We do as we damn well please
Until the end
St Trinian’s
Defenders of anarchy

So scam all the toffs, the neeks and the freaks
Blackmail the goths, the slappers and the geeks
And if they complain, we’ll do it all again
We do as we damn well please

As for the chavs, the emos and their mates
To torment the slags, we offer special rates
And if they complain, we’ll do it all again
Defenders of anarchy

We are the best, so screw the rest
We do as we damn well please
Until the end
St Trinian’s
Defenders of anarchy

ST TRINIAN’S!

I live in hope that this uplifting moral message – independence, honesty and self-interest to the fore – gets more attention in our schools. It’s certainly better than the mealy-mouth, politically correct, wimpish moral code promoted by our current authorities!!

...

It's an election we want Nick...and we want it now!

.

Nick Clegg clambered up onto the limited soap box provided by the Independent to get all radical and angry about the Queen's Speech.

...and what does he want?

1. Fixed term parliaments - so MPs get a solid four or five years to feather their nests?
2. State funding for politics - so all the aspirant MPs can get cushy jobs at party HQ
3. An electoral system designed to give the Lib Dems a permanent hold over Government
4. A House of Lords filled with still more washed up old hacks
5. A "code of conduct" for candidates - as if the electorate can't spot the scumbags

Nick, you're a nice man and they say you're very bright...but what people want is an election. And they want it now!

.