Time to thank John Major...

****

Amidst all the self-congratulation of current political leaders as their frankly pathetic game of claiming a bit of "credit" for the Olympics (how fast in the other direction would Boris, Ed and Dave have run had the event been less of a triumph), we really should take a moment to thank John Major.

"My original vision for the Lottery was to fund a renaissance in sport, the arts and our heritage. I saw the opportunity to fund projects the Treasury would never be able to afford". 

Whatever we may think of the lottery - its regressive nature, the way it squeezes out other fundraising and doubts about gambling - there is no doubt at all that without it British athletes would have done less well at these Olympics.

Thanks to the unique contribution of National Lottery players our athletes are being given World Class support as they prepare for London 2012 and beyond. A proportion of Good Causes money raised by The National Lottery is targeted at our most talented athletes and has helped to land 438 Olympic and Paralympic Games medals since lottery funding began.

And the National Lottery was - more than anything else - John Major's creation.

I guess we should thank him. It would be more credible of politicians to do this rather than seek political advantage from the Games. Yet I haven't seen Dave or Ed or Boris or Seb turn to camera and say those words - "without John Major insistence on the lottery funding sport, these games would have been less successful. Thanks John."

....

....

A successful North - we'd love it but not that way Julian!

Julian Dobson, on his Living with Rats blog, wrestles with the long-standing – and seemingly intractable problem of the relative underperformance of England’s Northern counties.

Julian asks us what a successful North of England economy would look like and sets out a ten-point descriptor – covering the offering of opportunities to everyone, not compromising on “sustainability”, encouraging distinctiveness and diversity, valuing the contribution of the “voluntary and community sector” and, of course, a local ownership approach founded on mutual and co-operative approaches. It is a delightful collectivist paradise described by Julian and this Shangri la will doubtless be peopled by selfless men and women sacrificing their own individual success to the collective whole. Commonweal will be all!

I was tempted to carefully dissect what’s wrong with all this item by item but there was one of Julian’s ten points that stood out above all the others as something the would shackle the North to a permanent dawdle behind more successful places:

A successful northern economy is one that reduces its dependency on other parts of the world and on national government support. This means ensuring our money supports local and regional businesses, and strengthening links between the north’s businesses and communities. There should be a clear correlation between incentives for business and firms‘contribution to local training, skills development and community wellbeing.

In this we see – and I could cry – the ‘import substitution’ approach to economic development being rolled out. This is the strategy that blighted Latin America as they cowered behind high tariff barriers and anti-yankee policies. The most successful places are places that are open to trade – even in a world where free trade is compromised by restrictions on free movement and a dysfunctional system of development finance.

Julian, like so many of the left, thinks that there is a way to ‘collectivise’ the free market and a means by which it will be civilized (at least in their terms) and controlled by “the community”. By taking this view, we are led inexorably towards state direction and a society where economic activity is categorised into “good business” and “bad business”. The little local co-operative – even if like the Meriden Motorcycle plant a co-operative that destroys value – represents the former while an industrial complex manufacturing parts for power stations and managed by a multinational PLC represents the latter.

The problem with Julian’s utopia is that it would place an intolerable burden on those wishing to do business and most importantly those wanting to do business that involves something other than a grand scale taking in of each other’s washing – a business that exports.

Since Julian asks though I’d better set out how we get to a successful Northern economy (perhaps more valid than what that economy might look like when we get there). For me success lies in people being empowered consumers – in us having the wealth and income to consume the things we want to consume. After all we live to consume (in its widest sense) rather than to produce!

Getting to success must be founded on:

Low taxes on personal and business income

No or very low tariffs and duties

A regulatory environment that encourages choice and flexibility in employment

A pro-business and pro-development planning regime

Priority for infrastructure investment that support growth – roads, ports, broadband

An education system focused on core skills and employability

Aside from infrastructure this is all about less intrusive government, about a tax system that avoids disincentives and an education system that works.

And what would be my measure of success? Aside from us all being healthier and wealthier, I guess the ultimately successful North of England would be a place that looked at itself and decided it didn’t need government any more.

.... 

Update: Seems I'm not the only person who finds Julian's prescription a little unworkable. Here's Tim Worstall on the subject:

Apart from the fact that high speed broadband (as opposed to the dial up/ broadband difference) doesn’t make any difference at all, it’s just the usual ritual cant about inclusiveness isn’t it?
There’s three things that are wrong with the “northern” economy.

1) The exchange rate’s too high.
2) Wages in one sector of the economy are too high.
3) The private sector is getting crowded out.

The solution is to cut government, cut wages (and taxes) and the exchange rate, well that’s more difficult.

...

Sometimes it's a tough life...

We don't all get to start in the best place. Sometimes the soil's a bit lacking and the ground rather stony. And that's the way it is - we can sit there and moan about what a hard life it is and how others have a much better deal. We can shout, "it's not fair" at our masters - and watch as they take away our freedoms in the name of a false equality.

Or we can be strong. We can make the most of what we've got. We can get pleasure from growing in the hard ground and the poor soil. And when we're set and strong, we can look around us, smile and tell the world...

...we did it ourselves.

Don't be fooled - that false equality is about them controlling you, not you getting a better (let alone a fairer) chance. Take the cards you get, play them well and thank the world. But please don't cry foul if someone else is more successful, taller, smarter, faster or braver. And stop asking the government to make it fair - it can't.

....