In this issue: No. 50 - April 2008 • Knowing what “they” are up to • Libertarian perspectives on charity, self-help and welfare • Beyond “Europe” • Chris Tame two years on

WE ARE NOT CHILDREN!

We are grateful to Robert Henderson for “… housewives as a whole can- his recent work on Freedom of Informa- not be trusted to buy all the tion issues. Having been involved myself right things, where nutrition in a modest way in similar work— and health are concerned. submissions to government consultation This is really no more than an processes—for the Campaign Against Cen- extension of the principle ac- sorship, I know what hard work this can cording to which the housewife be. herself would not trust a child of four to select the week’s pur- As the SIF and its contributors have said chases. For in the case of nutri- many times over the years, except in the tion and health, just as in the case of matters genuinely concerning na- case of education, the gentle- tional security, there is little or no excuse man in Whitehall really does for “official secrets”. In truth, they mainly know better what is good for serve to hide the incompetence and out- people than the people know right mendacity of officialdom plus act as themselves.” a reminder of, even in the best of times, that same officialdom’s patronising con- And that, as Professor Myddelton pointed tempt for “ordinary people”. out, is exactly how we’re all viewed by “the state”: as children. In his recent talk to the Libertarian Alli- ance (see below), Professor David Myddel- The articles in this issue of The Individual

ton, the chairman of the SIF’s National by Ziggy Encaoua and Richard Garner Council, reminded the audience of the full complement each other. Both speak of context of the notorious “the gentleman in individualistic, self-help and charitable Whitehall knows best” quotation. It was approaches towards welfare rather than written by Douglas (later Lord) Jay in his the nannying and very expensive statism 1937 book The Socialist Case. It ran, (Continued on page 17) AL F R E D OM

DISCLAIMER & PUBLISHING DETAILS Inside this issue: Views expressed in The Individual are not necessarily those of the Editor or the SIF and its members, Contrarian Thoughts from a Disabled Libertarian - Ziggy Encaoua 2 but are presented as a contribu- tion to debate. The Freedom of Information Act Two Years On - Robert Henderson 5

Only policies or opinions that have been approved by the SIF Man- and Welfare: Is Charity Enough? - Richard Garner 13 agement Committee, and are noted as such, can be taken as The Battle for Liberty: More than Just “Europe” - Nigel Meek 18 having formal SIF approval. This also applies to editorial comments in this journal.

Edited by Nigel Meek and pub- lished by the Society for Individual Freedom. Contact details can be Th e I n d i v u al S O C IE T Y F R I N D V DU found on the back page. Page 2 THE INDIVIDUAL

CONTRARIAN THOUGHTS FROM A DISABLED LIBERTARIAN: NOT ALL DISABLED PEOPLE WANT SOCIALISM

Ziggy Encaoua

Against the Grain any other job such as being bank clerk. You don’t expect to be served at the bank five min- I am a disabled person. I’ve written many utes after the banks close. So, no social times about being disabled but never exclu- worker or social carer is going to feel that they sively about why being disabled has made me should be expected to care about their clients an advocate for smaller government. Some when they clock off nor in my opinion should think that if you’re disabled then you must be they be expected to have a duty of care once an advocate for socialistic government. I be- they clock off. Plus, social workers have pro- lieve differently. My views have evolved from fessional boundaries which are set to protect a combination of my own experiences as a both social worker and client. This prevents disabled person and the treatment of disabled them from having anything other then a pro- people in society. Quite simply, I’ve come to fessional relationship with their client, other- believe that socialistic government is actually wise they’ll be reprimanded. Friendships are damaging the cause and prospects of disabled fluid, so it’s odd why any liberal or leftist ex- people. pects a social worker to develop friendships since friendships can’t flourish within the I believe that socialistic government helps to boundaries of a professional relationship. foster an attitude in society that there will al- ways be a social worker or an institution to I recognise that social workers are probably care for the disabled, and so why should any better off than other workers in setting individual care so long as it’s someone else’s boundaries to their professional relationships. job. This has led to an even worse notion that But as well as professional relationships social “… they’re paid to being a social worker or social carer isn’t just a workers often obsess about their remits. If a job of caring for the welfare of somebody client asks for help outside what a social care about people who’s disabled, but that it’s the job of a social worker judges to be their remit then that cli- and they clock off worker to be a friend. It’s the sad truth that ent is out of luck even though it’s not harming at the end of the some people think that it’s the job of a social anybody. For instance, there have been exam- worker to be a friend to somebody who’s dis- ples of social carers refusing to book prosti- shift just like any abled, and it’s because of the state. This tutes for their clients even though paying for other worker.” should come as no surprise. It is most often sex is the choice of their client. It’s not like expressed by liberals and leftists because liber- anybody is expecting a social worker or social als and leftists don’t think that they should care carer to provide the “service” themselves! Per- but that the state should care. haps the social carer should realise that maybe because the client is so disabled then the only I saw an example of this in the transgendered way they’re going to get sexual relief is by pay- community when no transsexual would be ing for sex. friends with or otherwise help a disabled per- son with gender dysphoria because they Another incident I know of is a disabled per- thought that it was a job for a social worker, son who asked their social worker if they even though no social worker would have the could help them become a professional domi- expertise to help a disabled person with gender natrix. This person wasn’t too disabled but dysphoria. did needed help doing various things an able bodied person would take for granted. How- Social Work: Just Another Job ever, with a little help they could have earned a living from being a dominatrix. This person There’s something of a misconception about happened to be on welfare, but rather then social workers. It’s the belief that social work- helping them accomplish something they ers really care about people. Not so. The found enjoyable and which would earn them a truth is that they’re paid to care about people decent living the social worker suggested that and they clock off at the end of the shift just they needed therapy. This is because social like any other worker. Social work is just like workers “know best” what help the client NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 3

needs and never mind what the client’s wishes but not enough of the taxpaying public knows happen to be. this. I’m sure that if they did they’d be asking far more questions about the relationship be- Turkeys Do Not Vote for Christmas tween state funding and disability charities. This is why I don’t believe that the state But the bigger problem with social workers is should be funding charities and that instead they need people to be messed up because the charities need to rely solely on private fund- more messed up people that there are then the ing. If this was the case then charities would more social workers can justify their jobs. aim to carry out far more constructive pro- grammes because people I found this out when I used to be involved in aren’t going to fund social a charity for people who had mental health workers to keep people ill problems. The purpose of the charity origi- or messed up just to justify nally was to rehabilitate people to help to get their job. them into education and employment—the usual “become a useful member of society” The government has re- stuff. But the problem was that the more peo- cently announced reforms ple got into education or employment then the to disability welfare. Now fewer the numbers of people the charity got it’s not going to be about funding for. This was because the charity re- Ziggy Encaoua what disabled people can’t lied upon government funding and the govern- do, rather its going to be ment didn’t measure funding by how many what they can do. But ironically it’s not dis- people the charity helped to rehabilitate but abled people whom are alarmed by this new by the number of people who were on their policy but social workers who the government books. The more people the charity had, the will get to implement these reforms. more funding there was. And the social work- ers who worked there looked out for their job However, even with the government taking prospects. So instead of helping people get this new approach many disabled people are ahead and become useful members of society still unemployable through no fault of their “… the more they decided generally to spoon feed them and own. It’s previous governmental policy which people got into wipe their backsides. has conditioned them since it used to be the education or policy to send disabled and mentally ill people Sadly, the majority of people who this charity to residential education and care institutes. employment then dealt with lapped it up and those who said it the fewer the was patronising where hounded. Not all the I was a product of this policy. I was put in an numbers of people paid workers went along with the party line. institution when I was seven and left when I There was one worker in particular who, was 18. I spent the next three years in and out the charity got rather then patronise any person with talent, of hospital suffering from depression because I funding for.” would say to them “stop worrying about your couldn’t cope out in the real world. I didn’t weaknesses and start thinking about your have a clue because I’d been cut off from soci- strengths”. This worker, however, was ety and this leads to problems about interact- “encouraged” to move on. Later on there was ing with the wider world. What people learn a volunteer worker who was prevented from from a normal upbringing is missing in any- getting too involved in helping individuals. I body put in an institution at an early age. I have a lot of respect for individuals who, out was lucky and I managed eventually to over- of the goodness of their heart, give up their come this institutional conditioning and forge time and volunteer to help those less fortunate. a life for myself. However, there are those However when this individual did more than who are less fortunate and they can find them- what was usually required the social workers selves isolated and in the care of social work- in charge of this charity put a stop to it be- ers. cause it made the paid workers look bad. Only Individuals Can Really Care I wonder if I’m the only one who reckons there’s something very wrong in charities that Some say I’ve romanticised a view that if gov- deal with the disabled and mentally ill being ernment didn’t tend to the disabled then peo- paid on the number of how many people there ple would be more charitable. Well, it’s not a are on their books rather than on the basis on romanticised view. It’s a logical one that if how many people they manage to rehabilitate? there wasn’t the idea that it’s the government’s I’m not the only one who knows this goes on job to look after disabled people then I believe Page 4 THE INDIVIDUAL

that people as individuals would be more will- disabled or not, who wallows in self pity. ing to help. It’s the belief that somewhere there is a gov- But disabled people need to help themselves ernment employed social worker “to look af- “… disabled far more and not expect the state to aid them. ter things” that prevents individuals from genu- people need to help This is not a popular opinion with the disabled inely caring. Yes, as usual, it’s the government themselves far and mentally ill. In fact, some have labelled which is the problem! me a fascist! I’m no fascist, I just believe in more and not self-empowerment and I believe that every- pqrspqrspq expect the state to body has a talent for something. I also believe aid them.” that there are people willing to care about the Ziggy Encaoua was born in 1974 in KwaZulu- disabled other then some government- Natal, South Africa, but now lives in Surrey. employed social worker. But I also believe His own website is at www.encaoua.net. that nobody is going to care about anybody,

The death of British democracy…

“The truth, the harsh, unvarnished truth is that there is no point to the House of Commons or to MPs. Let us go through it systematically. The House of Commons is supposed to legislate and hold the Ex- ecutive to account. It never does the latter. The only body within the British constitutional structure that still does it to an extent is the unpaid House of Lords and, with the help of the House of Commons, it has been emasculated and is to be destroyed completely.

Legislation no longer happens in the Commons. Between seventy and eighty per cent of it comes from Brussels, often bypassing Parliament completely. Even if it does hit Parliament, it cannot be rejected. Scrutiny, even if there were time to do it thoroughly, without the right of rejection or amendment is not legis- lation. It is akin to rearranging those famous deckchairs on the Titanic.

A good deal of the legislation both European and domestic, often intermingled, is produced by quangos, who are also responsible for implementing laws and rules. A good deal of the legislation that does go through Parliament is nothing more than the implementation of rules created by tranzis [trans-nationalists], starting with the UN and its many off-shoots.

In other words, MPs have abandoned all their duties and, while most people probably do not know the de- tails of the EU or suchlike matters, there is a widespread if unfocused understanding that there is no point in voting as that changes nothing. This is not because they are all the same, though that is true as well, but because they, the politicians, are not in a position to change anything and when they tell us otherwise, they are lying on a scale no politician has lied before…

The other side of the coin is that in the little that has been left to the politicians to deal with, they microman- age. No part of our lives is safe from their grubby little fingers: not education, not behaviour, not whether we need plastic carrier bags or not.”

Dr Helen Szamuely, EU Referendum blog, www.eureferendum.blogspot.com, 1st March 2008. NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 5

THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT TWO YEARS ON

Robert Henderson

Don’t Look a Gift-horse in the Mouth 28th April 2006) that the Notting Hill Carnival and Brick Lane had been included as English The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) came icons because they were each “one of the 21 into force on January 1st 2005. How has it most voted for icons suggested by the public performed? Like the curate’s egg, good in since the website was set up in January”. parts. Material is often being withheld and the delay in going through the appeals process is The DCMS response to my FOI request excessive. However, it is also true that much showed that the Notting Hill Carnival was useful and important information is being un- chosen despite 84.5% of the public voting NO earthed which would never have seen the light [it is not an English Icon]. Brick Lane was of day before the Act existed. It is demonstra- chosen with a mere 20 people taking part in bly a valuable tool against the secrecy, incom- the vote. petence and wilful misbehaviour of official- dom. That is not to say it could not be im- The second instance involved the BBC. My proved considerably, but it would be unwise FOI request forced them to admit that the to look a gift-horse in the mouth. Before you BBC operates a system of surreptitious censor- had nothing; now you have something. ship on phone-in programmes. The censor- ship is achieved as follows. The BBC decides Two attempts to restrict access to information someone shall not be allowed on air at any have been seen off, at least for the moment. time because they are either making “nuisance The Government has dropped its proposals to calls” or being abusive. The person is not told (1) include time taken to consider whether that they have been blacklisted and when they information should be released in the calcula- ring the phone rings but the BBC operator tion of the cost of answering a request and (2) refuses to answer the phone. Here is part of “Like the curate’s restrictions on the number of requests which the BBC’s admission extracted from their let- th egg, good in might be made by any one person, while an ter to me of 19 October 2007: attempt by a Tory backbencher David Mac- parts.” lean to exempt MPs’ correspondence from the “The BBC has a number of tele- Act has so far foundered in its course through phone systems in place which have Parliament. Do not bet against either coming different functions available de- to life again. pending on the particular BBC department’s operational need. There is a possibility of the scope of the Act Authorisation of the particular being extended. The Government conducted a system would be approved by the public consultation on the matter which closed appropriate senior manager based on February 1 2008 (see the final section “The on the department’s assessed need.” extension of the Act”). The Government’s decision on what is to be done is still some “For example, Radio 5’s telephone way off. system has a function which allows them to place a warning or banned My Experiences of using the Act flag on a particular number. This will only occur if the phone opera- I have made approximately a couple of dozen tor gets abuse or a nuisance call requests on a wide variety of subjects. These from a person using the specific have resulted in two unambiguous successes. telephone number. In future, if In the first instance, I obtained information that number calls in a symbol will which proved that a Department of Culture, appear on the screen to alert the Media and Sport (DCMS) initiative to provide operator to the warning or banned official English Icons was fixed to ensure that flag and the operator will then politically correct items were included. When choose to not answer the phone the first publicly nominated Icons were se- call.” lected, the DCMS announced (Daily Telegraph, Page 6 THE INDIVIDUAL

“The BBC is unable to provide you The most frequent refusals I have encountered with figures for how often the are claims of exemption from disclosure under BBC’s telephone systems have been section 35 (formulation of government policy, used to ban callers, or who author- etc), section 41 (information provided in confi- ised each telephone system. As dence) and section 43 (commercial interests) of noted above, each department the Act. within the BBC will have its own telephone system set up with differ- Section 41 is intended to be an absolute bar to ent functions. We estimate that to disclosure. However, Maurice Frankel of the audit the telephone systems of each Campaign for Freedom of Information department would take more than (CFOI) has recently written to me on the sub- two and a half days to complete. ject as follows: Under section 12 of the Act, we are allowed to refuse to handle the “The section 41 exemption, for request if it would exceed the ap- information whose disclosure propriate limit. The appropriate would be an actionable breach of limit has been set by the Regula- confidence, is not subject to the tions (SI 2004/3244) as being £450 public interest test in section 2 of (equivalent to two and a half days the Act. However, the common work, at an hourly rate of £25).” law of confidentiality itself incor- porates a very similar public inter- “However, we are able to confirm est test. So in practice, the kinds of that there are currently 239 people public interest argument that could on Radio 5’s banned or warning be made under other exemptions list.” can also be made in relation to section 41.” Those were the undoubted successes, although even in those cases I did not get all the infor- Sections 35 and 43 are not absolute bars but “The BBC refused to mation I requested. I was unable to get the full are meant to be tested against the public inter- give the numbers of voting figures on all proposed English Icons est. The problem with this is there is no (there were many hundreds) because the com- means of quantifying either the merits of keep- people blacklisted pany set up by the DCMS, Icons Online, did ing government discussions and commercial by departments … not fall within the scope of the Act and the interests private or the public interest. Because it is probable that DCMS claimed Icons Online did not supply it is a matter of opinion, data holders using them with voting figures for any proposed these exemptions in my experience always the numbers Icons other than those which became official baldly assert that in their judgement the public banned by the English Icons. They further claimed that they interest is outweighed by the other considera- BBC ... run into had no obligation to seek them from Icons tions. As the person making the request has Online. The BBC refused to give the numbers no access to the information being withheld, it many thousands.” of people blacklisted by departments other is difficult for them to argue that the public than R5 on the grounds of cost. As they ad- interest trumps the other considerations be- mitted to 239 people for R5 alone, it is prob- cause the data being withheld is not of a nature able that the numbers banned by the BBC as a to withstand the request for disclosure (it is whole run into many thousands. worth remembering that public bodies are remarkably secretive about everything). All Exemptions and Refusals the requester can do if he or she appeals is point to their assessment of the public interest My other requests show up the limitations of in the case. the Act. These limitations fall into five catego- ries: claims of exemptions under the FOIA; The cost limits are frequently used in an at- claims that the data sought is not held; claims tempt to derail a request. The limits are abso- that the obtaining of the material would ex- lute. If they are exceeded it is not a question ceed the cost limits (£600 for central govern- of the requester having the option to pay any- ment and £450 for local government); organi- thing above the limit, but of the entire request sations which would seem to be cast iron can- being rejected. The only option to get any didates for being within the scope of the Act information rapidly then is to narrow the re- being excluded from the Act; and attempts to quest. shift requests from the FOI to the Environ- ment Information Regulations. Proving a data holder’s estimate of the cost is NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 7

too high is problematical, because the person tially allowed the Council to charge for sup- making the request does not know the data plying information, something the FOIA does holder’s system. However, there are ways to not allow. Introducing the prospect of a attack such estimated costs. The labour in- charge could be seen as a means of dissuading volved in obtaining the information is calcu- the requester from proceeding. When I chal- lated at £25 an hour. That gives 24 hours lenged the attempt, Camden did not back work for requests to central government and down as such but came up with a “solution”: 18 hours for local government before the cost they would supply the material under both the limits are exceeded. There are few requests FOIA and the EIR. This meant that nothing which would exceed several days work. It is should be charged because there are Govern- always worth challenging the data holder to ment guidelines which say requests which give a detailed explanation of why the work could fall under either the FOIA or the EIR would take longer. Even if they fail to provide should not attract a charge. This was bending this, the refusal will provide evidence against the rules because my request indubitably did the refusal if you appeal against the decision. not fall under the EIR.

The most suspicious example of a claim that Successes data was not held I have encountered con- cerned the Home Office. I requested the con- Although I have met a good deal of obstruc- viction statistics on murder, manslaughter, tion, it is surprising what information is re- GBH and rape by race. The Home Office leased. Even where material is contentious claimed that they did not hold national statis- there is a reasonable chance that something tics. They did supply statistics for some re- valuable will be released, not least because gions but these contained a very large propor- those assessing and collecting the material may tion of “race not known” culprits. It is very not realise its significance or will fail to under- difficult to believe that a government so ob- stand what can be legitimately withheld under “The value of sessed with collecting racially based statistics the Act. I have yet to deal with an FOI officer refusals to release do not collect them on major crimes, even if who really understands the Act. In some cases, that is done only to track whether ethnic mi- the ignorance is very basic. One FOI request information should norities are being discriminated against. How- to the DCMS resulted in a refusal on the also not be ever, it is next to impossible to prove they do grounds of exceeding the cost limits. The offi- ignored. There is hold full details and the Information Commis- cer dealing with the request made the elemen- sioner (IC) is unlikely to support an appeal tary mistake of including consideration time in considerable unless it can be shown that the information the calculation. propaganda value does exist. in being able to The sheer weight of FOI requests to larger There are many bodies which would seem to public bodies such as government departments paint a public body be certainties to be within the scope of the Act can also work in the applicant’s favour. Public as hiding which are excluded. The section below on the servants are human (honest!) and pressure of something.” extension of the scope of the Act deals with work is likely to make them less careful than this problem in detail. Icons Online, which I they would otherwise be. mentioned previously, is a classic example, being an organisation set up by a government In the Camden case described above, my re- department, with a departmental remit, fully quest produced, amongst other interesting funded by the department and with a depart- things, a document which stated that the ques- mental employee on the advisory board. tion of which purchaser was to be allowed to buy the site (the seller was the DCMS) had On one occasion, I encountered an attempt to gone via Gordon Brown, something the switch a FOI request to the Environmental DCMS had denied when I put in an FOI re- Information Regulations (EIR). This hap- quest to them about the sale of the site. pened when I made a request to Camden Council for information relating to the pro- The value of refusals to release information posed building of a medical research centre on should also not be ignored. There is consider- land behind the British Library. The informa- able propaganda value in being able to paint a tion I was requesting manifestly did not fall public body as hiding something. It is also a within the scope of the EIR, it being con- fair bet that where a request deals with a politi- cerned with political discussions about what cally contentious matter the refusal is because the land should be used for not environmental there is some very politically embarrassing issues. A switch to the EIR would have poten- material to be had. Page 8 THE INDIVIDUAL

The Appeal Process Q1: Do you support extending the coverage of the FOI Act to organi- This is in two parts. If the data holder has an sations that carry out functions of internal appeal process—and the vast majority a public nature and to contractors do—then you must make an appeal to them who provide services to a public first. Unless there are exceptional circum- authority whose provision is a stances, only after they have rejected your ap- function of that public authority? peal can you appeal to the IC (an example of an exceptional circumstance would be that the In principle, the Society favours data holder has not responded to your appeal the widest possible extension of within a reasonable period.). the Act, because a government can be best held to account when I have made half a dozen appeals to internal the information available to the review boards and not one has been upheld. public is most complete. How- The experience of other people I know is ever, we recognise the practical much the same. The internal appeal is proba- difficulties which could arise bly best viewed as simply a charade to be un- from such an extension and con- dergone to qualify for an appeal to the IC. sequently would resist any exten- sion which would worsen an Appealing to the IC is a labour of love. Ap- already unsatisfactory situation. peals take between one and two years accord- ing to Maurice Frankel. Data holders know At present, the Information this, and it is reasonable to assume that often a Commissioner’s office is taking refusal to supply information is done cynically far too long to reach a judgement in the hope that the person making the request on appeals against refusals to will either not have the stamina to carry an release information—between “… it is reasonable appeal through or that even if an appeal is one and two years according to to assume that made and upheld by the IC, the information Maurice Frankel, the director of often a refusal to will be out-of-date by the time it is supplied The Campaign for Freedom of and consequently less likely to cause difficulty Information. There is also sig- supply information for the data holder. This is a question which is nificant delay with other enquir- is done cynically in particularly pertinent when considering re- ies, for example, a complaint the hope that the quests made by the media who will often drop about an unreasonable delay by a a story if the information is not quickly avail- data holder in responding to FOI person making the able. requests. Such tardiness is unsur- request will ... not prising in the context of over have the stamina to I have made five appeals to the IC to date. 100,000 public bodies being Only one has been adjudicated so far. That within the remit of the Act, the carry an appeal was an appeal against the refusal of Icons very limited resources available through…” Online to release data. The IC ruled that they to the Information Commis- did not come within the scope of the Act even sioner (around 200 staff) and the though, as previously mentioned, they are Information Commissioner’s entirely a creature of the DCMS. dual role as administrator of the Data Protection Act. The Extension of the Act and a Submission on Behalf of the SIF A delay of between one and two years severely restricts the utility The government is considering extending the of the Act, not least because, in Act to include bodies which are not formally the nature of things, the informa- part of public administration (the details of the tion with the greatest public in- proposals can be seen on the Ministry of Jus- terest tends to the most politi- tice website— www.justice.gov.uk—‘Freedom cally embarrassing and hence the of Information Act 2000: Designation of addi- most likely to be subject to a tional public authorities’, Consultation Paper refusal to release by a data CP 27/07). The Government’s consultation holder. In many instances, the paper calls for interested parties to make sub- delay may rob any information missions. I have made the following submis- which is eventually supplied of sion on behalf of the SIF to the questionnaire its potency, because the utility of contained within the consultation paper: the information is time sensitive NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 9

and by the time it is supplied it is 2007 that Icons Online did not past the point where it is of come within the Act. Clearly, value. A good example of this this is against the spirit of the would be information required FOIA and provides both central to lobby against an Act of Parlia- and local government with con- ment. In the vast majority of siderable opportunity to hide instances, once an Act is passed information which is considered the information becomes practi- contentious. cally worthless. Q2: Of the five proposed options, A considerable injection of which do you consider the best op- money is required to reduce the tion? Or would some other option, current delays in deciding ap- or combination of options, be pref- peals and answering, complaints erable? Please explain your reason- and queries to a reasonable pe- ing. riod. But even if those delays are deemed acceptable by the gov- With the proviso that adequate ernment, additional resources resources are provided, the SIF will be required to deal with any favours option 5. Our reasons increase in traffic resulting from for doing so are as follows: an extension of the Act. The additional resources could be Option 1 - Take no action at this considerable if a broad extension time. This would leave un- “The process of is implemented. touched even organisations as closely associated with public negotiation… The SIF’s response to Questions administration as Icons Online. could… put 2-8 should be read in the context pressure on the of the need for adequate re- Option 2 - Self-regulation. This public body to sources to be provided before has a generally sorry history substantial additions to those wherever it has been tried—the bring as little as encompassed by the Act are PCC is widely regarded as a possible of the made. However, there is one prime example of such failure— category which the SIF believes and breaches natural justice by contractor’s work should be brought within the creating a quasi-judicial system within the remit of scope of the Act even if no addi- which is not self-evidently disin- the information as tional resources are provided. terested. This is any organisation, for ex- a quid pro quo for ample, a company limited by Option 3 - Building information getting a contract guarantee, that is created by a access obligations into contracts generally public body which is already with organisations delivering favourable to the within the scope of the Act but public services. In practice, this which is technically independent would result in endless disputes public body.” of the sponsoring public body over what was covered by the and consequently outside the contract and almost certainly scope of the Act. greatly increase the work of the Information Commissioner. A good example of such an or- ganisation is Icons Online. This It would also be difficult to en- is a company limited by guaran- sure that all important informa- tee which was set up by the De- tion would be covered by the partment of Culture Media and contractual obligations. The Sport (DCMS) to perform a process of negotiation between function determined by the the public body and the private DCMS, which is funded by the contractor over the general terms DCMS and has a DCMS em- of the contract could (and almost ployee on its advisory board. certainly would) put pressure on Notwithstanding this very close the public body to bring as little association, the Information as possible of the contractor’s Commissioner ruled in March work within the remit of the Page 10 THE INDIVIDUAL

information as a quid pro quo for work sub-contracted to firms getting a contract generally fa- situated abroad. These would be vourable to the public body. In unlikely to willingly agree to the addition, those representing the release of information, and even public body are unlikely to have if they did there would be no sufficient detailed knowledge of practical means of checking the work covered by the con- whether they were supplying the tract to be able to anticipate all information which they had that will be important for the agreed to supply. public to know. There is also the very real risk that the con- Option 4 - Introduce a single tractor will try to exclude most section 5 order covering a speci- of what they do on the grounds fied set of organisations - The of commercial confidentiality, intention of this option can in something which they would effect be achieved by Option 5, have substantial grounds for do- for although Option 5 allows for ing as the Act is presently writ- any number of organisations to ten. If Option 3 was adopted an be added by a series of section 5 amendment loosening the confi- orders, the number could be dentiality restrictions would be stopped at whatever point is required. deemed reasonable, which could mean only including what was to There are other problems. If be included under Option 4. each contract has information access obligations tailored to its Adopting Option 5 allows for particular circumstances, the maximum flexibility, an impor- person making a request would tant point because it is conceiv- have to familiarise themselves able that a new class bodies with with each individual contractor. public functions could be created “There are other It would be possible to lay down in the future just as companies problems… the in law a set of general conditions limited by guarantee were re- person making a to be included in any contract, cently created. but that would be a very blunt request would have instrument which by its nature Q3: Should some form of public to familiarise would often fail to cover all in- funding be essential in order for an themselves with formation that is important. organisation to be considered for inclusion in a section 5 order, or each individual Many contracts will be given to a should this be just one of a number contractor.” contractor who will then sub- of relevant factors to be considered? contact the work. This is par- ticularly true of the building In principle, every organisation industry, which constitutes a in receipt of substantial amounts large proportion of the contracts of public money should be in- granted by public bodies. The cluded because of the need for number of sub-contractors can oversight of taxpayers’ money be very large on a large building by the general public. This is contract, dozens or even hun- clearly the most important and dreds being involved. On obvious criterion for inclusion grounds of simple practicality it within the Act. However, there is very difficult to see how sub- are other important criteria contractors could all be brought which should qualify a body for within the scope of the Act, both FOIA requests. The criteria de- in terms of their numbers and tailed at section 2 para 20 of the the complexity of deciding ex- consultation paper seem sound actly how each relates to the con- and to cover the vast majority of tractual obligations contained in bodies currently excluded from the lead contractor’s contract. the Act. The one important ex- ception is interest groups and There is also the complication of their ilk—see the answer to Q4 NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 11

given below. The difficulty with excluding organisations which would oth- Q4: Are there any organisations or erwise qualify for inclusion categories of organisations that do within the scope of the Act not receive public funding but that purely on the grounds of cost or you believe should be covered by because of the public scrutiny the Act? Please explain why. deterrent effect on potential con- tractors—particularly the latter— In principle, any organisation is that important areas of public which has a public aspect should interest could be excluded on a be included. The most pressing basis which took no account of cases for inclusion are organisa- the public interest in having ac- tions such as the Press Com- cess to information. For exam- plaints Commission which per- ple, it is normally the case that form a quasi-judicial role with very large publicly-funded con- political and public function im- tracts are bid for by only a few plications and any organisation contractors. Sometimes there which places itself within the may be only one realistic bidder. political system. Examples of If the work which is to be put the latter are campaigning out to contract must be done, groups, firms of lobbyists and the public body offering the con- charities which attempt to influ- tract could be placed in the in- ence governmental policy. vidious position whereby they have to choose between getting The PCC is a particularly inter- the work done at all or agreeing esting case because it exists on to exclude the contractor wholly the tacit understanding that if it or partially from the legitimate did not exist there would be a scope of the FOIA. government created body per- forming its function. In effect, it As far as quantifiable cost is con- is a government created body. cerned, the most sensible ap- “In principle, any Logically, any body which exists proach would be to set a limit organisation which in such circumstances should be, based on the value of the sum in principle, within the scope of below which a contractor would has a public aspect the Act. be automatically excluded from should be the scope of the FOIA. included.” Q5: Do you agree that the balance between the public interest and the As for a reluctance to take on potential burden of FOI is an ap- public work because of fears of propriate consideration when de- public scrutiny, it is probable ciding whether to cover an organi- that those bidding to be the lead sation? contractor would not be put off because of the vast amounts of In principle yes, but the devil lies money involved and the very in the detail. The public interest wide profit margins to be made is not a quantifiable quality from large public contracts. Just whereas the potential burden on as public bodies are reliant on a an organisation is quantifiable in few bidders for many contracts, some measure, for example, the so are the few organisations capa- cost of setting up a publishing ble of taking on the larger con- scheme and providing staff to tracts dependent on public con- respond to FOI requests. How- tracts to keep them operating. ever, some aspects of the burden Obligation works both ways. A of FOI cannot be quantified, sensible compromise might be to namely, the reluctance of non- place full FOIA requirements on governmental bodies, especially the lead contractors whilst leav- commercial enterprises, to be ing the sub-contractors un- exposed to public scrutiny for touched. reasons other than cost. Page 12 THE INDIVIDUAL

Q6: To what extent do you think subject to FOI? If not, please give that the factors listed, or any other your reasons. factors, should be taken into ac- count in determining whether or- In principle, the SIF agrees with ganisations performing public the proposition. However, our functions should be brought within support for this is conditional on the ambit of the Act? the provision of adequate re- sources being made available to The SIF judges that the prime the Information Commissioner. criteria for inclusions should be: Q9: Which organisations, or types 1 - Substantial public funds are of organisations, do you believe involved. should be considered for inclusion 2 - The organisation performs a in any extension of FOI under s.5 quasi-judicial role. of the Act, and why? 3 - The organisation undertakes a function which would otherwise This question has been substan- be undertaken by a body which tially answered by our responses already falls within the scope of to questions 3 and 6. However, the Act. the position of the PCC as the arbiter of disputes in the print Q7: Do you agree that the coverage media will bear a few more of FOI should extend to contractors words. At present we have an who provide services under con- imbalance between the overseer tract with a public authority whose of broadcasters (Ofcom) and the provision is a function of that au- overseer of the print media. Of- “… there is no thority? If you disagree, please give com (and the BBC Trust) is al- plausible reason your reasons. ready within the scope of the why the PCC should Act. If that is judged reasonable, In principle, the SIF agrees with and the SIF is of the opinion that be exempt.” the proposition. However, our it reasonable, then there is no support for this is conditional on plausible reason why the PCC the provision of adequate re- should be exempt. Indeed, there sources being made available to is arguably greater reason for the the Information Commissioner. PCC to be subject to public scru- tiny because it is a body funded Q8: Do you agree that information by the industry it regulates, a fact relating to an organisation’s ad- which both breaches natural jus- ministration of a public service or tice and provides much greater function, for example in the areas temptation for the exercise of listed in paragraph 33, should be bias.

Take your brain for a walk…

www.libertarian.co.uk

One of the world’s largest libertarian web sites with over 800 publications available on-line. NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 13

LIBERTARIANISM AND WELFARE: IS CHARITY ENOUGH?

Richard Garner

“What About the Poor?” ever vote for a government to force them to do so? As David Friedman wrote (pp. 21-22),1 Discussing libertarianism inevitably involves answering the question, “what about the “Suppose that one hundred years poor”? And then, when libertarians suggest ago someone tried to persuade me that those that want to help the poor can do so that democratic institutions could through private charity, the discussion just as be used to transfer money from the inevitably turns to doubts that charity would bulk of the population to the poor. be enough. The answer is, of course, “enough I could have made the following for what?” It certainly isn’t the be all and end reply: ‘The poor, whom you wish to all. Firstly, it is plain that the poor in more help, are many times outnumbered capitalist countries tend to be much better off by the rest of the population, from than the poor in less capitalist countries. whom you intend to take the When shown in this light, the claim that liber- money to help them. If the non- tarians only want to defend the interests of the poor are not generous enough to rich and don’t care about the poor is clearly give money to the poor voluntarily false. Capitalism, where it has been allowed to through private charity, what work to any substantial degree, has been better makes you think they will be such for the poor than socialism has. This is both fools as to vote to force themselves in terms of actual wealth, so that even if the to give it?’” poor get a smaller slice of the pie it is a much “… it is plain that bigger pie that they get a slice of, and in terms So, if the vast majority of people are too selfish the poor in more of equality, where the division between the to help those in need, then it plainly follows capitalist countries rich and poor is less in capitalist countries that no democratic institutions would result in than, say, between ranking members of the the transfer of money from the majority to the tend to be much Communist Party and the poor in the old poor. People wouldn’t vote for such a govern- better off than the USSR. ment. But people do vote for such govern- poor in less ments. Of course, one must not neglect cer- It should also be noted that libertarianism also tain facts. For example, according to its own capitalist means an end to corporate welfare, redistribu- figures2 the state directly employs between countries.” tion to the rich and the provision of monopo- about 20% of the entire workforce of the listic privilege by the state. And, lastly, liber- UK—the NHS is, I hear, the biggest employer tarianism would also mean the freeing of the in Europe—and that means that a large part of creative energies of people themselves to come the electorate will be made up of people who’s up with their own solutions to problems and continued income depends on voting in sup- hazards, including the risk of poverty and the port of various government policies. It also future inability to provide for oneself. That means that some of the most powerful pres- probably means the development of mutual sure groups on government policy will be pub- aid and insurance arrangements. lic sector, as opposed to private sector, unions.

“Compulsory Charity” Given this, support for an extensive welfare in Liberal Democracies state is likely to come, in large part, from those actually employed by that welfare state, So, in a more libertarian society, “welfare” not necessarily from those it serves, or from would not merely be a matter of private char- those exclusively interested in using it to help ity alone. However, just sticking with charity people. Beyond this, the welfare state also for now, would it be enough? Well, the ques- helps people who are not poor or needy. The tion itself is odd. The supposition is that peo- NHS is therefore supported by all who want ple don’t want to help the poor, or those in to use it, rich or poor. Likewise for schooling, need or those incapable of helping themselves. and many other things. Some of those non- But if that is the case, then why would they poor who support the welfare state may well Page 14 THE INDIVIDUAL

do so because it helps them, not because they “During the 1980s, I rented to wel- care for the needy who cannot help them- fare recipients. Ninety percent of selves, then. my tenants were able-bodied women with children who simply However, in the end, surely a large reason that chose welfare instead of work. people vote for welfare statist policies is be- Indeed, one woman who tried to cause they support the use of democratic insti- give me friendly advice suggested tutions to help the poor and the needy and that I stop fixing up the apartments those who cannot help themselves. However, at night and give up my day job. libertarians say, then, that if people want to “Have some kids and get on wel- help the poor then they don’t need govern- fare so that you can enjoy your ments to force them to do it, and if they don’t life,” she counseled me. Although I want to help the poor, then it is odd to think did not take her advice, many that they will support governments that force young women did. Low-income them to do it. teens often told me that they be- came pregnant in order to receive Of course, the response to that is that the de- welfare checks and establish their fenders of the welfare state are voting to force own residences. The more children the unwilling to help, as well as themselves. they had, the bigger their welfare However, surely the number of unwilling peo- stipend. ple isn’t that big. I find it incredible that they would comprise any significant part of the In 1992, New Jersey eliminated electorate. In fact, I would use the unpopular- part of the monthly increase that ity of libertarianism as evidence that it is not! women received for new children. Hardly anybody likes libertarianism, and a Even though stopping this stipend major reason that they dislike libertarianism, it only decreased the welfare package seems to me, is because libertarians say that 4%, births to welfare mothers went there is a big problem in forcing people to con- down by 10%. Clearly, many tribute to looking after the poor. The reason women were getting pregnant as a that most people reject this is because they means of self-support. No wonder “… how many of have a fear that, without such force, the poor that one in eight children now would not be looked after. It should, there- receive some form of government these people are fore, follow that most people care for the poor “aid.” genuinely considerably, and would continue to give incapable of money to help them even were they not Why would someone choosing to forced to. conceive children as meal tickets providing for and live on welfare? By the mid- themselves?” So, to develop an answer to the question, we 90s, a person would have to earn can accept that, given the popularity of the $5.50 to $17.50 per hour welfare state even amongst those that are not (depending upon your state) to get net beneficiaries of it, there is support enough more after-tax benefits than they’d to maintain its existence and it is reasonable to receive on welfare! Of course, assume that most people would continue giv- choosing welfare instead of work ing large portions of their income to help didn’t give a person job experience those in need. For the sake of argument, let us or regular raises, so choosing pov- assume that a third of them would, or that in erty as a teen was generally a life some manner total voluntary donations would sentence. amount to a third of the amount that govern- ment—i.e. the taxpayer—provides now. When Ohio required capable wel- fare recipients to work, 40% of How Many Really Need “Welfare”? them decided that they didn’t need help after all. Oregon tried to Beyond this, we have the question of how place its able-bodied welfare popu- many current welfare recipients are actually lation in jobs by offering employers people that those who support the welfare a subsidy to take them. Once wel- state for altruistic reasons really want to help. fare recipients found that they were By this I mean, how many of these people are going to have to work for someone, genuinely incapable of providing for them- 80% went out and found an un- selves? Mary Ruwart wrote,3 subsidized job. Clearly, a great NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 15

deal of the welfare population sim- to the truly needy—virtually over- ply chooses not to work when tax night!” dollars, usually in excess of what they would initially earn, are read- Assume that at least half of all those on welfare ily available. Giving money to or claiming some sort of benefit are actually those who could work results in less capable of supporting themselves and that pri- money for those who can’t. vate charity would cut off all support for such people. Now add in our previous position In 1987, Wisconsin began requir- that, absent government compulsion, people ing people on aid to seek or train would voluntarily donate funds equal to half for work. By 1997, Wisconsin had the current money that the government pro- 55% fewer families on welfare than vides for the poor. That would mean that the it did in 1987, while the rest of the actual needy, instead of those who are able to nation experienced an average support themselves, would receive just as increase of 16%. In other words, much without a welfare state. Wisconsin’s work program cut welfare by 71%!” Efficiency in the Public and Private Sectors

Of course, this is from America. People may However, we needn’t stop there, since we have say that the UK is different, that our welfare the effectiveness of government versus charity state is more discriminating and better safe- itself to consider. James Rolph Edwards has guarded against abuse and fraud. I’m not sure an excellent paper on this in the Journal of Lib- what possible grounds they could argue such a ertarian Studies.5 He reminds us that (p. 3), thing on—so far as I can tell, welfare fraud is widespread. This forms much of the basis of “Some fraction of each dollar taxed James Bartholomew’s excellent and highly will always be absorbed in wages recommended work on the welfare state.4 and salaries of the administrative Mary Ruwart’s claim was that “Giving money bureaucracy, costs of purchasing, to those who could work results in less money powering, maintaining and replac- for those who can’t.” People may think that ing equipment, buildings, etc., and “… it is worth worrying about benefit fraud and welfare other overhead costs. Only the mothers is only a concern for the selfish and remainder will actually be received considering where greedy, but in fact less fraud means more for by the target population in the the overheads will those who genuinely need it. form of cash or in kind payments. be higher… in Many advocates of compulsory Private charity is more discriminating than the income redistribution have tended state welfare or in state’s. If people don’t think that a particular to ignore this inconvenient fact private charity.” charity is helping, and helping more than any- altogether in their writings, how- body else can, then they will stop donating. ever. Indeed, most of the public This means that charities are under a competi- discussion proceeds with an im- tive pressure to be successful, and it means that plicit assumption of costless, dollar- if funds are being wasted on those that don’t for-dollar income transfers.” need them rather than those that do, then a charity is wasting the funds of its donors— Given this, it is worth considering where the funds that they can simply stop donating if overheads will be higher and how much they wish, unlike those that fund the welfare money gets absorbed in costs—in state welfare state. Mary Ruwart goes on to say that, or in private charity. Edwards goes on to say that (pp. 3-4), “Let’s assume that Wisconsin’s experience was atypical and that “Of course it is also true of private nationwide, only 50%, rather than charities dependent on voluntary 71%, of the people on welfare are donations that they have costs ab- capable of supporting themselves. sorbing part of their revenue, but Private charities would be likely to there is a huge difference in the weed out such people. Thus, if we efficiency with which they operate simply gave the equivalent of the relative to government… [P]ublic welfare budget to churches and income redistribution agencies are other private charities for distribu- estimated to absorb about two- tion, twice as much help would go thirds of each dollar budgeted to Page 16 THE INDIVIDUAL

them in overhead costs, and in These agencies are not under com- some cases as much as three- petitive pressures to keep costs quarters of each dollar. Using gov- down that are remotely equivalent ernment data, Robert L. to those of private charities. In- Woodson… calculated that, on deed, their incentives may be much average, 70 cents of each dollar the opposite, as Niskanen (1994) budgeted for government assistance has argued. Yet another factor goes not to the poor, but to the promoting efficiency of private members of the welfare bureauc- charities is that those operating at racy and others serving the poor. levels of inefficiency comparable to Michael Tanner… cites regional the average government agency are studies supporting this 70/30 split.” often prosecuted—by the govern- ment (which never applies the same In contrast, administrative and other operating standards or threat to its own costs in private charities absorb, on average, agencies)—for fraud. Pressure on only one-third or less of each dollar donated, private charities to avoid such leaving the other two-thirds (or more) to be prosecution, and the bad publicity delivered to recipients. Charity Navigator,6 and loss of public trust resulting, is the newest of several private sector organiza- strong.” tions that rate charities by various criteria and supply that information to the public on their Where does this leave our argument now? websites, found that, as of 2004, 70% of the Mary Ruwart again provides the answer: charities that they rated spent at least 75% of their budgets on the programs and services “Of course, public welfare gives they exist to provide, and 90% spent at least over 2/3 of every tax dollar we 65%. The median administrative expense give them to overheads (e.g., sala- among all charities in their sample was only ries of the bureaucrats who admin- 10.3%. ister the program). Private chari- ties, however, give 2/3 of every Edwards (p. 4) suggest that actually this two- dollar to those who need help. By “… huge numbers thirds figure is conservative: Charity Naviga- switching to private distribution, tor only records charities that are tax exempt we’d cut overheads in half. In of people would 501 (c)(3) organisations required to provide other words, we’d double the dol- continue to donate informational tax returns. That excludes reli- lars available to the needy once money were the gious organisations. Such organisations often again.” use donated labour, and so can exclude labour compulsion from their total costs. Why this difference in To Sum Up removed.” costs? So, the fact that so many people who are not “The basic reason for this large themselves net beneficiaries or employees of differential in costs between pri- the welfare state continue to vote for or sup- vate and public agencies is not port welfare statist policies itself indicates a difficult to see. Depending largely good chance that huge numbers of people on voluntary contributions, most would continue to donate money were the private agencies are under strong compulsion removed. pressures to operate efficiently and keep costs low. Benevolent citizens On a conservative estimate I said that a third naturally wish a large fraction of of the present government expenditure could their donations to reach the needy, be raised through voluntary donations. I then and many will not keep donating suggested that, conservatively, half of the total to an agency that does not accom- revenue spent by the government on welfare is plish that. Donors can select collected by those that can support themselves among private non-profit charities, and would be denied support by private chari- and competition between charities ties. That means doubling the remaining funds for donations tends to insure effi- for anybody left. That gives us two thirds of ciency. Public aid agencies, in the present expenditures. contrast, are budgeted their funds by Congress, which obtains them Lastly we have the superior efficiency of char- through compulsory taxation. ity over government, averaging twice as effi- NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 17

cient. So we can double our two thirds of gov- website, c. 1997, retrieved 25th February 2008, ernment expenditure. The result is that leav- http://www.ruwart.com/ ing support for the needy to charity could end poverty.lpn.wpd.html. up with 33% more support, in financial terms, (4) James Bartholomew, The Welfare State for the actual needy than is presently provided We’re In, London, Politico’s, 2004. by the state. (5) James Rolph Edwards, ‘The Costs of Public Income Redistribution and Private Charity’, Is charity enough? It is more than enough! Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 21, No. 2, Summer 2007, pp. 3–20, retrieved 25th Febru- Notes ary 2008, http://mises.org/journals/ jls/21_2/21_2_1.pdf. “Is charity enough? (1) David Friedman, Machinery of Freedom: (6) Charity Navigator, ‘Not All Charities Are nd nd th It is more than Guide to a Radical Capitalism (2 ed.), Chi- Equal’, 2 February 2004, retrieved 27 Febru- cago, Illinois, Open Court Publishing, 1989. ary 2008, http://www.charitynavigator.org/ enough!” (2) National Statistics, ‘Public Sector Employ- index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=186. ment’, National Statistics Online, 28th October 2005, retrieved 25th February 2008, http:// pqrspqrspq www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp? id=1292. Richard Garner is a free-market anarchist liv- (3) Mary Ruwart, ‘The Poor Would Have ing in Nottingham. He runs his own blog at More in a Libertarian Society’, Mary Ruwart http://richardgarnerlib.blogspot.com.

“Psychiatry claims to be a biomedical discipline because its area of interest includes behaviour arising from abnormal process. But it also deals with patterns of individual response that may be better understood in the terms of gender, politics or relationships. Psychiatry’s biological assumptions serve to legitimise a variety of social control procedures that are reinforced by the coercive power which treatment demands. Examples abound. The psychiatric condition of Reformist Delusion was recognised whenever a totalitarian ideology took control. It reached epidemic proportions wherever the Red Flag was run up a flag-pole. Diagnosis is secured from networks of informers, police reports and the criminalisation of dissent. Treatment there is no waiting list includes medication, rigorous assessment of family and peers and therapeutic re-location.” The Cunningham Amendment, Vol. 10, No. 2. 1005 Huddersfield Road, Bradford, BD12 8LP

(Continued from page 1) in one way or another means that this politi- cally very difficult issue is one that neverthe- that we have today. I recommend James Bar- less needs to be tackled. tholomew’s The Welfare State We’re In as an excellent, longer but still highly accessible read Professor Myddelton gave at least one crumb on the subject. of comfort in what was otherwise an often bleak tour d’horizon. He noted that the intel- Which, since he mentioned that particular lectual climate for free-market and non-state work in his speech, brings me back to David ideas was actually much worse than it is now Myddelton. The occasion was the first of in the decade or two after the last War. Hope- what we hope will be many Chris R. Tame fully, a video of the his excellent talk should be Memorial Lectures hosted by our sister—or available soon via the . should that be daughter?—organisation, the Libertarian Alliance. Professor Myddelton’s Chris Tame died three years ago, and remains excellent talk, held in the elegant surroundings an irreplaceable loss for many of us. All that of National Liberal Club in London, was ti- we can hope is that he would smile on the con- tled, ‘How to Cure Government Obesity’, in tinuing endeavours of organisations such as the other words, how to shrink the size of the SIF, LA and many others. state! As Professor Myddelton noted, the pro- portion of the 45% to 50% of GDP now di- Nigel Meek rectly consumed by the state that is “welfare” Page 18 THE INDIVIDUAL

THE BATTLE FOR LIBERTY: MORE THAN JUST “EUROPE”

Nigel Meek

The Follies of Youth sympathy with our erstwhile member. But I also have three, overlapping concerns. The membership of the SIF has remained fairly stable for some years. Some members Three Problems die, resign or just disappear whilst others join via one source or another, often the Internet First, much of the subject matter carried in The these days. At the end of 2007 we received a Individual or addressed by our public speakers resignation, and the resignee was kind enough is “universal” in nature. For example, many, to let us know why. but by no means all libertarians and classical liberals believe that, for a number of reasons, Briefly, he was concerned that the SIF was or we would be better off decriminalising the sale had become insufficiently explicitly Euroscep- of heroin and other narcotics. In principle, it tic. He noted that the majority of new laws in makes no difference to the validity of argu- the UK actually now come from the European ments for and against this that the ultimate Union. He cited in particular an essay that arbiters of the debate and subsequent legisla- had appeared in a recent issue of The Individ- tion sit in a sovereign parliament in Westmin- ual that was about legal matters but which ster or Brussels or indeed anywhere else. One made little or no mention of this fact. could even appeal to that mythical creature the “benevolent dictator” if he or she were in On the face of things, I have considerable sym- charge of things. pathy for this point of view. It surprises many who know me now that even into the mid Second, there is the tactical danger of what I 1980s I was for a time something of what we have long described as “monomaniacal Euro- would now call a Europhile. There were a scepticism”. By this I mean a focus on opposi- number of reasons for this. I am half German, tion to the EU to the virtual exclusion of all “I was for a time… and so do not share some of the cruder xeno- else, not least the reasons why one is opposed phobia that bedevils the Eurosceptic move- to the EU. For too many Eurosceptics, the a Europhile.” ment. I was also a supporter, and indeed mem- EU has come to be seen as the fountainhead of ber, of the Conservative Party, and it will be all evil. Remember: it was the British elector- recalled that Euroscepticism in the UK up to ate that voted in the 1945 Labour government that time had often if not always been the that promised its war-weary supporters to province of those who wished to transform usher in a new socialist paradise (see above) by the UK into a “socialist paradise” (with or nationalising much of the economy and being without the aid of Soviet tanks). Perhaps least the ones who actually brought into being “the defendable was that I accepted the wholly envy of the world” that is the NHS. And emotional appeal of an idea of “Europe” that what a success all of that was! was all about sipping fine wines in a Venetian piazza to the ethereal accompaniment of a These days, a distressing symptom of this is to string quintet playing Mozart (although I’ve find normally sensible and liberal (in our sense always been more of a Motörhead man). of the word) people cheering on an appalling array of racists (particularly anti-Semites), ho- And then, some time before the Maastricht mophobic ranters and plain hee-hawing buf- debates, I began to take notice of what the EU foons simply because “they want out of actually meant. I changed my mind very “Europe’”. Anyone who has spent much time quickly and have long since been a member of in the more “conservative” corners of the Eu- the cross-party Campaign for an Independent rosceptic movement will all too easily recog- Britain. (The EuroFAQ website (http:// nise this. www.eurofaq.freeuk.com/eurofaq.html) is a good place to start as, of course, is regular read- If this concern is inward looking towards Eu- ership of the EU Referendum blog (http:// rosceptics themselves, then the third and final www.eureferendum.blogspot.com) run by Drs reason is more outward looking. It is perhaps North and Szamuely.) So, in that sense, I have the other side of the coin. Taking an example NO. 50 - APRIL 2008 Page 19

both recent and directly relevant, in March that governments of one notional colour or this year two people known to many of us, Dr another have foisted upon us or are currently Sean Gabb of the Libertarian Alliance and trying to. Marc-Henri Glendening of the Democracy Movement, spoke at a UK Independence Party But by itself, leaving the EU will do very little (UKIP) rally in Exeter. (See http:// indeed if our domestic new ruling class is left www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc169.htm for intact and in place. more on this plus links to videos of both of these speeches. Some who receive Dr Gabb’s pqrspqrspq email bulletins will already know of the after- math!) As a lengthy afterthought… Helen Szamuely and Richard North often note the bizarre and In their different ways, both spoke to the same incompetent nature of mainstream media theme: that the European Union has to be (MSM) reporting of politics. seen as but one element of a new and illiberal ruling class. There is nothing inherently social- One aspect of this is when areas of policy are ist about notions of “class” and hence “class discussed in terms of “Westminster politics” conflict”. To paraphrase Dr Gabb, a class is when in fact—and this, of course, is where I simply a group of people that view their over- started this article—they’ve long since been all interests as being different from those surrendered to the EU. I’ve likened this to around them. imagining that the council members for the London Borough of Bromley started to spend This new ruling class is one which for years their official time debating troop deployments has infiltrated and now controls vast swathes in Afghanistan or foreign relations with “There is nothing of the political (elected and unelected), aca- China, and that in turn the local press reported demic, legal, media and cultural world. Unlike this without pointing out that this was an ob- inherently socialist the older ruling classes based upon land and vious nonsense. I suspect—or, rather, I hope— about notions of finance, it is almost wholly parasitical in na- that my fellow residents of Bromley would “class” and “class ture being dependent upon the public sector quickly question the sanity of their elected and therefore the taxpayer. This is the nature representatives and the competence of the conflict”.” of the new class conflict. It is not between press. “the poor” and “the rich”. Substantially, it is between, if you will, “net tax contributors” One way or another, the EU and its British and “net tax consumers”. (By definition, peo- followers have been careful in preserving the ple who work in the public sector do not pay appearance of the British constitution and have any tax. It’s simply an accounting procedure managed to conceal the fact that it’s often little between one bit of the public sector and an- more than an expensive charade run by people other.) engaged in lucrative displacement activity that hides their political impotence. The new class—fed in part by a never-ending stream of often otherwise unemployable social I was chatting to a noted libertarian commen- science graduates—operates within agenda such tator after the recent Chris Tame Memorial as “political correctness”, “multiculturalism”, Lecture (see my editorial in this issue). He “environmentalism” and, of course, raised the issue of Tony Blair and the possibil- “transnationalism” of which the EU is a prime ity of a directly elected EU president. He sug- example. gested that, whilst this would indeed be an- other major step towards “ever closer union”, “Getting out of ‘Europe’” is Not Enough it might be the one thing that finally made the MSM and the British public realise just what So yes, we need to leave the EU if only to be was going on. Perhaps... able to do a host of other things that we need to do such as immediately shutting down pqrspqrspq whole swathes of the public sector including the BBC, entire government departments and Nigel Meek in the editor and membership sec- ministries, sundry commissions, quangos and retary of the Society for Individual Freedom, agencies, and the other paraphernalia that the the Libertarian Alliance (http:// new class uses to enrich itself behind a veneer www.libertarian.co.uk) and the Campaign of legal respectability. Plus, of course, repeal- Against Censorship (http://www.dlas.org.uk). ing the colossal array of illiberal legislation Society for Individual Freedom The SIF is a classical liberal organisation that believes in the economic and personal freedom of the PO Box 744 BROMLEY individual, subject only to the equal freedom of others. BR1 4WG The SIF promotes... Phone: 01424 713737 Email (general): [email protected] Email (editorial): [email protected] ü The freedom, importance and personal responsibility of the individual. ü The sovereignty of Parliament and its effective control over the Executive. ü The rule of law and the independence of the Judicature. ü Free enterprise.

SIF Activities

www.individualist.org.uk The SIF organises public meetings featuring speakers of note, holds occasional luncheons at the Houses of Parliament, publishes this journal to which contributions are welcome, and has its own website. The SIF also has two associated campaigns: Tell-It, that seeks to make information on outcomes of drugs and medical treatments more widely known and available to doctors and patients alike, and Choice in Personal Safety (CIPS), that opposes seatbelt compulsion and similar measures.

The SIF’s Aim:

“To promote responsible individual freedom” Joining the SIF

If you broadly share our objectives and wish to support our work, then please write to us at the address on this page, enclosing a cheque for £15 (minimum) made payable to the Society for Individual Freedom.

The Law of Equal Freedom

“Every man has freedom to do all that he wills, provided he infringes not the equal freedom of any other man.”

Herbert Spencer, Social Statics, 1851