The Coalition and Beyond Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead LIBERAL REFORM
Edited by Stephen Tall Foreword by Nick Clegg First Published in Great Britain in 2013 by Liberal Reform
Designed by: James Thompson Website - fatmaus.site44.com
Printed by: Park Communications Ltd, Alpine Way, London, E6 6LA Contents | 01
Contents
01 Contents
03 Foreword by Nick Clegg
04 Introduction by Stephen Tall
09 A Whole New Kind of Choice in 52 Where Nick Clegg MEP Left Off Public Services - Antony Hook - David Boyle
12 Liberal Education: Academies Re- 59 Bleeding Heart Libertarianism visited - Sam Bowman - Paul Hunt
16 Social Policy 64 Is Drug Prohibition Liberal? - Baroness Claire Tyler - Adam Corlett
23 Collapsing Under the Weight of 70 Grassroots Economics Our Own Contradictions - Kirsty Williams AM - Richard Marbrow 74 Banking 27 Four Changes for the NHS of the - Baroness Susan Kramer Future - Norman Lamb MP 79 A New Deal for Poor Workers - Nick Thornsby 31 A Liberal Solution to the UK’s Housing Crisis 84 Future Generations Want the State to - Tom Papworth Go on a Progressive Diet - Alison Goldsworthy 37 Family Law: A Liberal Agenda for the Future 88 Higher Education: Britain has a - Nick Manners Social Mobility Problem - Stephen Williams MP 42 The Dignity of Work - Stephen Lloyd MP 92 Enshrining Individual Rights to Remove the “Planning System” 44 Evidence-Based Education - Tommy Long Policy. Why the Lib Dems Have it (nearly) Right 96 Wellbeing Economics - Layla Moran - Jonathan Jones
48 A New Mandate for Development Aid: Beyond 0.7% - William Townsend 02 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead Foreword | 03
Foreword
Over the last decade the Liberal Democrats have been fortunate to have had a healthy internal debate over the future of liberal ideas and Liberal Democrat party policies. Each of The Orange Book, Reinventing the State and The Green Book have brought interesting and powerful ideas to the table. Many of the ideas in those publications have become party, and indeed government, policy and I’m sure more will in the future.
The Coalition and Beyond: Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead stands firmly in that proud tradition. Along with most other readers I don’t agree with every idea in here, and I suspect not all of them will make the cut as party policy. But I do welcome them as exciting, innovative and thoughtful contributions to debates about what our party should stand for and do over the next decade. I’m sure they will provoke plenty of passionate and thoughtful debate – at conference, on the fringe and beyond.
I particularly welcome the fact this is not simply authored by a list of the party’s “great and good” returning to their favourite policy hobby-horses. Instead this is an authentically grassroots and diverse publication with ideas, wisdom, experience and views coming from all parts of the party. That is absolutely as it should be; Westminster, Whitehall and indeed our party committees are very far from having a monopoly of wisdom when it comes to policy formation.
Our party has always been one of vibrant debate and intellectual discussion, as a liberal party should be. The Coalition and Beyond: Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead is an important contribution to those debates and discussion, and one I hope party members will engage with. Congratulations to Liberal Reform and all those involved in pulling it together – let the debates begin!
Nick Clegg MP Leader of the Liberal Democrats and Deputy Prime Minister 04 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead Introduction
“I wonder what he meant by that?” asked Metternich on hearing the news that Talleyrand had died. When a new political pamphlet is published, with the parties limbering up for the 2015 general election, there will inevitably be those who question its intentions. Especially because Liberal Reform openly presents itself as committed to the ‘four-cornered freedom’ – personal, political, social and economic – identified in David Laws’ introduction to The Orange Book, a volume published in 2004 yet which still divides opinion within the Lib Dems.
So, unusually, I’m going to begin by saying what this pamphlet is not. It is not a right- wing / neoliberal / Tory / free market / Thatcherite* manifesto (*delete according to taste). Nor, for those who study Lib Dem ‘Kremlinology’, is it a power-grab by an internal faction designed to subvert the party’s democratic policy-making. Sorry to disappoint those who are looking either to praise or to bury it on those grounds (though I’m glad if such false premises enticed you to start reading).
That’s what it’s not – so here’s what it is. This pamphlet is, quite simply, a collection of essays bringing together a diverse group of individuals – all of whom are, with one exception, Lib Dem members – with fresh ideas about how to create a more liberal society.
Six are parliamentarians of whom one is a government minister (Norman Lamb); two are backbench MPs (Stephens Lloyd and Williams); one leads the party in the Welsh Assembly (Kirsty Williams); and two represent us in the Lords (Baronesses Kramer and Tyler). Fourteen are active Lib Dem members, including two parliamentary candidates: Layla Moran, aiming to win back Oxford West and Abingdon from the Conservatives, and Antony Hook, looking to represent the South East of England in the European Parliament.
No-one who reads all the essays here will, I predict, agree with all that they say. I certainly don’t. Just as The Orange Book brought together such disparate voices as David Laws and Vince Cable (who advocated radical market reforms in health-care and further education respectively) with Steve Webb and Chris Huhne (whose ideas on families and internationalism were in line with established party policy), so does this volume. That’s healthy in a party self-confident in its own liberal philosophy. We should be relaxed about letting a thousand flowers bloom. Adam Corlett, arguing against the prohibition of drugs, prays in aid JS Mill’s fabulous definition of the ‘single truth’ of liberalism being ‘the importance, to man and society of a large variety in types of character, and of giving full freedom to human nature to expand itself in innumerable and conflicting directions.’ That descriptor is lived-out fully in the pages which follow.
Those in search of strong meat should turn post haste to the chapter by the lone non- Lib Dem interloper, Sam Bowman, research director for the Adam Smith Institute, who was voted Liberal Voice of the Year 2013 by readers of the LibDemVoice website. There you will find an eloquent advocate of ‘bleeding heart libertarianism’, the ‘new term for an old idea’ of combining ‘concern for the poor with scepticism of the state’. Readily accepting that few Lib Dems will agree with all his free market ideas, he identifies areas where we could find common cause: liberalising our immigration, drugs and planning Introduction | 05
laws, for instance. If we truly believe in pluralism then we need to drop our label- conscious suspicions and be open to exploring areas for agreement across the political spectrum. Though ironically, it is the Conservatives – the supposed party of the market – who will have more problems with reforms in these areas than Lib Dems.
What Sam terms ‘modern mercantilism’ – particularly the protectionism of our planning laws which restricts houses being built and thus prevents those on modest or low incomes being able to afford to buy or even afford to rent – is elaborated by Tom Papworth and Tommy Long. The solutions offered are distinctively liberal. Yes, we need to build more houses, including in places where current residents do not want to see development. But this cannot be achieved through central government diktat, nor by brow-beating local people as ‘Nimbys’ when their opposition, based on their own quality of life, is quite rational. Instead, we need to put the public back in charge, giving local people the right to decide what’s built (or not) in the areas where they live and to determine their own price for it.
This emphasis on local solutions to national problems is echoed by Kirsty Williams, who urges greater devolution both to Wales and to the English regions to stimulate growth, rather than relying – as the current nascent recovery does – on the London-centric, financial services-dominated model which crashed so disastrously in 2008. We need as a nation to develop a distributed economy – ‘of a large variety in types of character’, as Mill might have said - and that is Susan Kramer‘s cri de coeur, as she champions local banking networks which are focused on their communities and also run by them.
The Lib Dems came into government in 2010 at the worst possible post-war moment. The economic slump out of which we’re gradually emerging has been the longest in a century, even beating the Great Depression of the 1930s. Rightly, this has focused our party’s collective minds on policies that can deliver better standards of living for the least well-off. The initial priority, delivered in Coalition, has been to ensure those earning less than £10,000 pay no income tax. But Nick Thornsby proposes going much further: setting a genuine living wage and raising the income tax and National Insurance threshold to the same level. This would put an end to the government-sponsored ‘boondoggle’, which sees the state tax with one hand and give out benefits with the other – including to wealthy pensioners who need the money a whole lot less than the working poor. As Alison Goldsworthy points out, ‘the public may have more of an attitude for the state to go on a progressive diet than we think’.
Our Conservative coalition partners have also turned their attention to the least well-off – for the purpose of pitting the ‘shirkers’ against the ‘workers’ in a too-blatant attempt at divide-and-rule. Their tactics get short shrift from Stephen Lloyd, as does Labour’s defence of benefit dependency. Both stereotypes – ‘‘work-shy scroungers’ (right- wingers) or ‘poor, put-upon victims’ who should be left alone on benefit (left-wingers)’ - are, he says, despicable: ‘a concerted, community effort by UK plc to help people get back on the ladder’ is the best liberal response.
Getting those who are able back into work is the destination. How you get there depends on three things. 06 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead
First, and most significantly, your upbringing. Liberals, scrupulously eager to live and let live, have often backed away from anything that might be couched as ‘family policy’. Yet, as Claire Tyler observes, ‘it’s often from a strong family base that people startproviding help and support to neighbours and extended families’ – or, to borrow Mill’s phrase, ‘giving full freedom to human nature to expand itself’. She and Nick Manners suggest a range of ways we can offer support which stops well short of interference.
Secondly, maintaining your health and wellbeing. Norman Lamb, through his prescription for the NHS, and Jonathan Jones, by urging us to look beyond GDP towards the simplicity of what makes us happy, both acknowledge the value of a life well lived.
And thirdly, education – the capacity to learn, to stretch yourself, to make life better for yourself and those around you – whether through formal school education (as Paul Hunt and Layla Moran focus on) or at university or in vocational training (as Stephen Williams emphasises).
Liberalism embraces individualism: the thirst for self-improvement and its diversity of expression. But, just as a concert needs an audience to pulsate with life, so too do each of us find true self-expression through our interaction with others – our family, neighbours, friends and colleagues. We can live as islands, entire of ourselves. But we are social beings who thrive on connections and inter-connections: individuals within families within neighbourhoods within towns within nations within a global community. To be a liberal is to be an internationalist, to recognise and celebrate the commonality of humanity which bridges nations, races, ethnicities and religions. Antony Hook and William Townsend examine how, practically, liberalism can make a difference within the European Union and through our overseas aid programme.
Like a parent with children, as an editor you’re not supposed to have a favourite. But David Boyle‘s chapter on how we need to place the individual at the heart of public services – and in particular start to distinguish between offering genuine choice to people and merely ensuring service providers are competitive – is mine. It illustrates vividly both the potential prize for a liberal approach to public services (flexibility which means the individual gets what they need in the way they want it) and also that such an approach can be both more effective and efficient (ending the waste of giving the public what they don’t want in order to meet government targets).
The Lib Dems are now in our fourth year of Coalition. In the easy days of opposition we could only imagine being in government. We lacked the experience of having to get to grips with the nitty-gritty reality of implementable policy detail. And, as Richard Marbrow highlights, there have too often been internal contradictions between the liberal outcomes we seek and the policies for which we end up campaigning: anti nuclear, but wanting low-carbon energy; pro-greenbelt, but wanting more houses; anti- hospital closures, but wanting ever-improving specialised health-care.
There are no excuses now. We have another 18 months in Coalition; and – who knows? – maybe another five years beyond that. We need to work out what are our liberal aims and how we are going to deliver them. The task is much, much harder now we’re a party of government. Not only do we need the fully worked through policies which give our manifesto credibility and enthuse party activists, we need also to work up the bite- size policies achievable within the compromise of Coalition that will nevertheless move Introduction | 07 us in a liberal direction. Because if we don’t claim that space, as we so effectively have on taxation but have generally failed to do on public services, we can be sure the other party we’re in any future coalition with will do it for us, whether Tory or Labour.
As a party we love nothing better than a good policy row. The trouble is we too often allow our debates to be defined reactively by our opponents’ agenda. We passionately argue for/against free schools or the NHS Bill or the top-rate of tax. They’re all interesting debates to be had. But they don’t move us much further towards identifying liberal solutions to improve education or health-care, or to raise living standards.
I hope this pamphlet helps the party in the process of identifying those solutions – whether by highlighting ideas we like, or by provoking others to come up with better ideas in response.
Stephen Tall
Stephen Tall has been Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice, the most-read independent website by and for party supporters, since 2007 and is a Research Associate for the lib- eral think-tank CentreForum. He was a city councillor in Oxford for eight years, including stints as executive member for finance and Deputy Lord Mayor, and appears frequently in the media in person, in print and online. Stephen combines his political interests with his professional life as Development Director for the Education Endowment Foundation, an independent grant-making charity dedicated to breaking the link between family income and educational achievement. 08 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead A Whole New Kind of Choice in Public Services | 09 A Whole New Kind of Choice in Public Services - David Boyle
I met a long-term patient would be struck off the list. “‘Choice’ and while I was doing my ‘competition’ are not independent review for the But what this story really Government into ‘Barriers brought home to me was actually the same to Choice’1 who really that she was asking for a ... there are times made me think differently rather broader conception when choice and about the subject of public of choice. It was a ‘choice’ services. about her treatment, in a competition are sense, but not one that is aligned, but there She had muscular recognised currently by the are also times when dystrophy and had to see system in the UK. her consultant every six they cancel each months, which meant a When the idea of public other out.” two-hour round trip plus service choice emerged half an hour or more in the in the US public school waiting room. It meant system, it was envisaged expensively, by a group going over a large river as a lever to enforce of economists as a way and paying a toll (which quality. It allowed poor, of raising standards. she would not have to pay excluded families to send It has been politically if she was visiting a relative their children to the best controversial because of in prison), and all she says, schools, when the inner fears that choice would when the doctor asks her city ghettos had tended inevitably benefit those how she is, is “I’m fine”. to trap them in the worst who are articulate and ones. When school choice demanding enough to What she really wants is was introduced into the make use of it. to check in occasionally UK in 1994, it had a similar by phone, and see him intention. Ironically, it has been when she’s not fine. But developed by people who she can’t because his slots That was not quite how – as one of them told me are full seeing people who things have ended up. – are not terribly interested are also fine. There is a School choice has worked in choice. ‘Choice’ in clue here also about how quite well in the UK – Whitehall has become a to release capacity in the though certainly not in shorthand for competition. NHS: it might be to examine London, where choice The two terms are used whether long-term patients is a mirage – mainly interchangeably. The might prefer to have a by lowering people’s difficulty is that ‘choice’ more flexible relationship expectations. It is not so and ‘competition’ are not with consultants. much choice as the right to actually the same, and express a preference. the failure to distinguish This particular patient had them has narrowed the tried and had been told by None of this suggests that idea of choice in a way the consultant’s secretary choice between providers that has made it politically rather aggressively that, is a bad thing. The problem ambiguous. if she failed to turn up for with it is that it has been her next appointment, she developed, rather 10 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead
As service users know very choice so that it breaks well, there are times when out of the confines of “The best approach choice and competition competition, and covers are aligned, but there the kind of flexibility people will be to find ways are also times when they want in the services they to strengthen the cancel each other out. This use. confidence of is so, for example, when the actual choice is made not The new emphasis service users to by patients, but by service would be not so much ask for something commissioners choosing on choosing between different, and between two alternative regulated options, but on candidates for block making services flexible perhaps provide contracts. Or when the enough to suit individuals duties on service weight of demand is such better – closer to the providers to consider – as it is for some popular ‘personalisation’ agenda in schools or GP surgeries – social care, where service this.” that the choice is made by users can get budgets the institution, not by the they can (theoretically, suggests instead that the user. In both cases, there at least) use in ways they best approach will be to is competition, but no user believe are best suited find ways to strengthen choice. to their needs. That is the confidence of service what I proposed in my users to ask for something This is a long-term problem independent report to the different, and perhaps for the choice agenda Government in January provide duties on service in the UK. It means that 2013. providers to consider this. choice is politically unstable. It is controversial The most obvious I imagine this would be because it appears to difference between like a ‘right to request’ have a hidden agenda flexibility and competition flexible service delivery. In (competition) and an is that it does not require each case, the provider unspoken by-product a detailed regulatory would not be obliged to (inequality). That makes infrastructure in quite the provide flexibility if it were it appear vulnerable to same way. We need to impossible, but they would a change of political have general guidance be obliged to explain leadership, just as it is about how flexibility can why and that letter would vulnerable to professionals best be achieved, but not have to be posted on their who disapprove of, or the kind of competition website. misunderstand, it. In social regulators (like Monitor, the care, the vast majority of sector regulator for health It would be aimed professionals have bought services in England) that particularly at situations into the agenda of control are so controversial in the where systems or and personalisation, UK system. bureaucratic arrangements although there are get in the way of what disagreements about Yet experience with people need. For example, how this is best promoted. personal budgets in social if they want the choice of In other areas of public care suggests that risk- a consultant who won’t service, like parts of the averse local administrators mind them asking lots NHS, ‘choice’ is sometimes can frustrate the broad of questions. Or to study seriously contested. aims at local level. It also Spanish at A-level when all suggests that central that prevents them is their What really needs to regulations are not school’s timetabling system. happen, it seems to me, enough to guarantee Or to go to bed later than is to broaden the idea of personalisation locally. It 5pm when their carer A Whole New Kind of Choice in Public Services | 11 comes round. patients and service users are processed in ways that These are basic flexibilities “One anecdote don’t really suit them, are in the system which makes the point. It a small part of what the articulate people can often is about the doctor’s system wastes. Some of get now by being assertive, these wasted prescriptions but which others can’t. surgery with the are there because patients hedge outside were mistaken about what There are certainly possible which is trimmed treatment they needed, objections to this kind of but some are there approach. Patients may once a year in the because the doctor has choose badly. They may fail summer, and – not listened, or has listened to take responsibility for the when it is trimmed but is constrained by the wider system, by misusing system. the flexibilities they are – a pile of rejected offered. There may also be prescriptions fall Either way, the hedge higher costs from treating out.” is a symbol of the waste people more individually, caused by inflexibility. and the costs will come before the potential Local Area Co-ordinators in savings are available. Western Australia suggest David Boyle has Financial innovations that a more informal just completed which tie professionals too approach to disability and the Government’s closely to narrow numerical social care, which has independent review into outcomes, like the current flexibility at its heart, can barriers to public service experiments with ‘Payment cut costs by up to a third choice commissioned By Results’ – which I – and improve satisfaction by the UK Treasury and believe will be hopelessly with the service.3 Cabinet Office. He is the counter-productive – may author of Broke: Who Killed also make flexibility more The truth is that the costs the Middle Classes? (Fourth difficult to achieve. of inflexibility – the failure Estate, 2013) and 14 other to be effective – are books. Find out more at The cost issue is important. absolutely enormous. www.david-boyle.co.uk. The evidence that flexibility can cut costs One anecdote makes is ambiguous. Personal the point. It is about the 1 David Boyle, ‘Barriers to choice - a budgets in social care is doctor’s surgery with the review of public services and the an example of flexibility in hedge outside which is government’s response’ (London, Cabinet Office, 16 May 2013) action and, although there trimmed once a year in the
Liberal Education: Academies Re-visited - Paul Hunt
Although academies adequate qualifications, and economically) and to have been welcomed aspirations and skills for life flourish in terms of intellect by individual Liberal enhancement and the and cultural enjoyment. Democrats such as Simon labour market. Even in London, where Hughes1, Liberal Democrats strategies such as the as a whole have been In 2012 almost 650 London Challenge have less than welcoming. The comprehensive schools out transformed some schools 2010 Manifesto2 stated of just over 3,000 failed to during the past decade, that Academies would achieve the basic standard 40% of state school children be replaced by ‘Sponsor- of five GCSE passes at are still not achieving five Managed Schools’, grade C or above including GCSEs including Maths commissioned by and English and Maths for and English at grade C or accountable to local half of their pupils. That is above. authorities. The Autumn roughly one school in five. Party Conference Only 28 schools achieved The social mobility once that same year said this standard for 90% of offered by grammar it was ‘concerned by their pupils with a further schools to a minority of the establishment of 123 achieving above 80%. children from poorer academies and Free I do not know the locations backgrounds – the Alan Schools under coalition of the best performing Johnsons of the world – no government policy’.3 schools, but I have a strong longer exists to the same This was consistent with suspicion that they are the party’s opposition likely to be in the more to Labour’s academy prosperous middle-class “Freed from programme at the 2004 areas. the restraints of Autumn Conference, local education re-iterated in 2009 at This twin reality of failing our Spring Conference4. schools (particularly in authorities, Academies are regarded our inner-cities), and a academies by many Liberal flourishing independent are effectively Democrats as socially and sector for the few, places educationally divisive, a severe restriction on independent schools weakening the role of the the freedom of children in the state sector” Local Education Authority, from ordinary or poorer and generally undermining backgrounds to ‘get on the principle of in life’, to use the current extent. This makes it even comprehensive education. party mantra. Every harder to accept the child should be entitled increasing dominance of However, although to a liberal education: the 7% of pupils educated there are many very an education which in the independent good comprehensive promotes the freedom sector and who go on to schools, the fact remains of the individual, both in be over-represented at that many pupils still terms of enabling them Oxbridge and in Russell leave school without to get on in life (socially Group universities and, Liberal Education: Academies Re-visited | 13 inevitably, in the major Equity and Excellence academy status and in professions. One-third of the to reform the national which pupils are now two undergraduates at Russell pay structure ‘giv[ing] years ahead, on average, Group universities and half schools and colleges at the end of Year Six -- of the undergraduates at more freedom, including has built its own housing to Oxford and Cambridge in offering financial and attract new staff as well as are from independent other incentives to attract a community sports centre. schools.5 According to the teachers - particularly in This provides additional Sutton Trust, three in four shortage subjects and income streams as well as a judges and half of leading in schools with the most community facility. company chief executives, challenging catchments’.7 barristers, solicitors, Graduates from the “the remarkable Durand journalists and civil servants leading universities are Academy in Stockwell, were likewise educated. disproportionately Independent school alumni represented in London -- a primary are also represented independent schools, school with the same disproportionately in which not only have catchment area as it politics, medicine, sport, their own pay scales and had before it achieved drama and music, both conditions of service but, academy status and in 6 popular and classical. and this is the important which pupils are now point, allow the head So why should Liberal teacher flexibility within two years ahead, on Democrats be more the scale when making average, at the end of sympathetic towards appointments and retaining Year Six -- has built its academies as a means staff. The net migration of own housing to attract of promoting a liberal some 1,400 teachers each new staff as well as education, given that they year from the state to the a community sports are often viewed as a independent sector tells source of further division? its own story. This migration centre.” is not simply in response The key point is that, freed to better pay and better Freeing governing bodies from the restraints of local motivated pupils. When I and giving them real education authorities, asked a recent migrant to responsibility for their academies are effectively the private sector about school is equally important independent schools in the the biggest difference if we are to encourage state sector. between the sectors, his better leadership and response was that he was management. Our This allows, therefore, now treated as a true 2010 manifesto spoke for greater economic professional and trusted of giving all schools the freedom with full control to get on with the job freedom to innovate over budgets including, without the attendant with the involvement of not least, pay scales. bureaucracy. “educational charities and Academies have the parent groups” and “other freedom to use this Academies also have appropriate providers”. mechanism as a means greater freedom to This is precisely what to attract and retain innovate financially. For academies do and it is academic high-flyers who example, the remarkable worth noting that under can inspire and encourage Durand Academy in the Coalition Government pupils to apply to the better Stockwell, London -- a the emphasis has moved universities. This is consistent primary school with the away from encouraging with the call in the 2009 same catchment area as sponsorship of academies Lib Dem policy motion it had before it achieved by businesses to sponsorship 14 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead
by high performing schools and bureaucracy, have classroom is the role and educational charities. understandably lacked of the local authority. Educational sponsors the time and possibly the The 2010 Manifesto (whether individual schools willingness to go beyond called for ‘Sponsor such as Wellington College, the core activity of Managed Schools’ to or school federations teaching. be commissioned by, such as the Woodard and accountable to, Corporation) have the The freedom to flourish local authorities instead opportunity of bringing intellectually must be of Whitehall. The motion their expertise, experience encouraged and no passed in September 2010 and distinctive ethos to liberal society should, in called for local authorities the work of governing effect, write off children to retain strategic oversight bodies. This ought to lead who have no real choice and secondly that they to more informed and but to go to their poorly ‘should continue to better leadership and performing local school exercise their arms-length decision making. Good in which education is as support for all state schools governance, along with much about crowd control funded wholly or partially aspiration, are the key as it is about teaching. with public funds’. government themes. The best academies have a strong record in public It all depends on the examinations and university length of the arm! Some “The best academies applications. For example, of us will remember offer pupils greater at the Mossbourne the bureaucratic local opportunities in Community Academy in education authorities of Hackney, which replaced the past with their teams sports and other the notorious Hackney of advisors. In East Sussex activities to match Downs Comprehensive in the 1980s, for example, it the extra-curricular closed by ministerial order was not possible to go on in 1995, 40% of its pupils a course without approval programmes in qualify for free school from the subject advisor independent schools” meals. Nevertheless, 80% based at County Hall. The of pupils in its first GCSE Inner London Education Cultural freedom, by which cohort obtained five Authority was notorious is meant the opportunity GCSE passes at grade C for its bureaucratic to widen cultural horizons or above including English centralisation and and expression, should and Maths. In 2011, 70 ideological commitment not be limited to pupils in pupils obtained places at to the comprehensive independent schools and in Russell Group universities principle and it presided a minority of state schools. with nine winning places at over some of the most The best academies offer Cambridge. ineffective schools in pupils greater opportunities the country. Good in sports and other activities The elephant in the and effective schools to match the extra- are usually the result of curricular programmes effective leadership in in independent schools. the school not in the local Such opportunities have “The elephant in authority. It is essential that declined in many state the local authority has schools since the teachers’ the classroom is strategic oversight in terms disputes in the 1980s the role of the local of the number of school and teachers, burdened places required and to by much additional authority.” ensure that schools remain examination preparation truly comprehensive in their Liberal Education: Academies Re-visited | 15 intake but do they need Equity and Excellence http://www.educationengland.org.uk/ documents/pdfs/2009-libdems-policy-pa- to do more than that? was ‘to close the gap in per-89.pdf> [Accessed 9th August 2013] Independent schools, opportunity between the 5 The Sutton Trust, ‘The Educational Background of the Nation’s Leading both primary and senior, private sector and the People’ (November, 2012). < http://www. have flourished without state-funded sector’. That suttontrust.com/our-work/research/item/ the-educational-backgrounds-of-the-na- such bureaucracy and is what academies can tions-leading-people/> [Accessed 23 many belong to wider do. There is a danger that August 2013] 6 Ibid. groupings of schools such we become wedded to 7 Liberal Democrat website, ‘Liberal as the United Westminster an ideal of comprehensive Democrats back plans to cut primary class sizes to 15’ (7 March, 2009)
I want to focus on Most of the ideas I want to Living Standards some of the big social put forward are distinctly policy challenges for practical and concern It is undeniably the case the Liberal Democrats, family and working life. that, since the financial col- building on both my I also want to show how lapse of 2008, many people work inside Parliament, resilience – the ability have felt their household -- as Vice Chair of the to be able to deal with budgets squeezed and are All Party Parliamentary life’s knocks – both at an struggling to make ends Group (APPG) on Social individual and family level meet. In the first quarter of Mobility, Chair of the runs through and connects 2012, real household in- Party’s Balanced Working these issues. come fell to its lowest level Life policy group, and since 2005.1 Figures from member of the Lords Select I am proud of Lib Dem the Resolution Foundation Committee on Ageing -- achievement in the suggest that just under 60% alongside my work outside Coalition Government in of those on low and mid- of Parliament in various areas such as the Pupil dle income are struggling capacities supporting Premium and taking to keep up with their bills children and families. It has people on low income out whilst a further 7% are fall- sometimes been an under of income tax. My hope ing behind with their debts, developed area for Liberal is that the Lib Dems can leaving themselves vulner- Democrats and one to continue to lead the way able to loan sharks.2 Rises which I feel the party needs in these and other critical in the cost of fuel, food and to give more attention. areas of social policy. housing have made life particularly tough for many The main themes I want to Modern British families face families. So what can be focus on are: many challenges from done directly to help with •falling living standards, declining living standards living standards? •families on low to middle to the lack of affordable income juggling caring and childcare to the need Through various tax credits working responsibilities, for more flexible working to low-paid earners, the •the impact of an ageing practices. As chair of the government is effectively population, party’s Balanced Working subsidising wages •family policy, and Life Group it’s been clear and thereby enabling •social mobility. to me how these everyday employers to pay low issues affecting low to wages. Certain sectors, These may appear at first middle income families particularly those with glance to represent fairly are all too often ignored in large numbers of low- distinct aspects of social policy debate. Improving skilled employees, have policy. All my experience the living standards of exploited this situation. The tells me that people’s lives such a significant group Resolution Foundation’s do not fit into neat public will require better targeted figures suggest that up to policy compartments and policies. £3.6 billion of gross savings policy needs to respond could be made by the directly to people’s Treasury if all employers everyday experiences. Social Policy | 17
wage. Transparency can “Fundamentally it be a powerful tool in the “Of course some seems to me a much private sector which is why mothers choose more empowering companies employing over to stay at home 250 staff should state clearly and therefore liberal in annual reports how and look after their approach if people many employees they pay children and that could maintain or less than the established must always be a Living Wage. Finally, the improve their standard rise in the number of ‘zero matter of individual of life through earning hours contracts’ – up more choice based on their their own money, than 150% since 20054 – is own circumstances. a matter for real concern rather than through and a radical overhaul But some people complicated tax to prevent exploitative are denied that credits, the take–up practices is needed. choice because the rate of which is only childcare simply isn’t Caring Responsibilities around 65%.” there. “ This issue is rightly rising paid the Living Wage. So, ever higher on the political Of course some mothers in addition to the moral agenda and likely to be choose to stay at home case for paying people part of the battleground and look after their children a fair wage in return for for the next election. For and that must always their labour, there is clearly parents, the four main be a matter of individual an economic one too. factors that matter choice based on their Fundamentally it seems when thinking about own circumstances. But to me a much more childcare are affordability, some people are denied empowering and therefore accessibility, adequate that choice because liberal approach if people provision and convenience the childcare simply isn’t could maintain or improve / flexibility. It’s fundamental there. It’s worth noting their standard of life both to growing a stronger that the Institute for Fiscal through earning their own economy (by enabling Studies has shown female money, rather than through parents who wish to do so employment to be the key complicated tax credits, to return to work), and also driver for increased income the take–up rate of which is giving children the best among low to middle only around 65%. start in life. Good quality income families in the last 5 early years education has 50 years. I’d like to see the Living been shown to be critical Wage being adopted by to child development But what are the solutions? the party and a gradual and helps promote social I’d like to see the number roll out begin across sectors mobility. of free childcare hours that can clearly afford increased on a stepped it. It makes sense for the The loss of female basis from 12 months central government to employment after upwards until children start lead by example and childbirth, due to the primary school. This could local authorities should be current lack of flexible and start small, say 10 hours a encouraged to do likewise. affordable childcare, is a week between the ages Public procurement serious loss of skills to the of one and two, to help should also take account economy. the parent keep in touch of the commitment of with the workplace, retrain suppliers to pay a living or ease herself (or indeed 18 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead
himself) back gradually into an issue crying out for to choose a GP based the workplace. It would more policy attention. on proximity to work also bridge the current The number of ’sandwich rather than home. Small gap between the end of carers’ is projected to changes like this could go parental leave and the increase in the UK until a long way to help families existing free entitlement at least 2030. Clearly juggle their priorities and for two year-olds. To be inter-generational caring complicated commitments progressive, I believe responsibilities of this kind and would require public these extensions to existing can put individuals and services to start fitting provision should be limited families under huge strain around service users’ lives to a certain maximum and too often lead to rather than always being household income, say women dropping out of the other way round. £80,000 or £100,000 per work altogether. year. An Ageing Population To prevent this skills loss we We also need much more all need to accept that Family concerns – when flexibility in the hours that employees will sometime acknowledged at all (a childcare is available to need to take prolonged matter I will address below) help the large number of periods off work to – nearly always focus on people who no longer work provide intensive period parents and children, and traditional 9-to-5 office of care to an elderly or rarely take into account hours. A ‘one stop shop’ very vulnerable relative the growing number of approach, with Children in crisis – often, in turn, older relatives and the and Family Centres and preventing that relative households in which three, other full day-care settings from becoming dependent four and five generation operating as childcare on full-time and costly families are becoming hubs linking together hospital or social care. increasing common. Taking more formal childcare I would like to see the part in the House of Lords settings, with wrap-around introduction of a statutory Select Committee which care provided through a right to a maximum period produced the report network of quality-assured of six months of Carer’s ’Ready for Ageing?’6 , I was childminders, would Leave with the state paying struck by the scale and mean that parents could a Carer’s Allowance at a the pervasiveness of the access all their childcare basic level which could be implications of an ageing needs through one central topped up by an employer population. The most place and help construct keen to hold on to valuable dramatic demographic a flexible and individual employees. shift facing this, and indeed tailored package. other developed countries, In addition to more support is our ageing population. Another key caring issue is to family carers, we need There will be almost 40% the plight of the so-called more family-friendly and more people aged 85-plus ’sandwich generation’ - accessible friendly public in England within a decade those people, nearly all services – such as allowing compared to 2011, and women and mostly in their patients the flexibility twice as many by 2030 40s, 50s and 60s, trying of Skype or telephone compared to 2010. simultaneously to bring up consultations with their children (and/or provide GPs, creating family as Whilst strongly acclaiming vital care for grandchildren distinct from individual GP the great boon and allowing young parents and hospital appointments benefits of living longer for to work) and at the same to minimise travel and many of our fellow citizens, time looking after elderly childcare problems and the Committee concluded, or disabled relatives. It’s making it easier for people Social Policy | 19 unhappily, that the market for networks of builders need to ensure Government is “woefully older people living together that the housing needs of underprepared for in supported communities the older population are far ageing”. So what are some but still retaining real better addressed, not least of the challenges and what independence and because this is one way of needs to happen? choice. Government freeing up larger properties should be helping to for younger families. shape this, along with • The impact on our far better convalescent There’s also an important public services is already accommodation for older issue of inter-generational apparent: treatment and or indeed childless people fairness to consider from care for people with long- who no longer need to the above. The current term conditions accounted be in hospital but aren’t welfare state model has for 70% of the health yet well enough to live largely been based on and social care spend in completely independently. people paying in when England in 2010, while the young and drawing out number of people aged 65- • Living much longer when they are old. This is plus in England and Wales means many people will right – but we do need with dementia is expected want or need to work for to be wary of shunting to rise by over 80% by 2030. longer; there needs to be too many costs on to an informed public debate younger and future • The NHS and social care about how to make generations. In particular, sector face major increases extended working lives and the property boom has led in demand and cost. gradual retirement the new to a substantial transfer of Without radical changes norm. wealth to older, better-off in the way that health and house-owners, which has social care is funded and • This Government increased housing costs for delivered, needs will remain have made welcome the younger generation. unmet and cost pressures progress with the single This makes an effective will rise inexorably. If we state pension; but many equity release market – want to keep older, frail people who will face an retaining use of your house people out of hospital far alarming drop in their while obtaining a lump greater emphasis must be income on retirement are sum or a steady stream of placed on preventative as yet unaware of this. The income, using the value and community care and Government has estimated of the house – to unlock resources shifted from that 10.7 million people the housing assets held by hospitals to the community in the UK can expect older people absolutely and home based care. inadequate retirement crucial if we are to avoid incomes. Government, ever growing inequalities • As the baby boomer business and the pensions between income groups generation gets older, industry must commit to and generations. The and with growing numbers work together to reform next government (of of childless couples and defined contribution whatever hue) needs to individuals, radically new pensions. These are be brave enough to lead types of social care will now the main type of a national debate about be needed. These are occupational pension but the big choices ahead of likely to be a far cry from are seriously inadequate for us – for individuals, families, the rather dismal type of many. businesses and society institutionalised residential at large – including the homes for the elderly with • Central and local very nature of our welfare which we are depressingly government, housing settlement. familiar. There is a growing associations and house 20 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead
is becoming increasingly Family Policy Having worked in my important and relevant, professional life in the providing a broader So far, I’ve very much children and families sector understanding of resilience focused on families across for a number of years I to help deal with adversity the different generations. know that the reality is very and life’s ups and downs, I’ve always felt that liberals different. Modern families be they health, work or and Liberal Democrats come in all shapes and family related. Thus we have a tendency to sizes and that is something all have an interest in shy away from what’s to celebrate. I’m a liberal families being able to generally called family and I certainly don’t think function effectively as policy, perhaps because it is the job of the state to a unit, provide for one our philosophical starting tell people how to live their another, and develop point is very much founded privates lives. However, healthy emotional on the importance of the families and personal bonds. Emotional and individual and our policies relationships are hugely psychological resilience are largely based on important to people. and the quality of individual empowerment. Indeed most surveys show relationships really do Of course, all politicians they are the most important matter to the wider need to tread carefully in aspect of people’s lives community and social this terrain – attempts at and intrinsic to good health networks – a concept that family policy are littered and wellbeing. We may Liberals generally seems with scandal and banana be far more comfortable much more comfortable skins. Indeed, the very term talking about constitutional with. ‘family policy’ is, for some, reform, civil liberties or It’s often from a strong inextricably linked with an Europe but, important as family base that people idealised family structure those issues undeniably start providing help and and an often misplaced are for Liberals, they are support to neighbours and notion of personal morality rarely the stuff of everyday extended families, be it or family values, especially conversation, be it as the helping with the shopping, when dealing with family bus stop, the supermarket gardening, picking up a breakdown. or the pub. And for us to prescription, taking the dog fail to acknowledge the for a walk when the owner “We may be far importance of family risks us is ill, or providing some sounding out of touch and respite care for a full time more comfortable removed from the realities carer. These little acts really talking about of most people’s lives. matter and I’d like to see constitutional policy makers and service I think the best approach providers recognising the reform, civil liberties for liberals is one based vital role that the family unit or Europe but ... not in terms of what is can play – and actively for us to fail to going wrong for families supporting the family unit – (ie, a deficit model) but in many wider social policy acknowledge the rather a ‘strengths-based objectives. importance of family model’, assessing how risks us sounding families survive and thrive Social Mobility out of touch and and understanding them as valuable assets to Finally, my recent work on removed from the the community with real social mobility has been realities of most potential for personal very much tied up with empowerment. Family the all-party parliamentary people’s lives.” resilience is an idea that Social Policy | 21 group (APPG) which last individual life chances Increasingly we are hearing year produced a report would require an essay on some schools – in the state called, ‘7 Key Truths that alone. as well as the independent about Social Mobility’7, sector – saying that highlighting the importance I will just mention one developing these traits is of different aspects of the newer aspect of this their core business and that life course to improved life debate which was for employers these more chances. This included the highlighted recently when intangible skills of ‘sticking importance of early years, the APPG organised a at it’, of ‘not giving up’ or the home environment summit10 on developing ‘accepting second best’, and, particularly, the style resilience and character – of empathy and teamwork and quality of parenting to sometimes called the ‘soft are precisely what they’re social mobility. Evidence skills’ – in young people looking for in potential shows that the home is just as a way of narrowing recruits. as important as school and, the life chances gap. during a child’s early years, ‘Soft skills’ seems to me That’s why I would like to their emotional and something of a misnomer to see the Pupil Premium cognitive development because these aren’t fluffy being used directly and their future prospects. or cosmetic skills we’re to develop character I have found the concept talking about – this is about and resilience and the of social mobility to having the fundamental identification and spread be a fairly polarising tenacity, resilience and of good practice. I also one amongst Liberal perseverance needed think it should be integral Democrats, with some to make the most of to teacher training and saying that the focus should opportunities that come included in the OFSTED not be nearly so much on along and help deal with framework, as well as individual efforts to improve setbacks. recognised in a Certificate their own life chances but of Achievement recording more on wider questions of The summit looked at the both academic and wider, social inequalities including growing body of research whole person, skills. income inequality. Despite highlighting how character the very recent and traits and resilience are To conclude it is only welcome news about the directly linked to being through giving more first fall in income inequality able to do well at school, profile and debate to well- since 19868, which is a university and in the work researched social policy significant achievement place and that these skills based on the reality of how in such difficult economic can be taught through a people’s daily lives that we times, the influence of range of different ways will be able to find practical parental income on the such as school ethos, approaches capable of income of children in Britain volunteering and out having a direct, tangible is amongst the strongest in of school activities. We impact on people’s quality the OECD. This was clearly heard how working on of life. And in so doing it demonstrated in Richard developing resilience to is my belief that we will Wilkinson and Kate Pickett’s setbacks, and an increased be building a more liberal work, ‘The Spirit Level’9. sense of control of their society. My view is simple: both lives for young people are important and neither with low confidence and could or should be ignored self esteem, had led to when designing policy. increased literacy and However policy ideas to numeracy results. So tackle poverty and social these so-called ‘soft skills’ disadvantage and improve can lead to hard results. 22 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead
Claire Tyler is Chair of the business/committees/commit- tees-a-z/lords-select/public-servic- Children and Family Court es-committee/report-ready-for-age- Advisory and Support ing/> [Accessed 19 August 2013] Service (CAFCASS), 7 ‘7 key truths about socil mobility: The interim report of the all-party President of the National parliamentary group on social Children’s Bureau (NCB) mobility’, 1 May 2012
1 ‘The Economic Position of House- holds, Q1 2012’, Office for National Statistics, 31 July 2012 < http://www. ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171766_274507. pdf> [Accessed 17 August 2013] 2 ‘Squeezed Britain 2013’, The Resolu- tion Foundation, p.11 < http://www. resolutionfoundation.org/media/ media/downloads/Resolution-Foun- dation-Squeezed-Britain-2013_1.pdf> [Accessed 17 August 2013] 3 Ibid, p.19 4 ‘’One million’ UK workers on zero hours contracts’, Financial Times, 5 August 2013 Collapsing Under the Weight of Our Own Contradictions - Richard Marbrow Governing is about choice My first example is housing. any form of green space – policy making is about The financial crisis was allied anywhere. Areas viewed aspiration. Where Liberal to a house price bubble. from Surrey as ‘brownfield’ Democrats tend to come The dirty little secret that are ‘community spaces’ in unstuck is where we need never gets talked about, Liverpool. What Macunians to turn policy into decisions. though, is that any situation think of as ‘urban London’ where house prices rise is ‘green belt’ to a We are rightly proud of faster than wages has to Kingstonian. We want to the fact that our Party has be a bubble. That isn’t a make sure that people can consistently produced policy statement, it is a live in the area where they fully-costed manifestos. mathematical one. And grew up, but at the same Financially, we know which we can’t pretend that time we want to preserve choices we have made what happened from the rural character. There and so do the electorate. late 1990s through to 2008 are a series of choices to What we have not always was in any way normal. be made and we can’t done is produced a fully The house price bubble have it all. The party tries coherent body of policy by combined with equity to get around some of eliminating contradictions release exacerbated the these contradictions by between decisions intergenerational transfer of talking about tenure but made at different party debt that we are now living in reality we can only get conferences. This leaves with, as well as promoting more affordable housing us with a delivery problem an artificial picture of the by building more houses when we have mutually economics of our housing intended for all types of contradictory delivery market. This bubble left tenure. It is estimated priorities, all of which have behind a property ladder this country needs to their own champions. that is often missing its build a net 250,000 new lowest rungs. houses each year to meet demand. Solving this problem “The contradiction in requires us to create more A Land Value Tax would affordable housing and help by making land our policies is that we the easiest way to provide banking less profitable. want to see affordable that is to build more houses. With LVT, sitting on land has housing for all -- but There are a finite number a cost, reducing the ability of households and greater to use land in one location at the same time we supply will drop the price. as a means of raising have policy that wants The contradiction in our money to invest elsewhere to protect pretty much policies is that we want to and also presenting an see affordable housing for incentive to improve the any form of green all -- but at the same time land and realise the sale space anywhere.” we have policy that wants value quicker. It would to protect pretty much also help if there was a 24 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead serious effort to require it can’t be rationally used move to electric cars is just increased numbers of as a reason to continue shifting the carbon problem housing completions with unsustainable house from cities to power station where planning permission price increases. The smokestacks. Variability exists - detailed planning larger benefit is that in demand is currently permission exists for 487,000 a sustainable housing handled by gas that can housing units to be built in market will also reduce be turned on and off the coming 3-5 years. But the economic impact of quickly and by renewables fundamentally we need to unearned wealth where such as wind acting in build more houses, in areas the constant increase equilibrium. Providing more with high demand, and in house prices steadily renewable capacity would that will need land. increases the amount of wean us off gas to some The temptation by local wealth transferred from extent, and adding carbon campaigners to demand new house owners to capture and natural the protection of green established ones in the form gas is the lowest carbon space could mean of equity. If wages can’t form of fossil fuel. Shifting maintaining the views and keep up with house prices the balance in dealing amenity of the better off at the disposable income of with variable demand the price of condemning the younger generation to renewables and using the less well off to will be steadily handed hydroelectric pumping increasingly unsuitable and to the older generation schemes as a means of unaffordable housing. This (a generation that also providing storage for peak is not a consequence that benefited from public demand is good policy and liberals should be happy service privatisation). This adds up economically. with. Rebalancing the converts earned income economy so that there is into unearned income and Where we hit our less emphasis on London prevents the economy contradictions again is in and the south-east would becoming more balanced the generation of baseload also help, but would be intergenerationally. A power, the stuff we need at very much a secondary more balanced economy a constant level all of the solution compared simply geographically and socially time. At the moment in the to building more houses. is an outcome that liberals UK this mainly comes from should welcome. a combination of coal-fired Of course, increasing power stations that are not supply would have the The major barrier to delivery as easily turned off and effect of reducing the will be that not everyone on as gas-fired ones, and price of all houses. That can win and we should be an aging group of nuclear will present issues with honest about that as well power stations. We could negative equity particularly as making clear that the try and retrofit all coal-fired for those who have only bubble was not normal. It power stations with carbon just got onto the housing was abnormal and deeply capture and storage ladder but there may be damaging and creating (CCS) and flue-scrubbing, no choice. If we start another one will endanger but there is a limit to how from the premise that the all of our other priorities. viable that is and the cost current housing market is increases for energy would unsustainable then prices My second example is be significant. In addition will have to fall for some energy. Energy demand the Coalition Government people for whom this will in the UK is not static, it has consistently failed to cause significant problems. varies with time of year and make CCS happen despite A separate policy response time of day. It is also wildly protestations of support. will be needed to this but carbon intensive and the Collapsing Under the Weight of Our Own Contradictions| 25 advantages. With nuclear is a way to guarantee “To be both we bury the waste, with greater suffering for many coal we pump it into the conditions. This isn’t always committed to air. Nuclear power has true and primary care preventing climate killed far fewer people than should be local – but change and anti- coal mining, too. highly specialised areas should not. When you go nuclear doesn’t add To be both committed to for a hip replacement, up; as things stand preventing climate change you don’t want a doctor right now, and absent and anti-nuclear doesn’t who understands where add up; as things stand the shops are in your town, a compelling new right now, and absent a you want her to have way of producing compelling new way of done hundreds of hip energy, it won’t in the producing energy, it won’t replacements, so that when in the near future. the 1-in-100 complication near future.” happens she has seen it Our inability to make ten times before. When it We can also keep rational choices outside of comes to elective neonatal extending the life of finance is a major barrier surgery, campaigning older, less safe nuclear to delivery for us as Liberal for local facilities sooner power stations but if we Democrats, and the than supercentres isn’t actually want to both perversion of community just inefficient: it is actually decarbonise electricity politics into pandering to killing babies in the name of generation and keep the voters causes local localism. the lights on the current politicians to struggle obvious option is new, when confronted with the The contradiction safer nuclear capacity. necessities of power. between evidence-based Renewable electricity is a policymaking and ‘local’ major part of the solution prevents the delivery but storage of power “Campaigning for of better outcomes for (particularly from wind) is smaller facilities to patients. Our overall still a tricky issue. Also, we stay open because policy programme should run into the same problem not just be fully costed, it with wind power as we do they are ‘local’ and should be fully coherent. with houses – namely that reduce journey times It is not possible to deliver we would have to stick is a way to guarantee the outcomes of policy turbines on land that Lib in a world where we Dems will fight to protect, greater suffering for support mutually exclusive quite apart from the fact many conditions.” programmes. Community that the best places to politics -- re-engaging generate the electricity people with political action are not the same as the My final example is the on a local level – helps us to places where the electricity NHS. All the science shows deliver when what we are is used and you lose a lot of that larger, specialist campaigning with people power transporting it round facilities have better for is both achievable the country.We could outcomes for many kinds and reasonable. When it move over to a hydrogen of medical intervention. becomes about special economy if someone wants Campaigning for smaller pleading, or about to plonk a few hundred facilities to stay open service provision based billion on the table – but, because they are ‘local’ on geography rather than if not, nuclear has some and reduce journey times need, it becomes a barrier 26 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead to implementing policy because politics is the art of compromise and of delivering the possible. The country is in a mess because politicians promised the voters they could have a free lunch. We could be the party that helps them to understand the bill and in doing so unlock the ability to deliver better, if not perfect, services and policy now and for years to come. Richard Marbrow has been a member of the party since he was 14 and has been North West Regional Treasurer for the last 5 years. In the 1998 Lib Dem landslide in Liverpool he was elected as the youngest councillor, serving 3 years as a member of the council’s executive board. Now working as Campaigns and Communications Officer for Chris Davies MEP he has first hand experience trying to translate Lib Dem policy to action in the North West. Four Changes for the NHS of the Future| 27 Four Changes for the NHS of the Future - Norman Lamb MP It is clear that we face big care within tough financial secondary, hospital care challenges in health and constraints. We have to do and healthcare from care in the UK – as in every this in order to ensure that social care. This makes no other developed country. the NHS is sustainable. sense from the patient’s We have a population that perspective. Importantly, is living for longer than ever Fragmented to we should not be seeking before, and an increased Integrated to impose any top-down number of people living model, assuming that with long-term conditions one size fits all. We need The increasingly complex such as diabetes, heart to give local health and health needs of patients disease, dementia, or care organisations and as they get older mean cancer. Furthermore, professionals the freedom that the NHS is more and we are dealing with all and resources to innovate, more likely to be dealing this at a time in which and find out what works with individuals whose no Government of any best for the patients under treatment requirements political persuasion can their care. span physical, social and claim to have money mental health services. The to spare to throw at the Through the Government’s NHS as it stands is far too problems. Pioneer sites programme fragmented in its approach which I announced earlier to patient care. This means in May1, we are promoting “The NHS as it stands that too many people fall at least 10 local ‘integration through gaps in the health is far too fragmented pioneers’ whose ideas and care system. This in turn in its approach to in implementing joined leads to an unacceptable up care should become patient care. This level of pressure being an inspiration for other placed on our crisis care means that too organisations across the services as people turn to many people fall NHS and care services. A&E as a first port of call. The model introduced by through gaps in the To be blunt, this is not good the Torbay Care Trust is an care. health and care excellent example; the Trust system.” introduced a single point of That’s why I am contact for patients, with a championing a move So while I strongly believe local database of medical towards an integrated that the NHS carries out history shared between approach which means fantastic work on a daily different local services, that care is shaped basis, I also believe it which stops patients from around the needs of the must adapt to meet new having to repeat their patient, not the institution. demands. I would like stories to endless separate Somehow, over the years, to see four major shifts in consultants and means we have managed to culture within the NHS to they are able to access institutionally fragment help achieve the essential the right services quickly. mental health from physical objective of improving Ultimately, I want to see health, primary care from 28 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead all patients experiencing a parity of esteem for this sort of approach from mental health must be a “As a Liberal, I hate local health services. I key priority for achieving the idea of the system strongly welcome the this approach. This means making assumptions recent spending review valuing mental wellbeing about what is good which announced a £3.8 on an equal level with billion pooled budget physical wellbeing and for people. Rather, we for health and care ensuring openness and need to provide people services – a fantastic base recognition of mental with the freedom and from which to develop health conditions across the control of resources more integrated ways of the NHS. There has wherever possible to delivering care. always been a serious make the treatment lack of awareness about and care choices that Repair to Prevention mental health conditions and their impact on a work best for them.” The NHS currently focuses patient’s wider wellbeing. too much on ‘repairing Prevent a deterioration of the damage’ once it has someone’s mental health Paternalistic to Personal occurred and not enough and you save money on preventative measures to the system. Far more We need to move from that could stop problems important, though, you a culture of paternalism down the line. Integrating improve that person’s life. which makes people health and social care Good preventive mental feel as though decisions services will enable a shift health services should be about their health care towards a preventative integrated with primary are being taken without approach that ensures a care. their involvement or patient’s wellbeing is dealt consultation, to one which with in a holistic fashion. Finally, while the Coalition puts patients in the driving The vast investment in the Government was right seat. As a Liberal, I hate the NHS over the last decade to scrap the profoundly idea of the system making was both welcome and flawed £6bn NHS IT project assumptions about what is necessary. But it was started by Labour, we good for people. Rather, spent predominantly at must not lose sight of we need to provide people the acute end of the the fact that effective with the freedom and spectrum. The payment use of IT is crucial to the control of resources system introduced by preventative care and wherever possible to make the Labour Government effective teamwork. I the treatment and care – so-called ‘payment have seen myself how choices that work best for by results’ – incentivises some integrated care them. Of course, with that acute hospitals to do organisations, notably in freedom, comes some more. The more patients America, make intelligent responsibility, to self care as a hospital admitted the use of computerised well as possible – provided more money they received. records to monitor the ‘big you are given the tools to Actually, hospitals should picture’ with individual do so. be encouraged to work patients, ensuring that alongside the rest of the decisions are made on system to keep patients the basis of as much Many people visiting healthier, to prevent information as possible, their doctor, or going into crises from occurring and, warning signs are hospital, first and foremost ultimately, to reduce recognised early, and want to feel they are in hospital admissions. health needs are less likely safe hands. But more and Working to introduce to slip through the net. more, people are not Four Changes for the NHS of the Future| 29 going into hospital for a a ‘right to request’ a wider community. ‘quick fix’, and visits to their personal health budget doctor are becoming a in such circumstances. I “Creating the NHS routine part of their lives. would like this to become of the future means For elderly people with a ‘right to have’ a personal moving away from a slowly-deteriorating health, health budget as soon as top-down approach or the many people living possible. with stable but chronic that prioritises systems health conditions, there It is also incredibly over individuals.” is often real value putting important that carers, who patients in control of their are so fundamental to In particular, this means own packages of care our system of social care, encouraging community- and support, and letting feel that their contribution based care and services them design a provision is valued, and that they provided by the voluntary to suit their own needs are being listened to. The sector so that people can and determine what their Government’s current benefit from a network priorities are. Care Bill2 makes significant of support that goes progress by ensuring they beyond that of the hospital “I am strongly in favour receive the support they environment. Already of the idea of personal need. Too often, carers there are communities feel ignored. They should across the UK employing health budgets – pools be partners with health a ‘neighbourhood watch’ of money provided to professionals. type of approach to ensure a patient to enable that vulnerable individuals them to tailor their care Exclusivity to Inclusivity are supported by the package around their community. Loneliness individual needs. These The number of people over and isolation, particularly the age of 85 is expected amongst elderly and can be hugely effective disabled people, has in empowering to double by 2030. This fact alone makes you risen rapidly in recent patients to remain realise that things have years. If you live on your independent.” to change. Our system of own and have complex care is already under a lot care needs, your life can be pretty miserable That’s why I am strongly of strain. Integrating health with very little human in favour of the idea of and care services will help contact. Re-building basic personal health budgets – achieve better care within neighbourliness where it pools of money provided the financial constraints has broken down can do to a patient to enable - which will simply get so much to give people a them to tailor their care tougher - but there also better life – and that tends package around their needs to be more than to result in better physical individual needs. These that. Traditionally statutory and mental health. can be hugely effective services behave in a rather in empowering patients exclusive way. They tend Creating the NHS of the to remain independent. to do what’s necessary to future means moving away The Government has get you better and then from a top-down approach committed to supporting discharge you, hoping that prioritises systems over personal health budgets, that you will cope on your individuals. Instead, we first of all for those own. Instead, we need need a flexible, human patients receiving NHS collaboration between approach to healthcare continuing health care. The statutory services and the that gives people access Government is introducing family, neighbours and the to the tools and resources 30 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead to make the choices that work best for them. We also need to help local authorities to be innovative and tailor their approach to local communities and their needs. Too often patients are left feeling that the system is working against them; we need to create an NHS that patients feel they can work with. Norman Lamb was elected as Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for North Norfolk in 2001 and has been Minister of State for Care and Support since September 2012. He was the party’s shadow secretary of state for health from 2006 to 2010. You can find out more at http:// normanlamb.org.uk 1 See ‘Letter for health and social care integration ‘pioneers’’, De- partment of Health (13 May 2013) A Liberal Solution to the UK’s Housing Crisis - Tom Papworth The Housing Crisis the South West) the figure did we manage to build is greater than six times over 200,000. The UK faces a housing the median household crisis. Housing affordability income.1 The result is an economic, has been worsening for social and human decades. In the 1940s The number of households catastrophe. Economically, the average household in England is projected to people are less able spent around a tenth grow to 24.3 million in 2021, to move to take up of its income on an increase of 2.2 million job opportunities, thus accommodation. By the (10 per cent) over 2011, impeding the efficient 21st century that figure or 221,000 households per allocation of resources and had increased to a third year.2 Yet the average preventing individuals from of household income number of new homes built maximising incomes. At a (despite the enormous rise over the past decade is governmental level, the in female labour market 160,000. In no year since cost of the housing benefit participation). Between the turn of the century bill to the UK taxpayer 1971 and 2011 the price of have we managed to has also spiralled out of housing in the UK increased build this number of houses control. In 1970, housing by nearly 40 times, and – indeed, only in the benefit cost £250 million (in the cost of rents rose by a peak year of 2008 (during 2013 prices). By 2017 it is similar amount. what proved to be an expected that the bill will unsustainable credit boom) have escalated to £24.1 In English-speaking countries, the ‘median multiple’ (the ratio of median house prices to median household incomes) required to buy a home has generally clustered around 3:1 – it costs three times the average family income to buy an average home. Nowhere in the UK can one buy an average home for three times the median family income: in the regions where people Table 1: Number of homes existing and newly built in most want to live (Greater England 2001-2011 (figures in thousands)3 London, the West Midlands, 32 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead billion.4 classed as Greenspace prices. They are a function and Water. The next of supply and demand. This 100 times real- biggest category, making For decades the number terms increase is the up four tenths of what is of households in the UK equivalent of 6p on the left, is domestic gardens. has been growing faster basic rate of income Just 1 per cent of England is than the supply of homes. tax5 , or around £1,000 housing, and half as much However, the supply from the typical worker. is non-domestic buildings. of housing is entirely a Socially, we have rising The idea that the England function of the supply of levels of overcrowding, has been ‘concreted land available for domestic homelessness and over’ is nonsense, resulting development. It is the intergenerational inequity from the perceptions acute shortage of land that (as those who bought of people who live in is zoned for housing that homes in previous decades urban environments. The leads to the shortage of sit on increasingly valuable most acute areas of construction and so to the assets while the young are housing demand are in shortage of housing. This is unable to afford homes). At London, the South East a problem that has been a human level, individuals and families are crammed into small, poor-quality housing, for which they are paying vastly inflating costs. “The supply of housing in the UK is a national disgrace. But it is not the real problem. The much- vaunted ‘Housing Crisis’ is a symptom of a deeper Figure 1: Land-use in the UK in 2005 problem. The real and the West Midlands. endemic since the middle crisis is in planning.” According to the Greater of the last century. It stems London Assembly, London’s from the Town and Country The supply of housing population is expected Planning Act 1947 – one of in the UK is a national to grow by around one the most resilient pillars of disgrace. But it is not the million over the next the post-war command- real problem. The much- twenty years, and the and-control state. vaunted ‘Housing Crisis’ is number of households a symptom of a deeper by nearly 700,000. Yet Land Use Planning in problem. The real crisis is in even the South East isn’t the England planning. overdeveloped: the South East of England is 84.7 per Broadly speaking, the right cent Greenspace and The Planning Crisis to develop land has been Water and just 2 per cent separated from the right buildings. England is a “green and to use land (‘ownership’). pleasant land.” In fact, Development decisions There is no magic to house 90 per cent of England is are politicised, and A Liberal Solution to the UK’s Housing Crisis| 33 thus fall foul of all the holding on to land with gain for the landowner. challenges resulting in any planning permission will ‘public choice’ arena.8 be warned to ‘use it The numbers involved are The result is an all-or- or lose it’’9. According staggering. In the South nothing, winner-takes-all to the Labour leader, East, agricultural land sells approach to planning. planning permission has for just 1 per cent of the There is no requirement, been granted for 400,000 price for which land with or effort, to compensate, homes – equivalent to a permission for housing or incentivize, third parties city the size of Birmingham. sells. That means that a who might be adversely Yet as Table 1 shows, this typical 50 hectare farm, affected by development. represents just two to which might be worth £1 Meanwhile, large swathes three years new housing. million, could increase in of undifferentiated land Rather than representing a value to £100 million just are placed under blanket shocking example of land through the owner getting protection. The system is banking, this represents the planning permission. This based upon an unswerving development ‘pipeline’ – represents the social value faith in the ability of a the land that developers of the thousands of homes bureaucratic planning will build upon over the that could be fitted on process to achieve coming three years. that land, all of which is superior outcomes to captured as a private, those achieved in the The reason for this shortage windfall gain by the owner. spontaneous order resulting of developable land is that from voluntary action, local people – those that A Liberal Planning and upon the belief that have the most influence Policy the public good can be over local decision-makers correctly assessed by – bear all of the social cost What would we expect political decision-makers of a new development and to see from a liberal and that it is therefore gain little of the benefit. A planning policy? Firstly, justified to impose third- new housing development it would be voluntary. party costs on the losers. will marginally reduce the Too often governments (Note, in this context, that it cost of housing regionally, have relied upon top- is as much a third party cost but the beneficiaries down targets, or have to a would-be developer to will be every would-be imposed development refuse development rights homeowner in the area. solutions. These are as it is a third party cost to a By comparison, the loss incredibly unpopular and neighbour to grant them). of amenity (in the form hugely illiberal. They are of local greenspace, also ineffective: Labour’s To understand the root population density, etc.) Regional spatial strategies, cause of the problem, will fall entirely upon for example, did not result we need to examine the neighbouring residents. In in the UK building enough winner-takes-all nature a liberal economy, there homes over the decade to of planning in particular would be a mechanism 2010. detail. Under the present for compensating those system, developable land who suffer these ‘negative Secondly, a liberal planning is in short supply. Politicians externalities’, but under the policy would devolve talk a lot of nonsense UK’s nationalised planning planning decisions as much about developable land. system, there is no need as possible. This needn’t For example, in June 2013 to compensate losers. be to local authorities: it Ed Miliband proposed Consequently, all the social has never been a point of that under a Labour benefits of development liberal principle (though it Government ‘Developers can be captured as private has too often been a point 34 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead of practice) that power is perfectly reasonable to The current land use should be passed ‘from expect to be compensated planning system for the Whitehall to the Town Hall’. for a loss of amenity but it UK fails against each of A liberal planning policy is not reasonable to seek the above tests. It is highly would seek to devolve compensation because centralised and highly decision-making as near to more housing is brought politicised. It awards the individual as possible onto the market. localised monopolies on while preserving the rights development that are of all. Fourthly, such a policy worth millions to the few to would internalise whom they are granted. “The most effective externalities: in other words, It passes the entire social way of ensuring that negative costs that fall cost onto neighbours. developers are not upon third parties would be And it fails to incentivise able to over-charge subject to compensation local communities: on the for new housing, build by, and at the expense of, contrary, it encourages the developer. This would them to nimbyism. low quality products, bring planning in line with that land-banking is the rest of the economy: “The current planning impossible, that rents if I wanted to carry out system awards are reasonable and any other economic activity and it caused a localised monopolies that standards are on development that maintained is the direct cost to you, you would be able to seek are worth millions to existence or threat of compensation, if necessary the few to who they are competition.” through the courts; it is granted. It passes the a strange anomaly of entire social cost onto Thirdly, it would have no our legal system that the truck with monopoly. courts will not consider neighbours.” Monopoly is the scourge claims for damages of markets, yet our present arising from neighbouring A Specific Proposal planning law creates development. Thus the for a Liberal Planning monopolistic development system would allow Policy rights.10 The most effective individuals to seek way of ensuring that compensation on the developers are not able grounds that it would cause A liberal planning policy to over-charge for new loss to the value of their would begin by dismantling housing, that they cannot property due to a change its socialist predecessor. The build low quality products, in circumstances (eg, a Town and Country Planning that land-banking is loss of a view or access to Act and its successors impossible, that rents a wood or field; increased would be repealed. are reasonable and that population density; etc). Instead, planning authority standards are maintained would be invested in is the existence or threat Fifthly, it would encourage local communities. These of competition. This would the enlightened self- communities would be also mean that the system interest of all parties. neighbourhood-level, not would not allow individuals So, for example, on top the vast local authorities to prevent development of compensating local we have today. Existing or seek compensation on people, it might go further planning authorities are too the grounds that it would and allow them to reap large. There is no reason cause loss to the value some of the rewards for to believe that residents of their property due to permitting development. of an entire district or the increase in supply. It borough share a common A Liberal Solution to the UK’s Housing Crisis| 35 interest when it comes to of a system of zoning, as Summary developing land on the practiced in many parts edge of a particular town of the United States, with The current land use or village. They are also the right to develop being planning system in England multi-purpose authorities: either auctioned off or is highly illiberal. It stems the local planning authority issued to residents in a from an age when we is also the local education tradable format. believed that central authority, transport planning could create a authority, waste authority, Investing development fairer and more ordered etc. Thus they are inclined rights in a planning society. The result has to allow non-planning authority would ensure been a highly inefficient related matters to influence that the local community distribution of development planning decisions. still had a mechanism that has also seen housing for determining which becoming less and less “A liberal planning areas of their locale were affordable. This particularly policy would begin by developed and which hurts the poor and the were not. Auctioning those dismantling its socialist young, at the expense rights would enable the of landowners and those predecessor. The Town local community to price with political influence. and Country Planning the value of that land: We need radical reform if Act and its successors rather than assuming that we are even to meet new would be repealed. people either do or do not housing needs, let alone Instead, planning want a certain field built rebalance supply and upon, it would let them set authority would be demand and make housing a price and so provide a cheaper and of a higher invested in local more accurate way for the quality. As the above communities.” community to express how demonstrates, this aim much it valued different can be achieved in a way uses of the land. Auctioning that empowers individuals The new planning those rights would also and communities and is authorities would take enable the planning compatible with our liberal the form of mutuals or authority to compensate principles. cooperatives, jointly those affected, in varying owned by the property amounts depending owners within the on the extent to which Tom Papworth is Associate neighbourhood. The development impacted Director – Economic Policy planning authority would upon them. Finally, at CentreForum and the exist solely to consider separating the planning author of Planning in a free planning applications. It authority from the local society: London as a case would use the granting authority would ensure that study for a spontaneously of planning applications decisions were taking by planned future, published to raise revenue: perhaps the local community with by the Adam Smith Institute through the auctioning land-use in mind, rather in 2012. He is also Leader of development rights. than for other reasons. of the Liberal Democrat This may build on the Similarly, elections to the Group on the London Community Land Auctions executive of the planning Borough of Bromley and proposed by the LSE authority would not be serves on the Development economist and Liberal influenced by matters Control Committee and a Democrat member Tim other than those related to Plans sub-committee. He Leunig11. Alternatively, planning. writes here in a personal this may take the form capacity. 36 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead 1 Kristian Niemietz, Abundance of Land, Shortage of Housing, Institute of Economic Affairs, April 2012. 2 Household Interim Projections, 2011 to 2021, England, Department of Communities and Local Government, 9 April 2013. 3 Dwelling Stock Estimates: 2011, Department of Communities and Local Government. 4 Medium-term forecast for all DWP benefits, Department of Work and Pensions, 23 April 2013. 5 “The Ready Reckoner estimates that raising the basic rate of income tax by 1 penny in the pound in April 2010 would raise £4.05 billion in a full year, or just over 0.25% of national income.”, Chapter 7, Options for fiscal tightening: tax increases and benefit cuts, IFS Green Budget 2010, Institute for Fiscal Studies, London 2010. 6 Land Use Statistics (Generalised Land Use Database), 2005, 7 Greater London Authority, 2009 Round of Demographic Projections from Focus on London 2010: Population and Migration 8 For an extensive account of the failure of “Public Choice”, see James M. Buchanan and Gordon Tullock The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. For a more contemporary summary of the half a century of Public Choice Theory, see Eamonn Butler, Public Choice - A Primer, Institute of Economic Affairs, 2012. For an account of how Public Choice Theory interacts with land use planning, see Mark Pennington, Liberating the Land: the case for private land-use planning, Institute of Economic Affairs, London 2002. 9 Ed Miliband issues warning to developers over ‘hoarding’ of land, The Guardian, 21 June 2013. 10 The term “monopoly” is rarely used in its strict sense, to denote a single entity in control of supply. With the possible exception of infrastructure networks, real monopolies are entirely functions of government. Ironically, that is also true of the quasi-monopoly in development rights, which are an enormously valuable gift to those able to persuade government to grant them. 11 See Tim Leunig, In my back yard: unlocking the planning system and Tim Leunig, Community Land Auctions: working towards implementation, published by CentreForum. Family Law: A Liberal Agenda for the Future| 37 Family Law: A Liberal Agenda for the Future - Nick Manners When discussing reforms to the Coalition Agreement seek to implement the family law, we need to start to abstain on a vote in following non-exhaustive with a basic re-assessment Parliament, we should set of ideas and principles:- of what ’family’ constitutes do all we can to oppose in the 21st century, and it beyond Parliament. To A) Family Law Reforms what this means for modern favor only the traditional liberalism. Crucially, we (married) family unit over 1. Reform of the law for must pull back from others is deeply unfair and cohabitees traditional assumptions and illiberal, and is, in effect, fully recognise the slow a tax break favouring Legislation should be evolution of the ‘typical’ children in married families brought forward to equalise family over the last half over children in non- the rights of cohabiting century. married family units3. couples so that they share the same privileges Single parent, mixed race, “We should be clear in law as those who are gay and lesbian, multi- that people have a married. Increasingly, generational and step- couples are choosing to parent families form a choice in their private form stable family units growing and diverse range lives and the state without committing to of non-traditional family should not fetter this, marriage. Yet the legal and units, which have rightly fiscal benefits of marriage been encouraged and but simply enable (eg, double ‘nil rate acknowledged by liberals equality and choice bands’ for Inheritance Tax (often in direct contrast for all forms of family” purposes and transferring to the suspicion of some assets between couples on the right)2. However, free of CGT) are denied policy in this area remains The liberal response should to cohabitees. This is in danger of being framed be unambiguously neutral: wholly unfair. When the with only the traditional it is not for the state either Conservatives tried to open family in mind. Liberals must to favor marriage or to up a debate in this area in resist this. undermine it. We should 2009 it was shouted down be clear that people as ‘anti-marriage’4. But in A first simple example have a choice in their reality, it is ’pro-family’, and can be seen in the private lives and the state liberals should pursue it. Conservative party’s should not fetter this, but stated aim to introduce simply enable equality Liberal Democrat peer tax breaks for married and choice for all forms of Lord Lester proposed a couples . ‘Transferable family, while ensuring the backbench Cohabitation tax allowances’ feature in safety of both adults and Bill prior to the last election the Coalition Agreement, children from all forms of aiming to give legal but liberals must be true exploitation and abuse. protection and recognition to our principles; though to unmarried couples. we are honour-bound by A liberal agenda could This proposal should be 38 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead resurrected, with reference autonomy over their lives has been incorporated to the Law Commission’s must be observed here. It into Scottish and Swedish 2007 report5, which should only be restricted divorce law, with neither surmised that: where the rights of the country having seen a other within the relationship great social upheaval as a It is not in anyone’s interests are adversely affected, result. for separating cohabitants and those who are to have to resort to lengthy vulnerable protected. 3. Reform of the child and expensive litigation support agency (CSA) over the application of Any debate in this area principles of trust law draws shrieks from the Almost half (49%) of that are more suited to right wing media, stoking couples divorcing in 2011 commercial relationships. fear that this will make had at least one child Whilst cohabitants have divorce ‘easier’ and aged under 16.8 To help not undertaken the public lead to more relationship care for their children, the commitment of marriage… breakdowns. But this is main method of financial there should be a legal statistically disproven in recourse for a single regime that allows just some of the countries6 who parent is to seek child outcomes to be reached have already adopted maintenance from the quickly and efficiently. this regime. For instance, non-resident parent via the in Australia, where no-fault CSA. Forming a stable and divorce was introduced in loving home as a couple the mid-1970s this change In January 2013, the should be promoted, not has not lead to a higher Department for Work and penalized. If one cohabitee divorce rate (there are Pensions (DWP) reported sacrifices their earning more divorces, but only that around 80% of parents potential and career to because more people are are making maintenance start and care for their getting married!)7. Instead payments to the CSA, up family, they should not find the change has provided from just over 45% in 1995- themselves without any people with more freedom, 969. But we must aspire to protections in law should dignity and choice. safeguard all children. the relationship break down. If a process of mutual The figures also did not consent and separation reveal whether the full 2. “No-fault” divorce leading to divorce were maintenance obligation introduced, childless was being met by all Historically, one party must couples could be the payees. Improving prove that the other is at divorced quickly on the enforcement of the fault for a marriage to be the grounds of ‘mutual payments must be a dissolved. However a liberal consent’. For relationships priority. The same DWP agenda should remove this involving vulnerable report also noted there is antagonistic requirement. parties protections could some £3.8bn of cumulative Instead, we should provide be incorporated; so for unpaid child support which for a regime of consensual couples with children, or had not been collected and mutual separation where one partner was since the CSA’s launch in leading to divorce. People reluctant to separate, 1993. Some of this will be should be free to leave a there could be a period genuinely unrecoverable, marriage succinctly and of “specific separation” to and will have to be written with dignity, irrespective allow for outstanding issues off, but we must work of the reason. The liberal (such as children, finance, harder to alleviate the stance of respecting etc.) to be resolved. Such clear injustices where a one party’s control and a protective balance father (or mother) simply Family Law: A Liberal Agenda for the Future| 39 has not paid. Cost effective before, mothers (both parents in all family units and practical reforms, in single and co-parent the choice to spend more such as reducing delay families) often cannot time with their children. from when CSA payments provide for their children The positive Swedish are taken directly from unless they rejoin the experience11 of improving the payroll of the paying workforce after childbirth. parental leave for fathers parent (Deduction of The cost of living and is a point in case12. Earnings Orders) to housing has risen so Recognition must also be when they are received significantly that mothers made that it is not just in should be considered, may have no choice but the weeks immediately along with even moving to return to work because after birth when parents enforcement directly to their family cannot survive need to spend time with the Inland Revenue. For on a single (or no) income. their children. Other key liberals this intrusion into Liberal values of choice stages during children’s a private individual’s and autonomy must be development should finances is a necessary returned. be recognised, for one as it safeguards example there are post- children from the dangers Families must not be birth parenting classes in of poverty. The Coalition ‘squeezed’ by modern Sweden while the Coalition has now proposed user working culture. Sensible has confirmed a new charges for parents to use remedies, such as legal right for men to take the forthcoming “Child promoting more flexible unpaid leave to attend two Maintenance Service”10 working hours and antenatal - these need careful equalising maternity and reflection, as they are paternity leave and pay, More must also be done to potentially punitive on the must be pursued more allow workers the choice poorest in society. vigorously to allow fathers to care for elderly relatives. to spend more time with With our increasingly “The cost of living their children. The cost ageing population, the and housing has risen and necessary regulation same practices that to enforce this, to which surround childcare should so significantly that some liberals may naturally be adapted to apply to mothers may have no be suspicious, would be wider family care. Provision choice but to return a necessary trade-off to of free childcare by the to work because grant the individual the tax-payer may become a their family cannot freedom to bring up his or necessary burden, where survive on a single (or her family as they please. the state must look to shoulder some additional no) income. Liberal The culture of fitting burden to allow people the values of choice and childcare around choice to look after and autonomy must be work, instead of work care for the elderly. returned.” complementing child and wider family care C) Related Welfare B) Employment and must be explored, with Reforms employers encouraged Working Culture (through innovations such Welfare is changing. The Reforms as using a simple paid Universal Credit – which time off’ scheme instead merges several benefits A modern paradox is of the traditional sick and tax credits into one that whilst women have day/holiday system, or monthly payout intended more rights, choice and more widespread use of to ensure being in work autonomy than ever un-paid leave) to allow 40 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead always pays more than (or even stay-at-home having best start in life. This being on benefits - is dads) who have had subject can be linked in planned to be rolled-out breaks in their employment with schools. For example, nationally by 2017. Key (often to care for their confidential parental liberal principles must children) could risk being counselling (or similar) not be lost in the rush to disadvantaged. Further, if could be more widely improve the system. In a spouse dies prematurely, available through schools creating conditions where annuity purchases can and local authorities, and people are encouraged often only be made for a efforts made to make these to return to work there is single annuity. Thus women chances the norm as soon a danger that a parent’s or men who have taken a as possible. choice to look after their career break on the basis children at an early age they will share in part of In addition, for both will be lost in the race their partner’s pension in cohabitees and married to penalise so called the future could lose out. couples, at the key ’scroungers’. Liberals must continue relationship transitions such their reforms and further as parenthood or buying Forcing the poorest into equalize this area. a house together, couples longer working hours or could take up ‘voluntary increased part-time work “Liberals need to relationship education risks limiting the amount of explain and promote programmes’. These would early age intervention these the importance of good address practical aspects parents can provide, widely family policies with a for young couples such as acknowledged as key to a focus on education debt, tax, parenting issues, child’s early development. etc. Couples of all types Liberals cannot allow only throughout adulthood” would be free to attend those who can afford it the and employ these sessions choice to take extra time as they liked, with the off work to look after their D) Education ‘menu’ flexible to meet the children. The children of the needs of each individual poorest in society should Finally, liberals need to case. not be punished by reforms explain and promote the which leave them with less importance of good family Clearer information parental time at a young policies with a focus on campaigns or wider age. The same is true with education throughout promotion of existing care for the elderly. adulthood. Targeted charitable campaigns14 advice and assistance could encourage fathers to Pensions reform must must be provided to spend more time with their continue to ensure those considering starting children. that women are not a family, contemplating disadvantaged - something marriage, suffering Conclusion the recent reforms to the family breakdown, or state pension piloted by unexpectedly facing Lib Dem pensions minister becoming a single Set out above is just a Steve Webb went some parent. The balancing act flavour of the reforms 13 way to address this. between accusations of to family policies However as the moves the “state knowing best” liberals should consider towards more defined versus individual choice implementing. By contribution schemes must be squared with our promoting freedom, choice take hold (as opposed to duty to ensure children and equality to all types defined benefit) women are not prevented from of family in our modern Family Law: A Liberal Agenda for the Future| 41 society, not only would 7 See ‘Families then and now: 1980-2010’, Australian Institute of core liberal principles and Family Studies The Dignity of Work - Stephen Lloyd MP After 20 years spent in individuals into a cycle It is because some of our business, one of the key of dependency, literally Conservative partners in issues that drove me back trapping them in poverty. Coalition fail to sell it the into politics was the sense way it should be sold. This is of horror at the sheer scale This is what the Coalition not in reality about ‘workers – I would even go as far Government is trying to versus shirkers’ but about as to call it a scourge – of address with the Work our neighbours, our friends, benefit dependency in Programme. Billions our families; in short our our country. By this I do of pounds have been own backyard. It is about not mean those who for invested into it and a a large number of fellow reasons of impairment whole plethora of schemes citizens who for one reason cannot work and need the developed, with payment or another have become support a civilised nation by results a key part of trapped. should provide – a safety the process. Another key net, as Beveridge intended part includes the much Consequently, I believe – but the many hundreds of reviled Work Capability that if we sell it more for thousands of working-age Assessments (WCA) what it really could be – a people in the UK who have where contractors are re- concerted, community ended up stuck on benefits, evaluating the needs of effort by UK plc to help with no clear way out. everyone who has been on people get back on the benefit for a certain length ladder – then it would “It has become all too of time. It is unpopular for a be viewed as something easy to park people, number of reasons and not transformational. Instead, giving them enough only because it’s seen as we have allowed the benefit to survive but unjust. Another reason that scheme to become is less discussed by some traduced by the Daily not much more, and commentators is the whole Mail tendency on the which then imposes reality of dependence right whilst allowing the a framework locking – when someone has left to cry ‘shame’, while individuals into a become utterly reliant at the same time being cycle of dependency, on any form of support, broadly passive if not literally trapping them in meagre or otherwise – comfortable with leaving means that any attempts to so many people and poverty.” change it will, naturally, be their children to a life of met with fear and loathing. permanent dependency. Under the current system I am not sure which I a situation has developed This is perfectly rational. detest more; right-wing, over many years where it Leaving aside that there boneheaded vituperation has become all too easy are some aspects of the of our fellow citizens or left to park people, giving programme itself that I’d wing complacency. On them enough benefit to do differently, why do I balance, frankly, I think the survive but not much more, believe the programme latter is more pernicious as and which then imposes still fails the Liberal test? it can be even harder to a framework locking Essentially it’s down to tone. challenge. If someone is a The Dignity of Work| 43 bully you can stand up to I believe is going in the challenges with the state of him. You can harness your right direction. However, the economy, but there is anger and fight back. But these changes are no narrative in Eastbourne if someone is patronised, being implemented in of ‘shirkers’, or accusations in the way the left are so the face of a fierce, of people being ‘work-shy’; adept at doing, you feel accusatory headwind of instead there is a genuine marginalised or, even either allegedly ‘work-shy collective desire to help get worse, ashamed. In these scroungers’ (right-wingers) people back into work. sorts of instances it does or ‘poor, put-upon victims’ not take long to sink into a who should be left alone on I recommend it and I victim mentality which, as benefit (left-wingers). Both recommend we as liberals social scientists have known stereotypes are despicable face down the noises for years, is the hardest and I believe the Lib Dems off from right and left. If mindset of all to escape should challenge each with we do we will be doing from. the same vigour. a service to those who society (and Labour) had My liberal solution is We should constantly given up on and we will be based around the, to me, confront those in defeating the ugly face of government on the a certain type of Gradgrind obvious understanding inappropriate language conservatism. This way, we that it is often no-one’s that is sometimes used – as a Party can offer what ‘fault’ they have become and I do so regularly on I believe the public really benefit dependent, the Work and Pensions yearns for – a welfare state particularly when we Select Committee – but we that acts as a trampoline, have such a sclerotic should also not shy away and not just a safety net. from those who persist in system of tax and the cruel lie that people on Stephen Lloyd was elected benefits. benefit should just be ‘left MP for Eastbourne and alone’. Since becoming Willingdon in 2010. He is My liberal solution is based the MP for Eastbourne one particularly interested around the, to me, obvious of my priorities has been in the area of disability, understanding that it is jobs and it’s working locally. having been hard of often no-one’s ‘fault’ they Our unemployment figures hearing from childhood have become benefit are down, we’ve secured as well as losing his sight dependent, particularly over 2,000 new apprentices for a period of six months when we have such a since May 2010 and there in his 20s. In Parliament, sclerotic system of tax and is a real sense of a town he serves on the Work benefits. Without a major, working together to help and Pensions Select positive drive to support people find employment. Committee, is Chair of the and encourage people to All Party Parliamentary join the Work Programme I work closely with all the Group (APPG) for Citizens on the basis that we as statutory authorities, the Advice Bureau, and Co- a society really do care local FE college, Job Chair for the APPG on about them, it will be hard Centre Plus, the Chamber Further Education, Skills if not impossible to move of Commerce, training and Lifelong learning. beyond the negative companies, charities, work Find out more at http:// headlines. programme providers stephenlloyd.org.uk/ and the local council, The Coalition are trying all of whom are trying to to tackle the iniquities of do the right thing for our the system with Universal neighbours. It hasn’t been Credit, which in principle easy and we still face real 44 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead Evidence-Based Education Policy. Why the Lib Dems Have it (nearly) Right - Layla Moran As Liberal Democrats we these is the background everything involved in pride ourselves on the of our parents (or more the school environment creation of policy based broadly, family), closely – teaching standards, on values. But we also followed by that of our buildings, disciplinary care that each policy will peers. This is especially procedures, curriculum – yield results and deliver stark in the UK. In fact, in and it could be argued the sort of change we a survey of 52 countries, as a result that, whatever want. While at times this Britain came top in the improvements we make results in policies that can link between background in schooling, will have only seem complex in the eyes and future attainment.1 marginal effects. However, of the general public, 14% of the variation in I disagree fundamentally our considered, long- student performance within with this interpretation. term, evidenced-based school is explained by Even a few percentage approach also distinguishes students’ socio-economic points can make a major us from the other parties; background and, when difference in all sorts of and it is one of the major taking wider family outcomes later in life: reasons why I am a Liberal background into account earning power, health Democrat. like immigration status, this outcomes, life expectancy. rises to over 25%. It is worth doing. But the Getting education right point is, it cannot be done is a fundamental for any More striking is that 77% of in isolation. government. The child is the differences in student father – and mother – to performance between the In order for any policy to the man. The way we best and worst performing have any measurable interact with our teachers, schools is explained by impact on the children peers and community, our differences in socio- most in need, it needs ability to move into further economic background to reach out beyond and higher education, of the students and not the school and address and how we view and features of the schools the deeper issue – the contribute to society themselves.2 This is much backgrounds of the are all influenced by our higher in the UK than in experience in school. It is every other OECD country therefore no surprise that bar Luxembourg. “For any policy to have governments seek to make any measurable impact their mark by strongly Let’s take this one step on the children most in influencing education further. This OECD data policy. suggests that just 23% need, it needs to reach of differences between out beyond the school But let us beware: the way schools in attainment can and address the deeper we experience school is be attributed to features issue - the backgrounds determined not simply of the schooling system of the students by the school itself, but itself. Perhaps 23% seems a themselves.” by wider societal factors. relatively small percentage The most important of given that it encompasses Evidence-Based Education Policy| 45 students themselves. If class suffer. Teachers are background. The detriment we are to substantively adept at differentiating is that by allowing tackle the pervasive issue their teaching to such stratification, the of educational inequality, accommodate the varying evidence suggests it lowers focusing only on school- needs of students but it is attainment overall. wide initiatives will not work. extreme cases that matter This is what makes the Lib particularly. This can be This poses some rather Dems’ proposed ‘Nursery addressed by providing uncomfortable questions. Premium’ – additional extra support for those For example, when the money for children who students either through evidence suggests that need it most – so powerful.3 teaching assistants, pull- increasing school choice It targets resources not just out programmes, or extra for parents increases at the children but also classes. And what is best educational inequality4 their parents and helps for that school should be and, as a result, social untie the knot between determined by the school mobility should we continue background and a child’s itself. to support such policies? prospects. Our constitution seeks to The Lib Dems’ ‘Pupil ‘balance the fundamental As stated before, the Premium’ – additional values of liberty, equality background of those money targeted at pupils and community’. Does who surround us, our eligible for free school liberty equate to parental peers, has almost as meals – is an attempt to choice and is the balance great an impact on our address this by tying money right at the moment? future prospects as the directly to those students An important distinction background of our parents needing most support. This between the consumer – and of course these two is one of the things private market and the market for factors are linked. The education does so well: education is the knock- research suggests that targeting resources at on effect of one family’s this is due to a host of weaker students to bring choice on another’s. The factors including, but not out the best in them. If number of school places limited to: better networks, properly managed and is a relatively inflexible best encapsulated in the accounted for – ie, if the quantity. We could think of adage ‘it’s not what you Pupil Premium is actually choosing a school like vying know but who you know’; spent on those students for a seat on a low cost increased social currency and is not used to fill other airline. There are roughly (the ability to access and holes in a school budget the same number of seats use information to your – then the experience as passengers, but some advantage); and higher from the private sector seats are more desirable emotional security. shows that this policy, than others. Middle introduced by Lib Dems in class families – though Another important factor Government, will work at mechanisms such as being to consider is that when raising overall attainment able to buy houses in the there is a concentration of for all. right catchment areas underachieving students or having the money in a school, this diverts Liberal Democrat to provide transport for resources away from education policy is making schools further away, and others. In a class of 25 if a good progress, but I also being generally better at small number of students believe we have some playing the system – get are taking much of the way to go. Our policies at the equivalent of Priority teacher’s time for either the moment do nothing to Boarding passes. By the academic or behavioural address the stratification time many lower-class reasons, the others in the of schools based on families come to choose 46 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead a school, the effect of the is this: if independent changing. How can we middle class push is fewer education reduces the expect students to make good seats for poorer number of students from good choices for their students. This might be fine well-off backgrounds to future when year upon for a short haul flight, but state schools, which in year the goalposts keep education is for the long turn leads to depressed shifting? It is true that our haul and has lasting effects attainment overall, why do education system needs on future prospects. we still allow these schools improvement, but we need charitable status? The main to be wary of change One solution is to help argument for it is that they that is based solely on cover transport costs to give back through facilities ideology as it can have far even out an aspect of this and assisted places while reaching consequences inequity of access. A policy not costing the taxpayer on life chances of the to be proposed at the anything to educate children who only go 2013 autumn conference those children. But this through the system once. – and one that I hope will could be seen as a false Paying careful attention be passed - would provide economy given that the to the whole body of free transport to school segregation that occurs research (rather than for pupils eligible for free by removing children from picking and choosing school meals (FSM): this is a wealthy families from the statistics to back up one move in the right direction. state system decreases ideological viewpoint) is Over half the students in social mobility and future the best way to ensure we the country have at least job prospects for the rest suggest and implement three schools within a five of the population. This policies that will benefit mile radius of their home.5 argument has been made the maximum number of Another solution I would to the Charity Commission children and we need to propose is to bias choice in in a tribunal in 2011 (which leave some time for these favour of children on FSM rejected it6) based on a policies to work. Teachers while having staggered lack of clear evidence. would also welcome the and supported application However I believe these stability this would afford processes for those families arguments should be as their greatest complaint administered though pursued. Just because the is that more training and the previous stage of proponents for including redesigning, rather than education (ie, nursery for factors such as decreased refining of practice and primary school). social mobility in the courses, encroaches on the assessment of charitable time they have to do what status made a less than they do best, to interact “If independent robust case in this one and bring out the best in education reduces the instance, this should not their students. mean this is the end of the number of students from story. Given the prize of For now, I am content well-off backgrounds to improving social mobility that we are moving in state schools, which in and diversity in schools the right direction and turn leads to depressed I argue this should be a remain confident that our attainment overall, why priority in terms of policy policies will have a positive do we still allow these making for our Party. impact. That said we must also ensure that our party schools charitable Finally, there is a wider continues to strive for a status?” political point about long term, well-grounded the fairness to students set of policies that stand a Another question we in having an education chance of working in the have never addressed system that keeps local context. We must Evidence-Based Education Policy| 47 learn from the international ground Facts’ (Centre for Market success stories but beware and Public Organisation, 2006) Layla Moran is a Physics teacher based in Oxford and the Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate for Oxford West and Abingdon. She holds a BA in Physics from Imperial and an MA in Comparative Education from the Institute of Education. 1 Kirstin Kerr and Mel West (Eds.), ‘Social inequality: can schools nar- row the gap?’ (British Educational Research Association, 2010) A New Mandate for Development Aid: Beyond 0.7% - William Townsend This year the Coalition quantity ahead of quality of State, Andrew Mitchell, Government aims to – how we spend our aid authorised a £16 million achieve a target of budget is just as important aid payment in spite of spending 0.7% of its gross as how much we spend. a 44-page UN report national income (GNI) documenting long-term on aid – up from 0.56% in Using aid money Rwandan support for rebel 2012.1 Development aid is virtuously and effectively groups in neighbouring a central component of takes resources and Democratic Republic our party’s ethos; it reflects requires caution. Many of Congo – to say the kind of country that we of the challenges that nothing of the Rwandan want Britain to be and we the Department for government’s human rights support it not because we International Development violations within its own must, but because we feel (DfID) faces today echo borders.3 With pressure it is right to do so. the findings of a report to spend aid money to published in 1969, entitled avoid more uncomfortable Partners in Development2, surpluses, awkward checks “In our ambition to which warned of tied aid, and balances are likely to become a ‘development private investment and, be swept away in an effort superpower’ we yes, a fixed percentage to hit the 0.7% spending have mistakenly and of GNI being used to target. Our obsession with disingenuously placed alleviate poverty overseas. development targets If aid is poorly directed, should not mean that quantity ahead of we risk stifling long-term a country that is doing quality – how we spend development in recipient well by quantitative our aid budget is just as countries. development indicators, important as how much such as GDP, is able to shirk we spend.” Central to these pervasive overarching liberal and challenges has been democratic values without the struggle to devise a any censure. Through my work with strategy for undertaking international campaigns development in countries When it comes to and, more recently, Liberal with objectionable development, planners in International, I have met governments. The the West simply have very groups who do miraculous Rwandan government, few answers for dealing things with UK aid money, for example, has been in with bad leaders in poor from the UN Refugee receipt of more cash from countries. It is tempting to Agency to people who the UK than almost any circumvent these actors have imported to India other bi-lateral aid partner. by channeling funds water irrigation technology Yet in 2012, perhaps in through non-governmental designed in Israel. Yet in an attempt to avoid organisations (NGOs) our ambition to become a tarnishing what is widely instead. However, ‘development superpower’ seen as a poster-child for creating parallel systems we have mistakenly and international development, of government or disingenuously placed the then DfID Secretary infrastructure will inevitably A New Mandate for Development Aid: Beyond 0.7%| 49 have corrosive effects Other Western countries Dirk Niebel, the German on political systems as have responded to the federal minister of illustrated in Haiti, cynically problem of delivering economic cooperation referred to as the ‘Republic aid to states with bad and development, of NGOs’,4 following the governments in a similarly recognised this point development community’s unhelpful way. Canada, when I met him at a lopsided response to the Netherlands and forum with the Lib Dems’ the 2010 earthquake. Denmark have moved sister party, the Free In Haiti, people looked closer to a model which Democratic Party (FDP), to unaccountable amalgamates their in Berlin recently. Niebel NGOs before elected aid departments with called for a marriage, or politicians to provide their foreign and trade at the very least a civil essential services; with the ministries. Ruling parties partnership, between the best educated Haitians in these countries claim state and private sector, enticed into working for to be responding to acknowledging that international organizations the changing nature of development aid can who were able to offer development, in which facilitate but not replace higher wages, an immobile the private sector and private sector investment. democracy was made economic development virtually inoperative. are seen as key. DfiD must not be afraid to Added to this the risk that pursue a policy that places recipient governments Although a well-regulated certain expectations on will concentrate more on private sector and inward governments which receive mollifying their donors than investment are crucial for UK aid. This may seem doing what is best for their development, there is a controversial. Yet a recent own citizens also increases. limit to what the private study by a university in sector alone can achieve. Virginia,8 which assessed Furthermore, aid Driven by profit, private the dispensing of aid on channeled through NGOs companies are risk- merit, found support in tends to provide essential, averse and have a poor both donor and recipient short-term relief but fails record of listening to local states; the study cited to create the long-term people7 in order to get Liberia under President structures required for micro-economies moving. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf as successful development Investment in entrepreneurs an example of a country and independence from takes time and requires that has done particularly aid. So while DfID is brilliant patience – virtues for which well under the scheme. at leading campaigns global conglomerates Promoting reform before that aim to save 250,000 are not renowned. spending money in this way newborn babies’ lives by Crucially, development has the added advantage 2015,5 or tackling malaria returns must consider of making development in at least ten hot spots social impact as well as aid palatable to the in Africa and Asia,6 it has economic development. electorate. By contrast, made far less strategic Helping more poor people DfID’s attempts at target impact in convincing will require us to tweak setting have, in the past, governments to use the the power relationships been lacking: only 3 of wealth generated from between donors, aid the 18 priority9 countries natural resources, say, to recipients, and the that DfID works with in build hospitals. Sustainable private sector in order to Africa have consistently development requires new build solutions from the met a target, agreed to attitudes that move us perspective of those we in 2001, to spend 15% of beyond issuing bed-nets are trying to help. government money on and drugs. health. 50 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead there are moving upwards, Ethiopia.11 DfID must do more to it still insists that a system of encourage progress ‘mutual accountability’ is Final Thoughts beyond the alleviation of respected. So, ahead of poverty. Steady economic the presidential elections We have come a long growth and the holding of in 2014, Norway has been way from (as we once did) elections are, in isolation, vocal in its intention to sending a country what it not stable indicators of suspend aid, as it has doesn’t need, making them a country that no longer done previously, if the pay for it, and calling it all requires development Kharzi Government fails to ‘aid’. Today, however, as assistance. In this vein, put in place the agreed development programmes DfID has frustrated its own democratic architecture. in other countries are re- ambitions to help the orientating towards self- poor following a decision interest and the Coalition to reduce support for “DfID is likely to lose retains its commitment to numerous Middle Income the confidence of the the 0.7% spending target, Countries, the 86 countries UK taxpayer (and by we must ask ourselves some that fall into the middle- extension its mandate) important questions. income range set by the if it continually World Bank, where the capitulates to the There should be less hurling majority of the world’s buckets of cash at the poor are found. In South sensitivities of bad problem, in true New Africa, for example, where leaders for the sake Labour fashion. Instead, our the ruling ANC’s vote has of meeting arbitrary development assistance never fallen below 60%, funding quotas.” should be informed by the Government is able to the facts. DfID’s budget fund a health service but its is dwarfed by diaspora investment in civil society, We are not admitting remittances (money sent which helps develop a defeat by acknowledging home to developing democratic culture through that there is no prescription countries by expatriates) checks, balances and hidden within the and uncollected revenues transparency, has been development apparatus within developing countries minimal. Consequentially, to transform ‘bad’ – Africa loses twice as South Africa’s government governments into ‘good’ much in illicit financial is mired in accusations governments. UK aid has outflows as it receives in of corruption, nepotism necessarily evolved from international aid. If we and other dodgy deals reactive pledges of aid to truly want to lift people out - in the meantime, half include assisting countries of poverty, we should be of all children live below with weak infrastructure; more focused on working the poverty line.10 South it has transitioned from with governments and local Africa represents a prime helping poor people to agencies to ensure monies opportunity to not only help helping poor governments. are collected, put into the people out of economic However, DfID is likely to state coffers and used to poverty but also empower lose the confidence of sustain development and them politically. the UK taxpayer (and by attract private investment. extension its mandate) if We have seen in countries Contrast the UK’s approach it continually capitulates like Georgia12 how to aid with that of Norway. to the sensitivities of bad technical assistance can Norway is one of the leaders for the sake of transform attitudes towards largest aid contributors to meeting arbitrary funding pernicious practices like Afghanistan and, although quotas, as it previously has corruption and bribery. development indicators done with Meles Zenawi in A New Mandate for Development Aid: Beyond 0.7%| 51 IncR-Dec07.pdf See also: http://www. oecd.org/corruption/acn/georgiaanti-co “DfID was created to 1 Booth, Laura. ‘The O.7% Aid Target’, rruptionachievementsmustbecomesustai put principle before House of Commons Library, June 2013, nable.htm p.8 profit, or, to paraphrase 2 The Report of the Commission on International Development (‘Pearson Roy Jenkins, to first ask Report’) is available at Where Nick Clegg MEP Left Off - Antony Hook The Orange Book1, and failure of New Labour with simple facts: the published almost a decade nerve to offer leadership Commission is smaller than ago, intended to change on and in Europe. Political many local authorities; Liberal Democrat thinking. debate was ‘disfigured the EU is not awash with British party politics was by [the] intellectual money (spending about changing: New Labour’s fundamentalism’ of 1% of GNP as opposed to popularity, following forced and absolutist anti- about 40% by the British the Iraq war, was falling European or pro-European government) EU fraud is from its pre-2003 heights; sides. He observed: not to be ignored, but Conservatives, facing a it is smaller than DWP third successive election • Public anti-Europeanism fraud and the European defeat in 2005, began to was widespread but Parliament scrutinises plot a renewed more liberal shallow: people generally the Commission more presentation of their party. “reflect the sceptical twist intently than most national The Orange Book’s chapter of much of the media and parliaments scrutinise on Europe (‘Europe: a political comment, but... national governments. Liberal future’) was written their opinions [on Europe] by Nick Clegg, who was are essentially fluid”; Clegg called for Liberal in transition from East • People are more positive Democrats to avoid Midlands MEP to, after about Europe when black-and-white terms of dedicated campaigning, reminded of the basic debate and to ‘show that Sheffield Hallam MP. premise (or promise) of being pro-European is Given that he, the Liberal the EU that countries are compatible with legitimate Democrats and the more effective together. doubts’. He wrote that political landscape were Pooling decisions extends ‘pro-Europeans must be changing, Clegg’s analysis the range of policy creative, innovative and of the political situation options and, thereby, our bold in proposing reforms’ of Britain, Europe and the sovereignty; and remind people that Liberal Democrats remains • Much of the public Liberal Democrats have remarkably apposite. The wrongly believe that long advocated a ‘more strategy Nick Clegg argued Liberal Democrat support open, decentralised and for offers a good direction for Europe equates to accountable’ Europe. for the party’s next 10 defending everything years. about the EU or all of its Clegg sought to policies; exorcise the notion that “Disfigured by Intellectual • Confusion and lack the party should hide from fundamentalism” of familiarity with debating Europe. Liberal Europe ought not to be Democrats needed to Nick Clegg summed up the insurmountable. Brussels engage with, and make British debate about Europe is no more complex than our case on, Europe. as polarised- laden with Westminster or Washington; vitriol and rigid wording. The • Much anti-European public had been subjected feeling is based on myths to relentless misinformation that need to be corrected Where Nick Clegg MEP Left Off| 53 Clegg’s Positive Case for prospect of stability. time hours) should be left to Europe member states themselves. Liberal Democrats should The EU needed, he argued, Clegg was specific about ‘attack the unaccountable to face up to economic the case that Liberal nature of the Council’ and underperformance, and Democrats needed to ‘encourage scepticism focus more on Europe’s relentlessly put across to the to the Commission’. He shared international issues public: argued that, such as: 1. The EU does not decide The Commission is a • Terrorism; things for us. We decide remarkably effective • Failed states; and things in the EU with others. organisation... [an] engine • Relations with Islamic 2. If we don’t like what the room of integration, countries. EU does we should blame counter-balancing... ourselves. national governments. Clegg’s chapter closed 3. Ministers get away with with a call to arms: a lot behind closed doors. But, he observed, too much With persistence and We need to hold them to power was concentrated in clarity such a Liberal vision account. the Commission and Liberal will emerge as the only 4. The EU bureaucracy is Democrats must advocate positive, compelling vision tiny. accountable government. for Britain’s wholehearted 5. The EU budget is 1% of The ‘absurd idea’ that commitment to the the EU economy. the EU must constantly European vocation, 6. We need stronger accrue new powers to responding to the real parliaments at both Brussels retain momentum must be needs of Britain and Europe and Westminster. rejected. Clegg’s rule was in the early decades of the 7. The UK has more that EU involvement must twenty-first century. influence abroad as a be limited to where cross- leader of the EU. border action can clearly “Positive advocacy help. That test should cause The Liberal Democrat no lack of work for the EU for Britain in Europe agenda for Europe as it would include: sharpened by a liberal needed to involve programme for EU ‘stopping perpetual • Lifting barriers to free flow reform, as outlined revolution’, ’make all of goods, services, capital by Nick Clegg in The power accountable’ and and people; Orange Book, should ‘streamline EU power’. • Environmental policy; When The Orange Book • Anti-monopoly regulation; remain the strategic was published, the draft • Asylum and immigration; ethos of the Liberal EU Constitution (which was • Co-ordination of foreign Democrats over the adapted into the Lisbon policy; next 10 years.” Treaty) was being debated • Single commercial policy across Europe. Clegg where we negotiate as wrote, bloc with the other great Advocacy for our country’s blocs of the world; place in Europe, with a Liberal Democrats should • Promoting cross-border liberal programme for EU embrace this acrimonious infrastructure. reform, as outlined by Nick debate on the constitution Clegg in The Orange Book, as an opportunity to Clegg was clear about should remain the Liberal explain the limits to EU what work the EU could Democrats strategic ethos action... checks and cut: agriculture and social over the next 10 years. balances... and the policy (such as working This is the right course 54 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead for Liberal Democrats. It is not just a theme for are not only in curing represents the best policy the century but also unemployment at home choice in the interests the urgent issue of this but throughout Europe. of people in Britain. It moment. Europe is The other EU states are is sensible in the party presently in economic crisis. Britain’s biggest market political electoral contest. Joblessness, particularly for exports of goods and among the young, is services: almost half of UK The ‘disfigured’ and high across Europe. As goods exports are to the ‘absolutist’ discourse that of May 2013, average EU. Unemployment in other Nick Clegg described in unemployment across states limits their ability to 2004 persists. We must deal the EU was about 12%, buy UK exports. with the exigencies of a 24- with Greece and Spain hour news society in which reaching 25%, Britain It is beyond the scope of the next political horizon at about 7% and every this chapter to provide a always feels close, in which member state except detailed prescription for ‘speed kills’, and sounding Austria being over 5%. Europe’s economy but right too often beats being Among young people, in broad terms Liberal right. But we should, as a problems are severe: youth Democrats should push for: party of values, always unemployment in 20 of the • Completion of the single make time to consider 28 states2 is above 20%, market, particularly for the the long-term. A century including in Britain.3 digital economy and the from now a fundamental services sector; question for historians will No society can prosper • Bi-lateral trade be ‘to what extent did the with so high a proportion agreements between nation states of Europe of healthy adults not the EU and other parts work together over the in productive work. of the world, such as the twenty-first century?’ The The consequences of proposed Transatlantic challenges of this century unemployment go beyond Trade and Investment will require us to work pure economic loss. It Partnership5 treaty between together. Those challenges means that many more the EU and US, to open include terrorism, climate people will fail to fulfil more markets for our change, immigration, and their human potential industries; taxation in a globalised and will not lead happy • Encouragement of more economy. The next century lives. Mental and physical mobility among British also bring opportunities health suffer. Families people for study or work; that can best be fulfilled if and community bonds • Assistance for more British we work together: pushing break down. Mass small- and medium-sized medical research forward unemployment leaves businesses to exploit their to cure cancer and other many of those affected right to sell throughout the diseases, the exploration of with a sense of alienation single market; space, and the elimination from society and can • Direct EU funds towards of conflict, hunger, and undermine acceptance innovation and research non-democratic political of the democratic political that will provide economic systems. If we work together system. advantage; do so then we, and the • Sounder economies values we broadly share in To borrow Lloyd George’s in southern European Europe, will prosper. If we phrase ‘we must conquer states where deficits were fail do so the future will be unemployment’4 in Europe. previously dealt with by less happy. British politicians have devaluation but where done little to explain to the fiscal discipline is required The need for co-operation public that our interests to remain in the Euro and Where Nick Clegg MEP Left Off| 55 to enjoy the advantages should: So also with security of the single currency (eg, • Invite businesses in our threats: serious crime and lower interest rates and no constituencies to inform terrorism. Both are cross- exchange risk to business). us of regulations that are border and require cross- problematic and if those border arrangements Liberal Democrats should concerns are well-founded to fight them, including be bold advocates for we should push for their regarding information Britain remaining within the repeal or modification; sharing between police European Union because • Fight to ensure the EU and greater mutual of the economic benefits. budget is well spent - not assistance. There have Three and a half million wasted and not excessive; been real successes in jobs in Britain are linked and recent years. Data on (directly or indirectly) to our • Push for openness and previous convictions are membership of the EU and competitiveness against shared in Europe. This access to the single market. other parties or member means that, when a local If we left no-one says state governments who Magistrates’ Court in these jobs would be lost from time to time are England considers bail for overnight but there would inclined to protectionism. someone, they will know be a steady trickle away. whether the defendant has The free movement of a record of serious crime, people, capital, ideas and “the environment perhaps of skipping bail, in information enables the another member state. But modern economy to work and security are vital there is much to do. Huge best. To the extent that areas where co- legal obstacles remain, regulation is legitimately operation is essential for example, to a British needed (for example to police officer interviewing a ensure competition or to protect the witness who happens to be basic product safety) it is happiness, peace in another member state. more efficient to agree and prosperity of Identification of criminal common regulations across or terrorist assets (so they the EU. After all, which citizens.” can be seized or restored manufacturer would want to victims of crime) remains to produce 28 different Both the environment and very difficult across state versions to comply with 28 security are vital areas borders. different member states’ where co-operation is sets of rules? Indeed, the essential to protect the On the environment regulations adopted in happiness, peace and and security, as with Europe frequently become prosperity of citizens. It is the economy, Liberal the standard in other axiomatic that pollution Democrat have a great continents. We should want does not stop at member story to tell about how British representatives to be state borders. We must our member states can active in deciding those agree, and visibly together tackle the rules in the EU. enforce, shared rules to challenges we face. cut pollution. We need There is a massive political But as Nick Clegg argued Europe’s combined benefit from being open in The Orange Book, while diplomatic weight to and proud about Liberal we advocate Britain’s persuade the US, China, Democrat belief in Europe, continuing role in Europe, Russia, India and others tempered by an agenda we should be critical when to take environmental for reform. It will win us the EU is wrong and call for protection seriously. more votes: change. Liberal Democrats 56 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead 1. Most polls currently show Democrats are united in great actor may be able that British public opinion favour of membership to persuade the public is roughly evenly split and we are the only main he believes something between those in favour party for whom support for that he does not believe and those against the UK’s membership is part of our but neither counsel nor continuing membership core identity. Even if Liberal politicians are (or should of the EU. The pro-EU vote Democrats were to win be) great actors. is typically 45-49%, which only half the votes of the We should be the original is remarkable given the pro-European population pro-European reformers relentless negativity of the that would be more Liberal rather than another British press towards the Democrat votes than derivative Eurosceptic EU. The Eurosceptic half were won in 2010 or in any voice. of the population has a election since. menu of parties to support: The approach of UKIP which wants exit; the 2. The public respect ‘persistence and clarity’ Tories, many of whose authenticity. People that Nick Clegg called MPs openly want exit and are better than many for all those years ago will whose leadership certainly politicians think they are at require: will put membership at risk; detecting when someone or Labour, in which neither says what they believe – • MEPs to make their work Blairite nor ‘Old Labour’ and people respect it. A as directly and visibly wings of the party are fully commonly heard sentiment relevant as possible to the reconciled to a Europe of about Margaret Thatcher lives of their constituents at openness, civil rights and was that people saw that the local level; free trade. she knew what she stood • Local parties to for, they respected that communicate this work “Liberal Democrats and many voted for it. to people through local Many people can watch a campaigning, with an can justifiably news report with opposing emphasis on jobs, the present ourselves as political figures giving rival environment and security; the natural choice views and will not really • Our MPs and know which is right. But if spokespeople in the media for the half of the one speaks more clearly to unashamedly put the population that than the other and sounds liberal and pro-European believes in Europe.” authentic in their beliefs, case; people will find that person • The permanent personal more attractive. commitment and example Liberal Democrats can of the party leader in doing justifiably present ourselves By analogy, within my so. as the natural choice for profession (as a barrister the half of the population specialising in jury trials) All of our opponents’ that believes in Europe. there is considerable belief claims on, for example, This will very often be that jurors are influenced by EU spending, immigration, people who share our whether they think counsel human rights, and red tape outlook on the economy, believes the case he or have good answers. The environment and security. she is arguing, as opposed party must put in place the Liberal Democrats are to merely following their research and information the only one of the three professional ethical duty apparatus to equip main parties who do not to put their client’s case as local Liberal Democrat have a significant anti- best they can regardless of campaigners with the EU wing. Only Liberal their own view about it. A points they need to put Where Nick Clegg MEP Left Off| 57 our case and rebut our that would be deeply opponent’s assertions.6 damaging to investment in the UK, jobs and the public Conclusion A Referendum interest. Co-operation through the Nick Clegg argued in the There is one referendum Europe Union is young Orange Book we should we could have now. in the context of our welcome a referendum on Conservative Home continent’s too often un- the Constitutional Treaty for Secretary Theresa May has cooperative, long history. It Europe as a chance to put recently said the UK will not is our new frontier. It holds forward a Liberal position of participate in the creation out our best hopes for the being in favour of Europe of a European Public future. It involves not only with demands for reform. Prosecutor (EPP), which can a set of promises but a set It was a pity that when the and will go ahead with nine of challenges, requiring Constitution was modified or more member states bravery of political leaders into the Lisbon Treaty the involved. Ms May has given to ask people wary of party abandoned that no reason for her position change to meet these position. other than it would be a challenges. The whole ’transfer of sovereignty’.7 Liberal Democrat party It is likely that before the Given that the EPP could must commit itself to end of the decade a only bring cases in member provide the persistence further Treaty will bring states’ own courts, will be and clarity needed for such forward reforms of Europe. restricted to prosecuting a Liberal vision of Britain at It may well trigger a fraud against EU funds, and the centre of ever closer referendum under the that in England and Wales co-operation to take hold European Union Act any person or organisation and meet the genuine 2011 (which requires can bring a prosecution needs of the public. a referendum on any this is an odd claim that movement of power from Ms May makes. There is Antony Hook works as a Westminster to Brussels) in a counter-argument to barrister and is Vice-Chair the next parliament. This Theresa May that the EPP of the South East England will give both supporters would be a valuable step Liberal Democrats. He and opponents of the in the fight against cross- has stood for Parliament European Union a chance border crime. The European twice, contested the to air their competing Union Act 2011 specifically 2009 European elections, visions for the future. It may provides for a referendum and will be candidate for well be in effect, as Nick on UK participation in the the seat currently held Clegg says he anticipates EPP. by Sharon Bowles MEP it will be, a referendum at the 2014 European on the UK’s continued Liberal Democrats should elections. Visit http://www. membership; indeed this is not accept Ms May’s antonyhook.com/ or on to be recommended at the isolationism and should twitter: @antonyhook Liberal Democrats’ autumn call for the referendum 2013 conference. provided for in the Act. I believe Liberal Democrat 1 The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism, Eds David Laws and Paul An earlier referendum on arguments – that we Marshall (Profile Books, 2004) membership, in 2014 or need action to combat 2 Including Croatia which joined the European Union in July 2013. 2015 as some have urged, cross-border crime – 3 All figures from ‘Taking Europe’s would cause economic would prevail in such a pulse’, The Economist, 18 July 2013 4 ‘We can conquer unemployment’ was the title of the Liberal Party policy document for the 1929 General Election considered by many as bold plan that would have done more to push back the depression than the policies of non-Liberal governments in the 1930s. See < http://www.britainforpeace.org/ Unemployment%20Lloyd%20George.pdf> [Accessed 17 August 2013] 5 See http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/ in-focus/ttip/ [Accessed 17 August 2013] 6 The websites of our MEPs, not least the author’s running mate in 2014, Catherine Bearder MEP, are good sources for this information. See http://bearder.eu/en/ page/euromyths [accessed 17 August 2013] 7 ‘Theresa May boots out new plan for EU prosecutor’, The Daily Telegraph, 14 July 2013 Bleeding Heart Libertarianism - Sam Bowman The question they ask is and Milton Friedman — this: knowing what we do believed in property rights Suppose you wanted the about markets and the protections as tools to state to do everything in problems with state action improve people’s welfare, its power to improve the – that state failure is just not as ends in themselves. welfare and opportunities as (indeed, sometimes In particular, Hayek and of the poor, but were more) real and dangerous Friedman were both willing extremely sceptical as market failure, that to concede numerous about its ability to do so knowledge is limited so areas of policy where effectively. This mixture of well-meant state actions property rights violations traditionally ‘left-wing’ ends often have very harmful were justified. with traditionally ‘right- unintended consequences, wing’ means to achieving and that the state can What would a ‘political them is a growing cocktail become captured by economy’ of Bleeding among many classical special interest groups and Heart Libertarianism look liberals and libertarians, act in ways that are not in like if BHLs focused their variously described the best interests of society efforts on a few policies as ‘liberaltarians’, as a whole – how can we that would deliver the ‘Rawlsekians’ (followers design our institutions so best results for the poor? of both John Rawls and that they best improve the Pursuing reform in areas FA Hayek) and, most welfare of the poor? like immigration policy popularly, as ‘Bleeding and welfare for the rich, Heart Libertarians’. Bleeding Heart and focusing on the Libertarianism is a new state’s regulatory activities term for an old idea, one in general, is far more “Bleeding Heart that has been at the important than opposing Libertarians combine core of classical liberal the sort of redistribution concern for the poor thought since Adam of wealth carried out Smith. Indeed, the most in most modern social with scepticism of common perception of democratic states. The the state. It is a new what defines libertarians – a upshot of a new focus on term for an old idea, belief that the protection these ‘BHL’ topics would of private property rights be that traditional alliances one that has been at is all that matters – only between libertarians the core of classical really describes followers and conservatives would liberal thought since of Murray Rothbard and become defunct, as BHLs Ayn Rand (the latter of would have as much Adam Smith.” whom explicitly rejected common ground with the the label ‘libertarian’). political left as with the Bleeding Heart Libertarians, Many of the most well political right. or BHLs for short, combine known libertarian thinkers concern for the poor with — FA Hayek, Ludwig von The BHLs’ preoccupation scepticism of the state. Mises, James Buchanan with the welfare of the poor 60 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead suggests that traditional debate in the direction accrue to the poorest free market areas of we want, giving cover to people in the world. As interest like tax and allow others to take more Clemens has pointed out, redistribution become less ‘moderate’ positions closer a taxi driver working in important or even lose their to us. Political change New York City can create importance altogether. requires ideas first. an order of magnitude Virtually nobody would more wealth than if she dispute that very high I suggest that three areas of was doing the same job redistributive taxes can policy where liberalisation in Addis Ababa. Matthew be harmful to the poor would have a profoundly Yglesias points out that by discouraging capital positive impact for the poor low-skilled immigrants are accumulation and thus are: actually particularly good long-term growth which, for the poor, because compounded over time, 1. Immigration they typically provide can lead to much less 2. Drugs legalisation goods and services that extra wealth creation at all 3. Modern mercantilism are directly consumed levels of society than would (aka corporate welfare) by other poor people, otherwise have taken reducing prices for them.3 place. However, this does Some degree of libertarian The idea that immigrants not imply that the optimal reforms in each of these ‘steal’ native jobs is untrue rate of redistribution is areas would mean a – they may displace native zero. Just as too much massive improvement workers but the extra redistribution has costs, too in people’s lives. The demand they generate little wealth redistribution founder of the BHL blog1, creates other jobs. There might as well. Matt Zwolinski, has also are other objections to suggested these areas, as immigration but none for But there is no shortage well as militarism (which which tight immigration of people who can tell us may be less relevant in the controls are the best either of these things. There British context). solution. The welfare are several ‘low-hanging benefits are so enormous, fruit’ policies that would do Immigration is probably the and accrue to such poor the most good for the poor most important policy issue people, that arguments without requiring a major in the world today. A study for controls should face an change in governance by Michael Clemens2 of extremely high burden of in general and which existing economic literature proof. are underemphasised by that tries to estimate global libertarians and the political GDP benefits from freer “Our drug laws left alike. trade compared to freer migration dramatically can reasonably be Although these policies illustrates the importance of described as the most should be achievable on immigration reform to the anti-poor domestic their own – that is, without poor. Removing all barriers legislation that we dismantling the entire to trade, it is estimated, have, and are part of a apparatus of the state could increase global GDP global network of laws (however appealing that by between 0.3% and 4.1%. may be) – they should also Removing all barriers to that indirectly cause not be heavily determined migration could increase tens of thousands of by what currently seems global GDP by between people to be killed politically achievable. 67% and 147.3%. every year.” Taking the ‘extreme’ position in a debate can That staggering extra help move the window of wealth would in large part Bleeding Heart Libertarianism| 61 Drugs legalisation is often cannot expect widespread to the effect they have dismissed as a middle liberalisation until a large on the value of existing class hobby-horse. In country takes the first step. properties. By raising the fact, our drug laws can That country could be costs of construction, fewer reasonably be described Britain. houses are built and the as the most anti-poor price of existing stock is domestic legislation that Many free marketeers and protected. For people who we have, and are part of economic leftists already own their homes, this is very a global network of laws share much common attractive. For people who that indirectly cause tens ground over corporate rent – which includes many, of thousands of people to welfare. Obviously, bank if not most, of the country’s be killed every year. In the bailouts are a transfer of poorest – this means that UK as in the US, drug laws wealth from the poor to the price of housing has disproportionately affect the rich and a dangerous risen far beyond what they black people: according distortion of market can manage. to the Transform Drug incentives – in the words Policy Foundation, “there of former chief executive Other middle class are a higher proportion of Eastern Airlines, Frank subsidies include universal of black inmates on drug Borman, capitalism without healthcare and education, offence charges (28%) bankruptcy is like religion but I do not expect people compared to white (13%). without hell. Sweden’s who are not already This is despite the black experience in the early sympathetic to free market community having a per- 1990s points to a ‘bail-in’ ideas to change their mind capita level of drug use strategy for letting banks about these issues. If a lower than whites.”4 Crime, fail that avoids taxpayers cross-ideological consensus which affects poor areas picking up the bill.7 And could be forged over issues most badly, is in large part there are many other more like planning and bailouts driven by drug addicts’ subtle forms of corporate for private businesses, the compulsion to fund their welfare. The modern-day absurdity of poor people habit – over half of property equivalents of medieval shouldering the burden of crimes are driven by drug guilds are the professional welfare for the rich could use, according to the lobby groups that restrict be ended. The ‘modern Number 10 Strategy Unit, the supply of, say, lawyers mercantilism’ of corporate including 80% of domestic or taxi drivers through welfare and middle class burglaries.5 professional licensure, subsidies is as much of a protecting their own threat to today’s poor as its Outside Britain, the impact incomes; or that lobby for predecessor was in Adam of drug prohibition is much government subsidies, as Smith’s day. worse. Drug wars in Mexico farmers’ groups do. have killed 60,000 people Lots of other things matter since 2006, according to But just as bad are the too, of course. School the BBC6, and extremely middle classes who use choice and monetary poor countries like their voting power to reform are both critically Guinea-Bissau have been support policies that important to the poor. brutalised by international protect their wealth at In particular, the Bank drug cartels. These cartels the expense of the poor. of England adopting a owe their existence to Although planning laws nominal GDP targeting drugs prohibition in the are typically justified in regime – as advocated by Western world. The tide terms of ‘protecting the my Adam Smith Institute seems to be changing in countryside’ and other colleague Scott Sumner8 the United States towards forms of conservation, – would help to end some legalisation, but we they owe their popularity the current economic 62 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead stagnation and avoid more bundle of policies they enough to reject all wealth demand-led recessions in want from one another. redistribution. While I am the future. You need not believe extremely confident about in abolishing the NHS the benefits of liberalising Most of the policies I have to accept libertarian planning to allow new outlined are uncontroversial arguments about school homes to be constructed in positions in orthodox choice. I am sceptical the UK, I feel less confident libertarian dogma, but about claims that (for about saying that all what may be new is the example) employment redistribution is harmful. suggestion that these issues deregulation will impoverish matter far more than do the poor, but I cannot So I propose a compromise: things like tax and overall dismiss them out of hand. a ‘libertarian welfarism’. government spending. Similarly, people on the left This might see us reform What is remarkable is how cannot dismiss the market tax credits and the welfare many of these issues are liberal critique of social system into a combination more typically associated democracy out of hand. of universal basic income with left-wing political Regulations do indeed and a ’negative income stances than right-wing impose costs and often tax’ that acts as a top- ones. Could it be that some hurt the people they are up to people’s wages, of the most important issues designed to help. adjusted to give a little for libertarians are the ones more to people in low- about which we agree with So I suggest that libertarians income jobs and the the hitherto hated left? concerned with the unemployed. The details plight of the poor should of this approach to Such an overlap should not abandon their opposition income redistribution be as surprising as it might to wealth redistribution are not important for initially seem. Nor is it to be in practice and focus now: what matters is the feared. Murray Rothbard’s instead on the regulatory idea of a simple, cash- fears about losing ‘the state, where we have a based redistributive tight-assed majority’ by much greater degree of mechanism. I find myself associating with ‘free spirits’ certainty about the harm very comfortable with this on the left were misplaced caused. For libertarians kind of redistribution; other – libertarianism never has who wonder if they libertarians will be less so. and never will command are BHLs, the question But perhaps they could a majority of the political might be: If libertarian accept it as the cost they tight-asses. Its best hope is institutions existed and have to pay to persuade to shape other ideologies serious, significant poverty others about the other, in ways that bring out persisted, would state much more important, the best in them: giving action be justified in acting things they have to say. conservatives a taste for to relieve at least some of free enterprise. Or, we may that suffering, if we had We should not forget that hope, giving leftists a taste a pretty good reason for political reform is like a for getting the government thinking that that action game of Jenga: removing off poor people’s backs. would work? the redistributive supports for the poor before we But for this to work, I think that it would, and remove the legislative libertarians must change if you have a serious contributors to their poverty their rhetoric and, to some commitment to welfare will simply cause harm (and extent, their minds. They so should you. The only make it harder to dismantle should be humble about problem should be an what we really do want to the policies they propose, empirical one, which get rid of). and disaggregate the I cannot say is strong Bleeding Heart Liberalism| 63 the Sidewalk?’ (Journal of Economic “Political reform Perspectives, v.25, no.3, Summer 2011) http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/ is like a game of pdfplus/10.1257/jep.25.3.83 [Accessed 9th August 2013] Jenga: removing the 3 http://www.slate.com/blogs/ moneybox/2013/04/22/immigration_ redistributive supports raises_american_income.html for the poor before we 4 Transform Drug Policy Foundation, ‘Drugs offenders, drugs related remove the legislative offending and the prison population’ Sam Bowman is Research Director at the Adam Smith Institute. He was voted ‘Liberal Voice of the Year 2013’ by readers of Liberal Democrat Voice. 1 Matt Zwolinski, ‘What’s Important vs. What’s Interesting’ (15 March, 2001) Is Drug Prohibition Liberal? - Adam Corlett The Liberal Democrats the answers are rarely the drugs trade may be have clear views on many simple, and popular welcome. Prohibition of an civil liberty issues. To lead perception usually a poor entire trade, however, can the debate, we must also guide. As a party, we must by no means be called craft a consistent and ensure our policies and economically liberal. Drugs recognisable position on perceptions are informed policy could be seen as drug policy and public by scientific research, and a good example of how health more broadly. avoid being biased by government restrictions can Alongside debates around headline-grabbing, non- - in this case deliberately - measurable costs and representative extremes. turn potentially dirt-cheap benefits, liberals must also We must also avoid crops and chemicals ask what value - if any - we conflating the intrinsic into ultra-profitable should place on ‘freedom’. harms of drug use with commodities. We see the harms added by how disputes are resolved Drug prohibition certainly prohibition. without access to a strong comes with some legal system; how the practical harms. It creates But here I want to address a black market inexorably a lucrative and violent separate question that gets fills gaps between supply criminal trade; makes too little political attention and demand; and even drugs more dangerous; where prohibited drugs are how import quotas and impedes research and concerned: is there an issue a lack of competition medical use; ostracises of freedom? What does it harm the legal supply of users; exposes them to mean for drugs policy to essential opiates to health criminals and harder drugs; have freedom and liberty in services.1 In contrast to the drives acquisitive crime our party’s constitution, and default view of economic and prostitution through to use On Liberty as the liberals, prohibition assumes high prices for dependent party president’s symbol that individuals are not users; attracts the poorest of office? Below, I first best placed (even with into dealing; deliberately compare drug prohibition assistance) to decide punishes through sentences to the four corners of what goods they need. and criminal records; and liberalism. As John Stuart Behaviour is distorted, but costs taxpayers money. Mill (and Harriet Taylor Mill) not necessarily for the The real debate is whether knew, these liberal values better. Chemists design these and other harms are are not necessarily ends in drugs to get around the outweighed by benefits. themselves. Rather, they letter of the law, suppliers are short and long-term favour products that are Another battleground is in routes to maximising utility. easy to smuggle, and users the objective assessment may be nudged towards and comparison of drug Economic, political and legal (but possibly more harms, and indeed the social liberalism harmful) drugs. Unless riskiness of other activities. policy is smart, these Just how risky an activity For Mexican cartels and economically inefficient is may affect how it UK dealers, the lack of distortions often work to should be treated, but any real state power over make people less safe. Is Drug Prohibition Liberal| 65 empowering and escapist substances or “Experimentation supporting individuals activities. and diversity are where necessary. But for adults, at least, this must not Personal liberalism key not just for be in opposition to personal capitalism and liberty. We must strive to Most important of all here individuals, but also ensure people have the is personal liberalism. Mill education, resources and saw On Liberty - which for policy making.” safety net to achieve their argued against alcohol goals, but that does not and opium prohibition - mean choosing those as being about a ‘single Experimentation and goals for them and taking truth’: ‘the importance, diversity are key not just for away decisions. What’s to man and society, capitalism and individuals, more, as I argued at of a large variety in but also for policy making. the Liberal Democrats’ types of character, and Drug prohibitions exist Autumn Conference of giving full freedom to at an international level, 2011, problematic drug human nature to expand with little room within the use can often be laid at itself in innumerable and law for nations - let alone the doorstep of failures conflicting directions.’2 smaller units - to decide elsewhere in government what alternatives are better or society. Employment, Drug prohibition takes for them. There are good child and family services, away freedoms, doing reasons for coordination health, education, housing long-term harm to society of drugs trade policies, and community links are as well as short-term but if we want evidence- the best way to prevent individual harm through supported policy and to problematic drug use. removal of choice and find the best solutions, we Those of us concerned the poisoning of the must let countries generate about social liberalism relationship between evidence. Those who should therefore be wary these citizens and their emphasise localism or of efforts to demonise own government and parliamentary sovereignty particular chemicals as police force. More broadly, must consider the long- scapegoats for failings in Liberal Democrats should outdated conventions and these areas - especially oppose the very concept unaccountable watchdogs when there will never be of ‘victimless crimes’. We that govern global drug a shortage of alternative must similarly question the policy. While fighting the argument that certain many serious human rights “Mill saw On Liberty - activities might in some abuses committed around which argued against cases, ultimately lead the world in the war on alcohol and opium to harm to another and drugs, British foreign policy should therefore not be must not discourage new prohibition - as being considered victimless approaches in South about a ‘single truth’: (the possession of certain America, Europe and the ‘the importance, to weapons may be a USA. Within the UK, we must man and society of a legitimate exception, continue to make use of large variety in types of given how direct their devolution to experiment character, and of giving relationship to physical with policy, and let local harm). As Mill noted, this authorities do the same. full freedom to human can lead to almost any nature to expand itself activity - or thought - being Social liberalism gives in innumerable and banned, with unreasonably the state a significant conflicting directions.’” long chains of events role to play in enabling, between the ‘crime’ and 66 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead the potential damage we immigrant culture and of important part of human ultimately wish to avert. ‘the other’. Enforcement culture, is secondary. Each new crime in turn often doubles down on this More importantly, it is opens up new areas of discrimination, with ethnic hard to see how defining behaviour to the creeping minorities and poorer areas some activities amongst expanse of the law, not disproportionately targeted consenting adults as least when the crime may and prosecuted by the intrinsically immoral simply be to do something criminal justice system.4 can any more fit with that others may copy. In our party’s ethos than particular, one oft-implied Within personal liberty, we prohibiting certain books justification for prohibition is might argue especially or homosexuality. It would not that you risk your own for ‘cognitive liberty’: be difficult also to draw health but that children sovereignty over one’s own a line between moral (teenagers) may copy you mind.5 This may be an issue and immoral substances and so risk their health. The that rises in importance, when there is such a population does not consist with drugs to boost mental wide range of ‘drugs’ entirely of consenting performance and digital and circumstances adults, but this cannot technology that might do (including, for example, be used to undermine the same. The cognitive amphetamines prescribed all liberal arguments of liberty case is particularly to air force pilots). informed freedom, nor striking if we consider the to manipulate all adult reverse. If the government Instead, it might be behaviour for the purpose were to mandate the argued that addiction of ‘sending messages’ to taking of particular itself represents a loss of today’s children. chemicals to make us liberty, to be prevented better citizens, that would by whatever means. But The removal of freedoms likely be seen by liberals as we first need to ask why becomes even more one of the worst possible addiction should be such worrisome if our drug laws transgressions of liberty. a concern. Is nicotine are not objectively-based. But it is no better to insist addiction wrong in itself, If activities are legal or that we each stick to our or only insofar as smoking illegal based not on their natural mental states, with is harmful to long-term harms and benefits but on the government proscribing health? Is heroin addiction how many voters use them, any recreational use only an issue if obtaining this is simply a tyranny of that might harm worker supply interferes with the majority, which must productivity, or even day-to-day life? Does our be opposed by a party functional use that might concern extend to non- committed to ‘fostering improve it (caffeine chemical addiction, and is diversity’ (though note that excepted). the severity of withdrawal the ‘minority’ using illicit key? But even if these drugs each year totals 200 Addiction and evil questions lead us to a million or more worldwide3). liberal argument against Nor should freedoms be An alternative to the addictive drugs (only), we given out or taken away utilitarian and liberal view must consider the social based on tradition and may be that drug use is liberal point above, as cultural history, and this is simply ‘evil’ or intrinsically well as asking whether particularly the case when immoral - perhaps on personal liberalism should choices of drug use can be religious grounds. Whether prevent adults - no matter based on class or ethnic this opposition should be how well informed - from background. Indeed, drug at any cost, or ignore (risking) ‘creating rocks prohibitions have long millennia of experience they cannot lift’. The role of been related to fear of of drug use as an the state in helping citizens Is Drug Prohibition Liberal| 67 overcome bad habits of plants, for example. Are the loss of liberty without all kinds is discussed further objections to ‘snooping’ noticing or caring about below, but on the whole it entirely practical ones, or those we have already would be disproportionate, are there liberal principles lost. Relatively minor new for example, to say that that may also be relevant restrictions in some areas because some people to public health? Has the (such as plain cigarette become addicted to fear of an Orwellian police packaging) are deemed alcohol that alcohol state led us to place too illiberal, yet proposals possession must be much attention on how tougher than 1920s-style universally criminalised. the government protects alcohol prohibition us from violent crime and (such as Portuguese “It is odd that liberals not enough on how it ‘decriminalisation’) are tries to protect us from perceived as a liberal are so vocal about ourselves? Typically, the option when moving in the individual freedom first government powers opposite policy direction on issues such as over drug use arose during with other drugs. communications World War I, and have data, CCTV and DNA expanded within the Home However, in public health, databases, but much Office ever since. the debate is not just about legalisation, but of what quieter about the Our philosophical position restrictions, taxes and ability of the police to on drug prohibition should nudges it is appropriate storm homes and arrest inform - and be informed for the state to use. The people for owning by - other areas of public libertarian argument certain plants, for health. If you support the would be that any example.” state restricting these interference whatsoever is freedoms, why should we an infringement of personal not use those same tools to and economic liberty. prevent harm caused by However, there is room to Comparisons & regulations mountain climbing (where acknowledge - as policy on some there is one death increasingly does - that Is drug prohibition liberal? for every three successes6); humans arenot perfectly The considerations above horse riding (unfavourably rational, long-term planners suggest it is not. Whatever compared to ecstasy by with infinite will power answer you come up with, Professor David Nutt7); and all the information however, it is useful to test alcohol and tobacco use; they need. It is therefore these views on other issues or soft drinks and crisps? appropriate that people to come to a consistent, Readers may disagree can use the government liberal position, and on the relative harms of they elect and pay for establish what policy tools these, but in principle as a tool to help them this gives us. should any activity more achieve their goals, such risky and harmful than the as by ‘nudging’ themselves It is odd, incidentally, least risky illegal drug be towards healthy eating, that liberals are so criminalised? Public health pension saving or drug vocal about individual philosophy affects the lives harm reduction. There is freedom on issues such of everyone in the country - some room to manoeuvre as communications data, most of them drug users - so then, with policies that CCTV and DNA databases, we cannot afford to ignore can help the majority of but much quieter about these debates. At present people realise their own the ability of the police to we seem to follow a ‘status- goals (communicated by storm homes and arrest quo bias’, responding voters) without removing people for owning certain to new suggestions of liberties from others. Any 68 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead loss of freedom from using ‘proportional intrusion’ into by a certain amount: it healthy default options, or people’s lives’.10 must also be shown that providing health warnings this benefit outweighs on packaging, for example, The Government’s public the costs and the harms is almost incomparable health strategy goes done by reducing liberties. to the total prohibition of further, using a ‘Ladder New policies moving some activities. of Interventions’ model onto or up ‘the ladder’ formalised by the Nuffield must be scrutinised for The range of relevant Council of Bioethics.11 proportionality, but existing policy discussions is vast, The ladder represents the policies must also be including advertising and broad range of possible frequently reviewed - this packaging, minimum measures, from simply being especially important pricing, medical providing information for the most illiberal prescriptions, the location at one extreme to the measures. of premises, drug strength criminalisation of both limits and more. There retailers and users at the This means that the onus is also the question of other. Their approach should be on the Home whether it is better to fund seeks to ‘balance the Office to regularly show our NHS on a collective freedoms of individuals - for each drug - that the basis for everyone’s self- and organisations with the criminalisation of drug inflicted harms, or whether need to avoid harm to possession and sale is alcohol users as a group, others [...and] determine sufficiently more effective for example, should pay the least intrusive approach than measures lower on the for some of their additional necessary to achieve the ladder to justify its costs and harms, or whether costly desired effect.’12 Using the warrant its continuation. users could and should be ladder, ‘the government As Liberal Democrat MP more precisely targeted. intends to ‘stay out’ of Jeremy Browne, currently people’s everyday lives Home Office drugs minister, Liberalism in government wherever possible.’13 once wrote: ‘Liberalism is the greatest protector Given the case for of personal freedom, but liberalism, what should “liberals should be it should be applied with unite all public health those making the rigour and vigour, and proposals, however, is a strongest case for liberals should be those consideration of personal making the strongest case freedom. At present, this the burden of proof for the burden of proof is lacking. Freedom is the hurdle to be set at hurdle to be set at the first of the coalition’s three the highest level” highest level.14 core principles8, and one of the Home Office’s priorities – Jeremy Browne None of this requires us is to ‘protect people’s to be ‘pro-drugs’ (or freedoms and civil liberties: These considerations need ‘pro-obesity’, etc.). We reverse state interference to become institutionalised can place some value to ensure there is not within government. And the on freedom while still disproportionate intrusion question is not just whether disapproving of and into people’s lives’.9 But, a policy is stricter than it discouraging those remarkably, its other needs to be to achieve activities. Many voters have priorities are not assessed ‘the desired effect’ (though a poor idea of what the against this goal and ‘there that would be a good Liberal Democrats stand is no formal framework start). It is not enough to for, and indeed whether for considering whether show that a policy may there are any dividing lines drug policy represents reduce a certain malady between major parties. It Is Drug Prohibition Liberal| 69 would help if they knew www.gov.uk/government/uploads/ system/uploads/attachment_data/ what the ‘liberal’ party file/78977/coalition_programme_for_gov- thinks about ‘nanny- ernment.pdf> [Accessed 23 August 2013] 9 ‘Home Office Business Plan 2011-2015’, state’ issues - from sugary November 2010, Coalition Priorities or alcoholic drinks to ‘E’ 10 Author’s enquiry to the Home Office 11‘Healthy lives, healthy people: Our and e-cigarettes - and a strategy for public health in England’, consistent position would Department of Health (HM Government, 2010) < http://webarchive.nationalar- help us fight for better chives.gov.uk/20130107105354/http:// health while safeguarding www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/ groups/dh_digitalassets/documents/dig- and extending freedoms. italasset/dh_127424.pdf> [Accessed 23 August 2013] 12 Ibid, p.6 13 ‘‘Healthy Lives, Healthy People’ sets out the future for public health: Health improvement to be driven locally’, De- Adam Corlett is an partment of Health, 30 November 2010 economics researcher at 1 See for example ‘The Inadequate Treat- ment of Pain: Collateral Damage from the War on Drugs’, 2012, doi:10.1371/ journal.pmed.1001153 ; the Office of Fair Trading’s 2006 review of opium derivatives; and ‘NHS painkiller shortage warning’, 2004, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/ hi/health/4122173.stm 2 John Stuart Mill, ‘Autobiography’ (1873), Chapter VII: General View of the Remain- der of My Life 3 UNODC ‘World Drug Report 2013’ 4 ‘The numbers in black and white: ethnic disparities in the policing and prosecution of drug offences in England and Wales’, Release, 2013 5 Boire, R. G., ‘On cognitive liberty’, 2001, The Journal of Cognitive Liberties 6 ‘Stairway to heaven: How deadly are the world’s highest mountains?’, 2013, The Economist 7 ‘Equasy - An overlooked addiction with implications for the current debate on drug harms’, January 2009, Journal of Psychopharmacology. Professor Nutt, cur- rently professor of neuropsychopharma- cology at Imperial College, London, is a former chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD). He was sacked in 2009 by Labour home secretary Alan Johnson. 8 David Cameron and Nick Clegg ‘rose garden’ press conference, May 2010, and ‘The Coalition: our programme for government’ (20 May 2010) < https:// 70 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead Grassroots Economics - Kirsty Williams AM Devolution and the Welsh establishment of the growth in the UK between Economy National Assembly. 1998 and 2008 were in The headline figure for Scotland and saw growth The decline and fall of measuring the Welsh of over 70%. These include the Welsh economy since economy is regional Gross rural, urban and deprived the industrial revolution is Value Added (GVA), which areas. None of the top 15 well documented. Once compares Welsh economic were in Wales. the powerhouse of the output per head to the world it has since suffered UK average. Since 1997, Scotland has enjoyed a from decades of decline. GVA has fallen from 78.1% greater range of powers 1 Traditional industries such to 75.2% , although there than Wales, including as mining and steel- have been rises in recent primary legislative powers working have disappeared years, most likely due to the from day one, based on a and the investment by impact of the recession on reserved power model that foreign manufacturers has UK economic output. offers greater stability and vanished as it became clarity. In addition, Scotland more economically viable This has led some to benefits from the operation for them to invest in Eastern question if Welsh devolution of the ‘Barnett formula’ – Europe and the Far East, has the capacity to the Treasury adjustment where wage costs are bring about the change of public expenditure substantially lower. required. Professor Kevin allocated to the different Morgan, who lectures in areas within the UK – which This economic history governance at Cardiff has been shown to fund was one of the strongest University and was a Wales less generously reasons why people key figure in the 1997 than if it were a region of 4 backed devolution in referendum campaign, has England. 1997. The sense that openly stated that “there is no necessary economic the Welsh economy “We must remember needed attention from dividend to political 2 that one of the most people that understood devolution.” it was re-enforced by successful economies Wales’ experience of the Like Professor Morgan, in the history of the Thatcher years. Thatcher’s I take the view that world, the American devolution needs to be economic policy bolstered economy, is built strengthened to ensure the the financial sector in around a federal London, but at the cost Welsh people receive this system with a of traditional industries in dividend. A good example areas like Wales. of the divergent paths of significant amount of economy under devolution tax decentralisation” Unfortunately, this is shown by the economic economic decline has growth in different areas 3 continued since the across the UK. Seven of the The Scottish experience top 15 areas for economic demonstrates that Grassroots Economics| 71 devolving responsibility The Increasing Demand for who are making the for economic growth Change intellectual case for greater without significant powers autonomy in economic to stimulate it is insufficient. In Wales, the Silk matters. Across England, Other federal models also Commission5, whose the decentralisation demonstrate this – we first report recommends of economic growth is must remember that one a significant shift in tax beginning to occur. The of the most successful powers from Whitehall ’City Deals’6, promoted economies in the history of to Wales, has stimulated by Nick Clegg and the world, the American debate on these issues. agreed between the UK economy, is built around The report recommends government and some of a federal system with a borrowing powers for the England’s largest cities, significant amount of tax National Assembly and represent a significant decentralisation. proposes the devolution of change in the relationship a series of taxes. Many of between central and local Of course, much of the these taxes are low-yield, government and offer blame for Welsh economic such as air passenger duty the opportunity for English underperformance is and landfill tax. But its most cities to shape their own about policy failure too. radical recommendation is economic recovery. The The Labour party in Wales that the National Assembly more interesting ideas, has shown an inability should be responsible for however, are the proposals to produce economic a proportion of income for regional equivalents. change due to a lack of tax. For the very first time, vision, a lack of delivery the amount of money a Local authorities in the and a lack of a financial Welsh government spends north-east of England incentive to improve. will be directly linked to are being encouraged Further devolution will success in promoting to form a ’combined change some of this, but economic development. authority’ with powers over I am in no doubt that, That should sharpen minds economic development, as in any democracy, in Cardiff Bay and would transport and planning.7 the government has also bring the same level If these plans are carried sometimes pursued the of accountability to Wales out, it will represent a wrong economic choices. that exists in almost all significant opportunity for However, while it is up to national parliaments. the north-east to re-assert the electorate to change its economic identity. the government, it is up The Silk Commission to politicians to develop proposals would devolve These proposals are the optimal constitutional specific new economic interesting because north- arrangements within which powers to Wales and east England has similarities government operates. increase the ability of with Wales, especially Welsh politicians to address regarding its economic “For the very first time, economic decline. It is not legacy. The reasons given the amount of money just a constitutional reform; for the establishment it is an economic reform of this proposed new a Welsh government too. The recommendations authority are similar to spends will be directly should be implemented by some for the reasons for linked to success in the UK government during the establishment of the promoting economic this parliament. National Assembly – a development. That recognition that a shared should sharpen minds However, this is not simply identity and shared a Welsh issue and it is economic problems can in Cardiff Bay.” not only Welsh politicians be better solved at a 72 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead local level, rather than in can be relied upon to Its own revenue streams Whitehall. deliver economic growth. will be boosted if areas The Treasury is nervous like Wales, or the north- Likewise, Lord Heseltine’s about giving away powers east of England, or the 2013 report into economic to untested bodies and Scottish central belt return growth, ‘No stone centralists in government to economic productivity. unturned – in pursuit of hang on to the belief that Decades of centralised growth’, argued that huge a benevolent central government have shown swathes of the economic authority is best placed to us that this does not development budget run the country. happen automatically. should be devolved But recent experience to a regional level8. To These are often the same suggests that devolution, what extent this will be people who tell us that when accompanied by implemented is unknown, constitutional reform is a real power to improve the but the idea of devolution distraction from the real economy, can make it of economic powers is issues of the day. But there happen. gaining traction. is no tension between stimulating economic Economic growth is The London Finance growth and constitutional improved when local Commission has reform. In fact, stimulating units have control over recommended that a series economic growth is reliant economic levers and of taxes be devolved to the on constitutional reform. a radical approach to Greater London Authority the distribution of power 9 (GLA). Specifically, it “A British economic must recognise this. If recommends that the the competitiveness of GLA be given control recovery will only come the UK economy is one over property taxes such about when every part of the biggest long- as council tax, business of the UK’s economic term challenges facing rates, stamp duty, land tax, machine is working politicians, then we must annual tax on enveloped properly. Every cog make sure our constitution dwellings and capital gains must be well-oiled.” gives us the power to property disposal tax. These compete. proposals are valuable in themselves but they also The government of the Kirsty Williams has been represent a sea-change in day is elected mostly as Leader of the Welsh political debate. Talk about a result of elections in Liberal Democrats since taxes being levied by marginal seats, usually in 2008. A four times-elected regional bodies in England, the south-east of England. Assembly Member for and by a Conservative As a result, any government Brecon and Radnorshires, Mayor of London, will be overly focussed on she has variously been demonstrates that this kind an economic policy that Party spokesperson for of economic thinking is benefits those areas. But a health, finance, rural affairs surpassing geographic and British economic recovery and the environment. Read political boundaries. will only come about more about Kirsty’s work at when every part of the www.kirstywilliams.org.uk Delivering change UK’s economic machine is working properly. Every cog The biggest obstacle for must be well-oiled. 1 Source: Office of National Statistics, change is often Treasury National assembly for Wales Research officials or dogmatic The Treasury will realise this Service. The most recently available figures are from 2011. unionists who insist that when it sees the benefits to 2 Kevin Morgan, ‘Dirty Little Secret’ in only central government itself of a UK-wide recovery. Agenda vol. 39 (Institute of Welsh Affairs, Grassroots Economics| 73 2009) 3 “Eluned Parrott: The magic bullet strategy has clearly not worked in Wales” in Western Mail, 10th August 2011. Available: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/ news/business/business-news/eluned- parrott-magic-bullet-economic-1815232 4 See Independent Commission on Funding and Finance for Wales, ‘Funding devolved government in Wales: Barnett & beyond’, (Welsh Assembly Government, July 2009), p.18 - Baroness Susan Kramer For the better part of interconnectedness the last year my life and ‘too big to fail’ The Parliamentary was dominated by the were the key problems. Commission recommended Parliamentary Commission Governments and banking “electrifying” the ring- on Banking Standards. regulators launched fence so that the regulator Now with our final report strategies to combat these. can separate the ring- published1 and new Without question the UK has fenced entity easily if banking legislation shortly been the most radical, in it sees attempts by a to arrive in the Lords, it part because our banking banking group to cheat; seems a good time to try sector is so huge compared Government has agreed and set down my thoughts to our GDP that it threatens to this. But we also wanted on the way forward for this our whole economy when to enable Parliament to vital but so often flawed it goes wrong. separate the entire industry industry. if it became clear that The independent Vickers wholesale abuse was The process of re-examining Commission (set up by taking place – I will be the banks began with the the Coalition Government fighting for this in the next crash in 2007-08 when crises to review the structure months. in the sub-prime mortgage of the banking system) market in the USA and recommended in 2011 But of course no-one wants the interconnectedness “ring-fencing” those a repeat of bank failures. of today’s banking system parts of the system that a So the banks are also led liquidity in the banking Government would step in required to increase their sector to dry up virtually to save if ever necessary capital (a battle goes on overnight. Within months with the assumption that between the Commission the UK taxpayer largely anything outside the ring- and the Government over owned Lloyds (38%) and fence can be allowed to the level and which ratios RBS (84%) and had injected fail2. It is likely that inside the should be included), and some £65 billion into the ring-fence will be little more they must have detailed system to prevent collapse. than current accounts, plans for “recovery and savings accounts, possibly resolution”, which are overdraft facilities and being introduced. Some “Our banking possibly some basic of this last is technical sector is so huge derivative transactions (requiring internal systems compared to our for small businesses. to permit separation), The ring-fenced banks but some is based on a GDP that it threatens will operate with only a concept known as “bail- our whole economy “sibling” relationship with in”. Most people were quite when it goes wrong.” any other activities of the rightly furious that, when banks. They will have not the UK Government saved just independent boards our banks, they also saved but independent treasury the creditors who had lent At first, conventional functions, HR departments, money to the banks. It wisdom held that etc. would happen in no other Banking| 75 industry. LIBOR-setting process, the major banks credit, they flaws were apparently are beginning to simplify. So the international invisible at the top. This Ring-fencing and resolution community is setting out to was despite the fact mechanisms will encourage make sure that next time that these abuses would more transparency. The creditors lose money before generate huge and unlikely new regulators are better taxpayers. The concept profits for the banks which empowered. But I very must be right, both to contributed to the amazing much doubt that all the protect the taxpayer and pay and bonuses for senior bad habits are eliminated. to make sure that creditors management. You cannot keep a watchful eye on have an organisation so the banks. The problem complex that it can only “The revenue is the practicality, and be run by exceptional generators in the here I am one of the geniuses. And while we banks and the senior sceptics. My question is have had a dreadfully management who sat who should hold these weak regulator in the past, above them enjoyed a ‘bail-in bonds’?. No bank there really are questions one-way bet. If profits can be allowed to hold about whether any them or we will be back regulator can penetrate came pouring in they to ‘interconnectedness’. extreme degrees of received huge bonuses Do we really want our complexity. but if transactions pension funds or insurance turned sour they lost companies to hold these Many of our banks grew little or nothing.” bonds unless they cut back by aggressive acquisition. on their shareholdings in The consequence was that the banks which would already complex institutions These concerns lead defeat the purpose of became involved in areas me into the next set of strengthening their capital? of banking about which issues stemming from Are hedge funds and they knew little. But, such the lack of individual sovereign wealth funds was the hubris, they hardly responsibility. I suspect I big enough to hold all the bothered to notice. Growth am not the only member ‘bail-in bonds’ we need for became everything. So the of the Parliamentary the entire global sector of collapses of HBOS and of Commission who was financially significant banks RBS were not really due to startled to learn that pretty which is the concept? I am the financial crisis of 2007- much everything was a waiting for answers. 08; that crisis only dictated ‘collective’ responsibility the timing. Both banks so that no individual was But even if we sort out were stuffed full of rotten ever at fault unless they ‘too big to fail’, are we loans and were indeed, were found with their left with ‘too big and too as one of our reports fingers pretty literally in complex to manage’? One said, accidents waiting to the till. Risk management of the startling pieces of happen. In effect, they lost was totally compromised evidence – heard over and money the old-fashioned in most institutions, with over by the Parliamentary way by poor business those making the money Commission – was that practices. Neither the then so powerful that the senior management were senior management nor controls one would expect quite unaware of problems the then regulator seems on them were hopelessly in their banks. From mis- to have caught on at all. undermined. Remuneration selling of PPI and interest- The banks are now running was all about revenue rate swaps to money down these books of bad generation and not about laundering to submitting loans. And to give the risk control. And the money false information into the new management at the was extra-ordinary. The 76 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead revenue generators in that, if their institution goes they are re-building capital the banks and the senior rogue, the whole economy and because they long management who sat is at risk. ago reduced their trained above them enjoyed a people at branch level. one-way bet. If profits One reason for separating came pouring in they “If you speak with RBS into a ‘good’ and a received huge bonuses most people about ‘bad’ bank is to give the but if transactions turned switching banks they good bank more capacity sour they lost little or to lend. nothing. Those in charge say that no other bank of compliance and risk is different so why This is not the place to management were bother. Essentially we go into lots of technical treated as underdogs. have four major clones. stuff but actually the I.T. Even the head of risk This should have been matters. Because they usually reported to the tackled a decade have been so complacent, legal department not the the current banks have Board. Add to that the ago.” never dealt with their lack of skill at board level, legacy and out-of-date and the choice by banks technology – we all pay of aggressive, charismatic But one area that has far too much for inefficient risk-takers for CEOs, and it received less media services. Innovation has is easy to see why so much attention is our concern been slow for an industry went wrong. for the extra-ordinary which is basically about concentration that exists information transfer – just So as a Commission we in UK banking. Essentially compare it to Google or have been very tough in four banks dominate, iTunes. The Government this area. Remuneration holding well over 80% of has finally caught on to has to be subject to long current accounts and small the fact that allowing just periods of claw-back; business loans. No other the major banks to own much of it will be in ‘bail-in major country lives with and manage the plumbing bonds’ and even pensions this. If you speak with most of the entire banking can be attacked. We people about switching system has undermined want the whole regime for banks they say that no innovation and been a licensing bankers changed. other bank is different so huge disadvantage to Bankers themselves have why bother. Essentially we new players. New rules on proposed a professional have four major clones. account switching arrive in association to manage September 2013. A road- such standards. The idea is This should have been map is being prepared fine but it will be decades tackled a decade ago. It in which key parts of the before it has teeth. So allowed the banks to forget plumbing will likely become we have toughened the serving their customers and a public utility. licensing regime to be used just to use them as a source by the regulator, including of revenue, abandoning Historically the regulator requiring the banks to a customer culture for a has been resistant to new allocate key responsibilities sales culture. It is an even competition. I popped to specific individuals and more acute problem now open champagne this year providing a criminal penalty that we need a significant when the new regulators for reckless conduct in the increase in credit to support turned a century of management of a bank. small businesses as the behaviour on its head and The goal is prevention. The economy starts to recover; issued revolutionary plans senior management of yet the major banks to actually encourage new banks have to recognise struggle, both because banks to enter the market Banking| 77 rather than seeking to who will also run them. The drawing together issues of strangle them before birth.3 high street banks, as part social justice, economic While we will now get new of their banking licence, growth, local economies banks to challenge the should support these CDFIs and local empowerment. old (there is huge interest with both capital and skills. from investors), these will Local authorities, charities So we really are in a time of take time to grow. But we and social enterprises need change for banking. Some are also seeing the rise to be part of the CDFI of that change is defensive. of non-bank alternatives. structure. Banks cannot be allowed Peer-to-Peer (P2P) and to play fast and loose in ‘crowd–funders’ cut out The CDFI template comes the expectation that the the banks altogether from the USA, where it has taxpayer will rescue them. and will grow faster as a over $30 billion in assets But we must also seize new proper regulatory regime under management. The opportunities. If we have is introduced. Vodafone, network provided much successful change, banking Google or Apple will likely of the resilience in the US will be a normal industry, come into the market. during the last recession, paid normally and focused In a decade we will not especially in keeping on customers. We will have recognise this industry. funds flowing to small different banks to choose and new businesses. It is from on the high street But none of these frankly not work that big and on the web; new non- changes deal with the high street banks can do bank player such as P2P problem of the missing with their overheads, their will be major competitors; layer of banking. If you centralised structures, and and most importantly, live in a disadvantaged their stratified career paths. CDFIs will be part of every community, if you are We do of course have disadvantaged community yourself on benefits or a low credit unions and CDFIs in so that we have real income, if you are trying to this country but they are financial inclusion. We start a new small business, small and fragmented. The need a banking system there is really no place in challenge is to get scale that serves the real the banking system for you. and coverage. One of the economy. We must not miss By the end of the year, and reasons I am interested this chance to shape it. thanks to work I have done in the break-up of RBS is with colleagues, the big to see if we could use this Susan Kramer is a Liberal banks will be disclosing by to seed such a network. Democrat peer and was post-code which types of But at present we have MP for Richmond Park from lending they are doing and no road-map. The current 2005 to 2010, speaking for how much. I suspect we will CDFI players are looking at the party on international see real vacuums. Add to the issues. I will personally development, trade and that the limited capabilities spend much of the next industry, and transport. She in basic bank accounts two years on a project to was the party’s London and the success of the shape policy on CDFIs. This Mayoral candidate in 2000. price-gouging payday really is an urgent area, Before entering politics, she lenders and it is clear had a successful career in that we need banking banking in the USA, later services of a different kind “If we have successful setting up a number of altogether. We should financial partnerships in the be building a network of change, banking will UK with her husband. Community Development be a normal industry, Banks, Credit Unions and paid normally and Funds (CDFIs) focused on focused on customers.” our local communities 78 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead 1 Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards, ‘Changing banking for good’ (19 June 2013) A New Deal for Poor Workers - Nick Thornsby ‘What is Freedom?--ye can ever seen. Booming tax income. An economic tell revenues have facilitated recession characterised by That which slavery is, too the provision of universal falling real wages (though well-- access to education and certainly preferable For its very name has grown health care. Universal to one characterised To an echo of your own. suffrage has given by massive increases everyone the power to in unemployment) has ‘’Tis to work and have such effect change. brought that point into pay sharper focus. As just keeps life from day The past 200 years have to day been liberalism’s success In fact, we have as a In your limbs, as in a cell story. nation implicitly recognised For the tyrants’ use to dwell the inadequacies of the But just as we should not lowest of wages for some ‘So that ye for them are make the mistake of time, hence the massive made being downbeat about rise in various state tax Loom, and plough, and that success, nor should credits and rent subsidies. sword, and spade, we forget that there is still With or without your own much for we liberals to do But there has been will bent to deliver real freedom. comparatively little public To their defence and debate on whether such nourishment. The Working Poor subsidies are sensible, and what potential alternatives From ‘The Mask of Anarchy’ Until recently the working there might be. By Percy Bysshe Shelley poor have been rather neglected in the political I want to draw together Shelley’s words, written as debate. Following the some of that thinking, on they were in his rage at introduction of the national wages, taxation, social the massacre of peaceful minimum wage in 1999, security and employment, protesters in St Peter’s it was often thought that to see if we can carve Field in Manchester in those in employment are out a distinctively liberal August 1819, seem rather getting by: they have a way forward, ensuring overblown now, looking wage floor to protect them, that work pays not only at the state of the labour and generously funded to keep ’life from day to market in modern Britain. public services for their day’, but to provide the basic needs. sort standard of living that Since the early 19th century should be possible in a rich, things have improved But things have shifted developed economy like dramatically for Britain’s in recent years, with the ours. workers. Capitalism has realisation that simply brought about the greatest being employed (even on The Problem improvements in living the minimum wage) does standards the world has not guarantee a decent The basic problem, now 80 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead generally accepted by all incredibly wasteful, also simultaneously raise but the most laissez-faire necessitating vast systems the NIC threshold to the of economic thinkers, is to implement and manage. same level (or abolish NICs that capitalism, for all its altogether; see below). benefits, generally fails if left The absurdity of the current to its own device to provide system is clear to see. After those changes the poorest with wages Those earning the national the take-home pay of sufficient to maintain a minimum wage are taxed, someone working full-time standard of living that as are their employers, on the national minimum delivers the basic freedoms but because the wage is wage will be roughly at we all desire. not enough to provide a the level of the ’Living decent income, the state Wage’ (currently £6.19 The response of the last then gives back some, all or outside London) which has Labour government to more of those taxes in the formed the basis of a much this problem was two-fold: form of various benefits. talked about campaign1. to introduce a national However, the Living Wage minimum hourly wage The Coalition Government assumes that the current below which level it is illegal has left this element of the social security system to employ people, and system broadly untouched, remains unaltered, whereas to further subsidise those concentrating on other the aim of liberals should wages through a complex, reforms to the social be to provide a decent expensive benefits system. security infrastructure. But wage without state top- this is a policy issue ripe for ups. The first of those is generally liberals to grasp, looking accepted to have been with an open-mind at So the Low Pay Commission a success. The predicted solutions that move beyond (which calculates the increases in unemployment the narrow Conservative current minimum wage did not occur, even when and Labour mindsets that levels), working with the the economic boom came built the current system. Centre for Research to a crashing end in 2008. in Social Policy at A Liberal Solution Loughborough University The latter is more (which calculates the controversial, and should The first step on the route Living Wage), should be pose much more of a to solving this absurdity asked to devise a wage problem for liberals. Statists, is already a flagship that, assuming income tax, and therefore many in Liberal Democrat policy NICs and tax credits did the Labour party, love the being implemented by labyrinthine system of tax the Coalition: raising the “The absurdity of the credits, child benefits and threshold at which people current system is clear rent subsidies devised by begin to pay income tax. to see. Those earning Gordon Brown. But it is for the national minimum precisely the reasons that It is nonsensical for people wage are taxed, as are they are loved by such to be paying income tax people that they should be and national insurance their employers, but anathema to liberals: such contributions (NICs) on because the wage is schemes turn industrious, wages that the very state not enough to provide hard-working people into which is collecting those a decent income, the clients of the state, reliant taxes deems insufficient. state then gives back on Whitehall bureaucrats to some, all or more of ‘keep life from day to day’. So we should continue to raise the income tax those taxes in the form Such wheezes are also personal allowance, but of various benefits.” A New Deal for Poor Workers| 81 not exist, could provide makes workers in those rise from national minimum a decent living for most areas less attractive still wage levels to living people. to businesses looking to wage levels, but no recruit: it weakens their other changes. Standard That is not an easy task. A comparative advantage. modelling suggests young, single woman living a reduction in labour with her parents clearly When those wage levels demand of 160,000, which needs less to provide a are calculated, they should the report notes ‘represents decent standard of living then be implemented an important note of than a single mother of in place of the national caution to advocates of three children renting a minimum wage, with tax the widespread adoption house. But that is inevitable thresholds raised to the of the living wage, and the gaps can be filled salary one would earn particularly in the current by the benefits that remain, working a 36-hour week on climate’.4 particularly child and the highest regional wage. housing benefits. That would then allow Three points are worth many personal tax credits mentioning about this It is worth considering at (which currently cost research. First, the rise this stage, too, the issue of around £30bn a year) to considered here would regionality. There is always be abolished completely, likely be lower than that going to be a problem making up for the lost assumed in the modelling, with a minimum wage that revenues from the increase because the tax changes takes no account of the in the personal allowance. here mean a lower wage massively varied costs of level is needed. Secondly, living in different parts of Preventing a Rise in on such aggregate the country. The national Worklessness modelling the introduction minimum wage currently of the national minimum makes no distinction Despite predictions to the wage would have between somebody contrary, the introduction decreased labour demand working in London and of the national minimum by 22,000: as we have seen somebody working in, say, wage is generally this is generally thought Burnley, whereas the Living considered not to have not to have happened, Wage does, by having in resulted in a decrease in so the modelling may effect a London weighting. employment levels.2 overstate the effect of wage increases on There are strong arguments But a rise in the minimum employment levels. And to go further and have wage level being thirdly, the modelling a truly regional minimum considered here would be does not consider the wage. First, for reasons of more significant than any simultaneous measures that fairness: not regionalising previous rise. And without can be implemented to the minimum wage will other measures in place it is offset the increased cost for pull down the average, likely to lead to an increase employers. lowering the wages and in the unemployment rate. therefore the standard There are several things of living of those in more The Resolution Foundation, that can be done to expensive parts of the a think-tank which has mitigate the increase in country. And secondly, for done admirable work wages for employers. economic reasons: setting on the issue of low pay, First, the other costs of an artificially high minimum recently commissioned employment faced wage in the poorest areas, research on the possible by businesses can be where business activity impact of such a rise.3 It reduced. Some of this already tends to be limited, assumed an immediate costs government nothing: 82 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead it is about removing and we would have to in unemployment among unnecessary bureaucratic consider how to meet that young people, which restrictions. deficit in our overall plans would be particularly on taxation. unwelcome given the More significantly, already high rates of government could look These measures would youth unemployment. A at employment taxes, the go a significant way to graduated system like the most significant of which compensating employers one currently operated are employer national for the extra costs of the should be maintained to insurance contributions new minimum wage. minimise this risk. (NICs). These are paid Ultimately, though, by employers for each employers may have to Conclusion employee who earns more bear some of the extra cost than the threshold amount. themselves. The experience What is freedom? Just like Governments for some of the introduction of the Shelley, we know what it time has been considering national minimum wage is not. Working 36 hours merging employee NICs suggests they are willing a week in a minimum and income tax, and this and able to do so, and as wage job, earning a would be an opportune David Laws MP recently salary that fails to satisfy moment to do so – but it said: “Not many investment one’s basic needs and would also be a good time banks...would go out of relying on bureaucrats at to abolish employer NICs, business if they paid their the Department for Work which act as a perverse tax cleaners more.”6 and Pensions to get by is on jobs. not freedom. It might not For small businesses, be slavery, but nor is it a though, and particularly situation with which any “There is a clear path to for those just starting liberal should be happy. freedom: making work up, the changes may pay, freeing people pose extra challenges, But there is a clear path to from the grasp of an and government should freedom: making work pay, be flexible in their freeing people from the overbearing, inefficient implementation, perhaps grasp of an overbearing, and unresponsive state, delaying enforcement in inefficient and unresponsive ensuring capitalism particular circumstances. state, ensuring capitalism delivers on its promise delivers on its promise of of freedom to provide It is also worth considering freedom to provide the the liberal society we that these measures have liberal society we all want the potential to cause to see. all want to see.” disproportionate increases Solving this problem Employer NICs are forecast “Working 36 hours a requires us to look at a to raise approximately range of policy areas – £62bn in 2013-14,5 week in a minimum wage levels, taxes and effectively increasing the wage job, earning a benefits – often considered base costs of employment salary that fails to satisfy quite distinct. But both our by that amount. A one’s basic needs and values and our record as significant portion of the relying on bureaucrats Liberal Democrats mean cost of abolishing employer at the Department for we are well placed to think NICs would be met from big on what is likely to be the savings from the tax Work and Pensions to one of the biggest policy credits bill. But those savings get by is not freedom.” challenges to governments will not cover the total cost, for years to come. A New Deal for Poor Workers| 83 Nick Thornsby is a lawyer, co-chair of Liberal Reform and a member of the editorial team of Liberal Democrat Voice. 1 See, for instance, the Living Wage Foundation < http://www.livingwage.org. uk/> 2 See, for example, Richard Dickens, Rebecca Riley and David Wilkinson, ‘The Employment and Hours of Work Effects of the Changing National Minimum Wage’ (National Institute of Economic and Social Research, March 2009) 84 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead Future Generations Want the State to go on a Progressive Diet. - Alison Goldsworthy It is a natural desire to that. Multigenerational time of Obama-branded leave future generations households are becoming ‘Hope’, is how they map a in a better place. Until the norm, too, creating way out of this unhopeful now, every UK generation more networks of support mass of contradictions. has, on average, been as well as inevitable better housed, more networks of dependency. “Faced with the double highly educated and whammy of a public experienced rising It was against this sector debt that has standards of living than the background that the one preceding it. However, Joseph Rowntree Reform burgeoned, combined that pattern is set to be Trust (JRRT) carried out with a raft of spending broken - UK living standards work with polling firm Ipsos cuts, for many people are no longer rising and MORI to examine different the current implications the times of austerity generations’ attitudes to of decades of 1 are stretching in to the intergenerational justice. overspending is that distance. This environment The results showed that poses new challenges to while young people may ‘this shit just got real’.” policy makers. resent the idea that they are paying for a social care As our economy struggles system that is unsustainable, Hints for the answer lie to cope, decisions are they do not want to see in a sense that some being made on austerity their grandparents lose sacred cows will have to measures that threaten out. It is the same principle be slaughtered – and the to pit generations against that means people are Coalition Government each other. The sense reluctant to see new houses has already slaughtered of victimhood amongst built, but suddenly support some. In the JRRT / Ipsos younger generations the concept when it would MORI study, just 22% of is acute in the current enable their families to buy people wanted to maintain political climate, as is the a house in the area. child benefits to all discomfort of the older (including the wealthiest) people who are often A palpable sense of doom household, indicating blamed for creating the pervades young people that, in popular terms, problem but must face when asked about the the Coalition’s decision their own challenges and future: for instance, just 42% to scrap child benefit in insecurities as they head of ‘Generation Y’ (18-33 2012 from households towards old age. This is year-olds) expect they will where at least one parent leading some to predict have a better standard of earns more than £60,000 we will find ourselves in living than their parents.2 was the right thing to do. generational warfare of old Against a backdrop of Surveys elsewhere show people who ‘have’ and unaffordable house prices that support for winter young people who ‘have and job insecurity this is fuel payments for wealthy not’. In truth, the position unsurprising. The question pensioners is dwindling.3 is far more nuanced than for policy makers, in a The public may have more Future Generations Want the State to go on a Progressive Diet | 85 of an attitude for the state considered and balanced. feel in their middle-ages to go on a progressive diet (the so-called ‘Baby than we think. Our focus should be Boomers’): that, as their on creating equality of jobs became less secure, “What the public need opportunity. This is about they don’t know enough – and deserve – from the steps government about technology to re- can take to intervene to skill and be useful to future our politicians is a vision make sure that life is fair employers.5 It is not just for what that smaller and people do not end the youngest generations state should look like. up stuck in the socio- who will need the state’s That’s why it’s important economic class in to which support. to outline where a they were born. For all the diet would leave the rhetoric of social mobility Electoral cycles create a in the last twenty years, tendency for politicians country, rather than many remain stubbornly and the public to think in slapping on a gastric stuck in to the class in five year loops, trading band and hoping for a which they are born, and short term success for quick fix.” there isn’t much equality of long term catastrophe. opportunity about that.4 Examples abound It’s also a time to reassess whatever the hue of For liberals, these answers what is important. While government: selling off should plant seeds of a way Peter Mandelson may council housing without out of the current mess we have achieved traction for replacing the stock, raiding find ourselves in. Faced with Labour in the City by saying pensions so black holes the double whammy of a he was ‘intensely relaxed become the norm, failing public sector debt that has about people getting to raise the retirement burgeoned, combined with filthy rich’ our language age. Voters and politicians a raft of spending cuts, for should be that we are were able to turn a blind many people the current ’intensely supportive of eye to the long-term implications of decades people making the most effects of these policies as of overspending is that of opportunities’. Implicit they were shiny and new. ‘this shit just got real’. The in this is that these are Shifting attitudes won’t next generation realise opportunities the state just mean challenging that it simply isn’t realistic helped to create for politicians more –many of to keep spending in the them. This doesn’t mean them (from all parties) are way we have. What they abandoning a safety becoming acutely aware need – and deserve – from net for those in need – of intergenerational issues – our politicians is a vision quite the opposite; we it will mean persuading the for what that smaller state should be doing all we public to think more long- should look like. That’s why could to provide them term, too. it’s important to outline with a springboard to where a diet would leave bounce back again. For In Germany, in 2003 and the country, rather than example, in tackling the again in 2008, parliament slapping on a gastric band anxiety of those facing debated the potential to and hoping for a quick fix. unemployment in middle give parents/guardians As anyone who has ever aged but anxious about the right to vote on tried one of those ‘six week their lack of understanding behalf of their children bikini diets’ advertised in of technology holding (Kinderwahlrecht), so future glossy magazines will tell them back from getting generations’ voices would you, they either don’t work another job. The JRRT work be heard more loudly. The or make you feel faint. So with Ipsos MORI showed proposal rightly fell, it was this diet must be careful, how threatened many recognised to be slightly 86 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead ridiculous and that a parent be directed at, nor should provide, whether through would be unlikely to cast they be so crude as to a penny on income tax a vote differently for their just take away from older for education or a rise in child than themself. But people, many of whom live the top rate of taxation. if the aim of the debate in poverty. Everyone needs That political capital was was to get people thinking to think about the sort of dashed on the Party’s about how the world will society they would like to 2010 U-turn on tuition fees, look in 25, 50 or 75 years’ exist, not just for them, but but it is not lost forever. time, then (once people for their grandchildren. We should fight the 2015 stopped laughing) they People are not feeling the election with an equal may have achieved it. current cuts on a purely degree of honesty, telling generational basis, it is also some people they will need Environmental on a personal one. It is to pay more and others campaigners have often voters’ grandparents who they may not be able been the best at predicting are dependent on caring to get support they had cataclysm, and, they support from their family, expected, including the have certainly got people or their grandchildren potential for future rises in (excepting climate change who can’t afford to buy a retirement age. We should deniers) thinking about house in the village where reassure people that by preserving the planet for they grew up. Imagining doing this we will be able future generations. It may generational warfare may to provide a safety net not be a coincidence that make good headlines, for those who need it and on this issue, Germany is but thankfully, it isn’t what a trampoline for others. leading the way with its people want. Underpinning it all is a vision support for renewable for what society should look technologies. The share “We should fight the like in the future. of electricity produced 2015 election with from renewable energy in an equal degree of Germany reached some 1 Ipsos MORI Social Research Institute, 25% in 2012.6 It may still honesty, telling some ‘Intergenerational Justice: research report’ for Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust be baby steps, but it is people they will need Ltd (Ipsos MORI, June 2013) < http://www. at least steps in the right to pay more and others jrrt.org.uk/publications/ipsos-mori-report- direction. The public have intergenerational-justice> [Accessed 10 they may not be able August 2013] become willing to make to get support they had 2 Ibid, p.15. small change to their 3 For instance, an ICM poll published in expected. We should The Sunda Telegraph on 30 June 2013 behaviour; for example, in showed 56% 56% supporting means reassure people that testing age related benefits like the winter Wales in response to the fuel payment and free television licence. introduction of a plastic by doing this we will be Source: Anthony Wells’ UK Polling Report 7 blog Alison Goldsworthy is member of the Welsh Liberal Democrats, Deputy Chair of the party’s Federal Executive, and a Director of the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust. She writes here in a personal capacity. 88 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead Higher Education: Britain has a Social Mobility Problem - Stephen Williams MP As a Liberal Democrat, too many people destined worth the full £2.5 billion social mobility is something to stay in the poverty by the time of the next that I care a deeply about. trap that held back their General Election. The A lack of social mobility parents. The best escape Pupil Premium should be not only hurts individual ladder is education. But extended for students fulfilment, it also hurts the there are shocking levels undertaking graduate potential for economic of low attainment in many study (who would then fulfilment for the entire communities, with over receive the Student country. Providing equality half of children leaving Premium) but extra funding of opportunity, breaking school at 16 without even needs to first be identified. down social barriers the basic level of 5 good and enabling those who GCSEs including maths “I watched the student haven’t had the best start and English. This is the real protests triggered by in life to develop the skills education problem that the Coalition’s new they deserve to better needs to be solved. If we themselves is at the heart are to widen participation fees policy with great of liberal philosophy. The at university level then we sadness, as I feel Pupil Premium – the Lib have to drive up standards that the case for the Dem policy of targeting within schools. To do this, progressive elements of money at children from we must ensure that the the proposal had been low-income families – is foundations of the Pupil poorly communicated the key to breaking down Premium go even further. these barriers and at the and thus severely next General Election In the last Parliament misunderstood.” we must continue the (2005-10), I spent over work we have started by four years as the Liberal Of course, following continuing its legacy into Democrat shadow minister on from the financial higher education with the for higher education and crisis of 2008 and the Student Premium. Such skills. I tried three times resultant global economic a system would maintain to change our university downturn, the Coalition the previous support for fees policy. I got my way Government has been students on Free School on some issues – on part working to strengthen and Meals who continue time students, a greater increase the resilience their education, whether role for FE and growth in of the UK economy. The they go on to further or apprentices. The party deficit that we inherited higher education or an also found the right answer from the previous Labour apprenticeship. to helping children from government, which stood poor backgrounds – the at £121.6 billion last year, All my political career I Pupil Premium. This policy fundamentally undermines have championed social is now being implemented our financial stability mobility and the need to in government, straight and must be reduced. tackle inequality. In 21st from the first page of our The Coalition has closely century Britain we have manifesto and it will be examined the ways in Higher Education | 89 which this can be achieved some progress – the new and liberal – it enables and higher education has repayment regime is far everyone the chance to go had to bear the brunt of more progressive than to university, regardless of departmental spending the Labour model. But our income – and encourages cuts, along with many failure over tuition fees was everyone to want to other areas of government not on policy – the new maximize their earnings. funding. system is after all a capped graduation tax (a system Since the introduction Higher education policy, the NUS actually campaign of the Coalition’s higher or more specifically ‘the for) – it was a failure of education policies, there tuition fees policy’, was, communication. has been an obsession rightly or wrongly, most by some with the UCAS prominently associated “Under the Coalition, numbers detailing how with our Party in the no one pays fees up- many people took up 2010 General Election. front. What graduates university placements. I watched the student However, I am more protests triggered by the do pay back is a tax concerned with who goes Coalition’s new fees policy linked to their earnings. to university, rather than with great sadness, as I This is fair and liberal with how many. Thanks to feel that the case for the – it enables everyone this Government’s reforms, progressive elements of the the chance to go to all new students will not pay proposal had been poorly university, regardless anything upfront, there is communicated and thus more financial support for severely misunderstood. For of income – and those from poorer families when I think about higher encourages everyone and everyone will make education, I think about to want to maximize lower loan repayments social mobility. We as their earnings.” once they are in well-paid liberals should be seeking jobs. To win back the many to improve access to higher voters who felt betrayed education, via the Student I often hear journalists over tuition fees, we must Premium. and commentators say accept we cannot win that “students are put the argument by simply We should be celebrating off going to university talking about fees alone. those schools who currently because they don’t think This is not a numbers game. receive the most Pupil they can afford it”. This is As liberals we must not Premium and encouraging an example of our failure pluck some abstract figure more pupils to continue to communicate what from the air and say to the into all sectors of higher exactly we have changed electorate this number education. But I want to from the Labour system of will guarantee economic see more money going fees. Perhaps our biggest success. But what we to those who need it mistake was to miss the should be doing is ensuring the most, with extra opportunity to change the higher education is seen advice and mentoring for description from tuition fees as the ‘British Dream’: an children from lower socio- to graduate contribution, achievable outcome for all economic backgrounds. which matches the in a fairer society. Our top universities must, circumstances of the reality therefore, do more to of the change. Under the Education is not just about ensure an intake that Coalition, no one pays fees students, it’s also about is a socially balanced up-front. What graduates those who teach them group of the brightest do pay back is a tax linked and those who supervise and best. We have made to their earnings. This is fair their research. We have 90 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead some of the brightest that the opportunity to help our economy. The and most entrepreneurial study should be given National Audit Office, minds in the world. Yet too to all. By shaking up the which looks at the impact much emphasis is placed sector further we should of Government policies, on academics talking at make it easier for new estimates that for every £1 students; what takes place entrants to have a greater spent on apprenticeships in the lecture hall is not choice between taught, the economy benefits the whole story. I would research and distance- by £18.3 But the Student like to see the student learning courses. This would Premium should apply to experience include study dramatically increase these people too. Bursaries, periods on their timetables choice in the sector and mentoring and access must with talks from professionals offer a new appeal for be fully targeted to those in the sector they study. those who wish to study in who need it most. Most universities do hold the shortest time possible. careers events – but these It is important to empower are only really accessible Of course higher education all young adults by giving to those who can talk is not just about tuition them access to far more ‘the talk’. Furthermore, a fees. Most people don’t information about the lot of careers events are go to university, nor should courses on offer, the too focused on certain they and we have rightly alternatives to university sectors. Breaking down the rejected Labour’s 50% and their prospects in life barriers to higher education participation target. The after higher education. is not just about those Coalition Government is I believe that better the students who wish to putting a huge amount careers advice provision study but about everyone of effort into helping in schools about the involved in the sector. young people secure range of degrees, apprenticeships. It is no vocational courses and Shaking up higher secret that for our country apprenticeships on offer education and enabling to do well over the coming would not only diminish the everyone to get on in life decades we need highly number of applicants who is exactly what the new skilled people who can drop out of university, but system is attempting to compete globally. For would also allow school do. We have introduced some this will mean further leavers to start their chosen radicalism into an industry study and university but for career quicker and more that was still seen by many many people it will mean cheaply. young people as an option getting high quality, on-the- only for the most fortunate. job vocational training. “We fought the last Indeed, the latest figures show the biggest increase That is why the Coalition election on fairness in applications to university has rapidly increased the and in Government we from those from poorer number of apprenticeships have been consistently backgrounds.1 This has not available. We have almost calling for a stronger happened by chance but doubled the number of economy in a fairer because of the progressive apprenticeship places society. The key elements of the new fees available since the system under the Coalition. General Election. In 2012 to achieving this is This could not have been alone 520,000 people recognition that higher achieved without the stared an apprenticeship, education must be presence of the Liberal more than ever before.2 about opportunity for Democrats in Government. Apprenticeships are not all, achieved via the This radicalism, then, is only great for young Student Premium.” based on the liberal view people, but they also Higher Education | 91 To be credible contenders evolution of the Pupil at the next general election Premium and I hope it will in the area of higher become a firm feature of education we must move our 2015 manifesto as the beyond ‘tuition fees’; we pupil element was in 2010. will not win if we go down this road. Despite the merits of the policy we have Stephen Williams was implemented in Coalition elected to Parliament at Government, we have his third attempt in 2005 lost the communication as MP for Bristol West. battle which matters He served as the Liberal to voters. We as Liberal Democrat spokesperson Democrats must frame the for Innovation, Universities debate around access. and Skills from 2007-10, and The unprecedented is currently the chairman rise in apprenticeships is of the Liberal Democrat something we should all backbench committee be proud of. Ensuring no for Treasury matters. one pays up-front fees Find out more at http:// when studying part-time is stephenwilliams.org.uk/ another. We fought the last election on fairness and in Government we have 1 ‘Demand for higher education from been consistently calling young people is at or near record for a stronger economy in levels for each country of the UK in 2013. ... Application rates for young, a fairer society. The key to disadvantaged groups have increased achieving this is recognition to new highs in England.’ Source: ‘Demand for undergraduate higher that higher education education’ UCAS, 23 July 2013 Once we begin to frame higher education as a social mobility problem, rather than an economic problem that is suffering as part of our deficit reduction package, then we will start to win back some of those voters who have left us since the Coalition was formed. The Student Premium is a natural 92 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead Enshrining Individual Rights to Remove the “Planning System” - Tommy Long It is undeniable that a century’s building, the restricted to 20% of our something is wrong with the supply of suitable land is citizens (who are likely UK property market. Since now depleted. Obviously the most economically 1952 property prices have land is finite, but the fact successful)? We often talk risen in real terms by 253%.1 that we find new land to of how important it is to An average house would build on each year at a preserve green space for have cost you 3.2 years of reasonably constant rate our children, so why then average pre-tax income whilst prices continue to do we want them growing in 1952, today it would increase suggests that up in urban communities, cost 6.15 times.2 What the annual supply is being isolated from it? Is ‘the explanation is there for this artificially limited. British dream’ really living price rise? in a pokey flat with the “One of the seemingly countryside as something Obviously wages have unshakeable myths that’s either distant or for risen considerably since commonly held is that ‘other people’? the 1950s and material costs have likely risen England is already We need urgently to look too, leading to higher heavily developed. In instead at the mechanism construction costs. The most fact, only 2.3% of land through which supply is striking difference, though, in England is actually governed. The UK planning is the change in the cost built on.” system grants privilege over of land. Between 1994 whether something is built and 2008 the price of land or developed – or not – to rose in real terms by 267%.3 One of the seemingly local authorities. This is a Again, why is this? Prices will unshakeable myths decision that becomes only increase when supply commonly held is that inevitably politicised. outstrips demand. England is already heavily Building new homes is developed. Perhaps this Yes, demand has steadily is because 80% of us live increased owing to our in the urban areas that “Building new homes ever-increasing population; take up around 25% of is unpopular among but it has been primarily the nation’s land mass. In those who already led by the increase in those fact, only 2.3% of land in own homes and few choosing to live (or, in the England is actually built building programmes case of family breakdowns, on. Even in the South East, ever galvanise more needing to live) in ever- where development is smaller households. This is densest, the vast bulk of supporters than those superbly illustrated by the land is classified as rural. they alienate.” growth in housing of 12.1 Yes, this is what makes living million since 1952 against there so pleasant – but is it unpopular among an overall population really right that the dream those who already own increase of only 12 million. of living in the countryside homes and few building Some argue that, after should be permanently programmes ever Enshrining Individual Rights to Remove the “Planning System” | 93 galvanise more supporters gain a vested financial it greater efficiency and than those they alienate. interest in shutting others freedom of choice. The Decisions are made at out. This isn’t a malicious principle that shone so local authority level by decision, it’s simply part clear in the time of Adam a combination of the of the complex decision- Smith once more emerged; personal preferences of making that individuals incentives matter. individual councillors and instinctively make every what the electorate will day to maximise their own How then do we tolerate. As for the people personal outcomes. make people desire themselves, their reaction development? We have to is understandable. Why We can only ever build give them a stake in it. The would anybody actively enough properties with planning system currently desire new house-building public acceptance – exists to protect people’s near them? What benefit acceptance not only of rights, although it does is there to an ordinary the need for more house- so through a community- citizen in seeing new building nationwide, but orientated ‘for the greater homes constructed on also on our own doorsteps. good’ approach where it’ll a field near their house? Perhaps we could benefit often decide (sometimes They’ll receive all the from an educational arbitrarily) to trample over negatives – their quality of campaign about the the rights of individuals. life detrimented by built- need for housing, as well up surroundings, increased as appealing to people Instead we should look to traffic and more pressure who want sufficient homes legally enshrine those rights on local infrastructure and for their own children. that we value and wish to facilities – while somebody Ultimately, though, there protect but give individuals else benefits from all the are only two ways enough the right to commoditise positives. homes will be built: either them so people can reach through ‘brute force’ their own decisions as to “Ultimately, there are (illiberal); or by ensuring the relative merits of a only two ways enough people are content with, project. I’m sure we’d all even actively desire, new agree that somebody living homes will be built: development (liberal). next to a green field that is either through ‘brute proposed for development force’ (illiberal); or by Liberals should be should have a say on the ensuring people are instinctively suspicious proposal – and indeed content with, even of any attempt by probably a greater say actively desire, new governments, local or than somebody who lives national, to manipulate a few miles away, even development (liberal). the mechanisms of supply if they are in the same How then do we and demand. Are we really electoral district. make people desire surprised that a market development? We have in which the government Rights could be allocated to give them a stake in exerts such heavy influence based on a combination it.” is so horribly broken? of various factors, for Centralised planning was instance: loss of light from very popular in the 20th tall buildings, a blighting of This, then, is the current century but constantly your scenic view, additional situation. And the longer it is ended in disaster.4 During noise generated by new maintained, the greater the the 1980s, many markets residents, or even simple problem becomes. Those were liberalised and this proximity to development. who pay a high price to get is a trend that has since Groups of individuals could on the ‘property ladder’ continued, bringing with pool together their various 94 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead rights and trade them for arbitrary Green Belt. If the unpopular realities new schools, leisure centres local residents had control of this proposal. If they or roads. This direct control over building they’d be worked as planned and by affected parties would able to make their own increased land supply and mean that all building work determinations of how their thereby reduced land was, by definition, popular, community should look. prices we would see a at least with a majority; serious backlash from those otherwise it would never This policy wouldn’t apply who either enter negative be signed off. It would also only to housing. Where a equity as a result, or who use market mechanisms company wishes to build a had viewed their property to find the ‘sweet spot’ supermarket or office block value as a ‘nest egg’. This is that best suited all parties. the same rules would apply. the hardest issue to tackle. Developers would only It would also apply to cases While the property market be able to offer a certain where mineral rights were is clearly a bubble waiting amount for a particular to be found. Communities to pop, the government plot before somewhere are often opposed to which finally pops it will else became cheaper fracking for shale gas, risk vast unpopularity. This or the project became and understandably should ease over time, unviable. This would mean so. Why would you though, as anybody hoping existing residents couldn’t want the risk (however to ‘move up’ the property excessively profiteer or the small) of earthquakes market realises this is now deal would fall through and and groundwater cheaper. they’d get nothing at all. contamination without some sort of tangible For those who feel Who would you trust to benefit? queasy at the thought of make the best decision this backlash, I ask one about building on your There are, it should be question: what alternative doorstep? Your local freely admitted, some is there? Inaction will lead councillor, likely elected potential pitfalls with these to greater numbers of by a small, vocal minority, plans. Most notably, we people living in increasingly who has extremely limited can’t say for sure exactly over-crowded areas with time; or you and your what would happen to the all the inherent problems neighbours, who are land market. It’s possible this produces. The status directly affected? I would that the fees required to quo cannot continue personally choose to have procure rights would add to indefinitely. The age the final say every time the price of housing while at which people can (likely following advice not radically increasing afford their first home is given by reputable third supply: in this eventuality rising and shows all signs parties), just like I do day in, the situation would worsen. of continuing to do so. day out.. However, I do not think Eventually, enough people this is likely to be the case. will become alienated Of course, there should What is more likely, I think, from home ownership to be exemptions. Areas is that removing control take action through the with national designations based on estimating ballot box and the homes should still be protected demand and moving will then be built – quite by national policy. This instead to a free market possibly, through ‘brute would include areas of would bring large volumes force’. Would you rather outstanding beauty, of land into use, freeing change things now on ancient woodland and owners to compete with terms friendly to all, or see other irreplaceable one another in order to sell central government make habitats. It should not otherwise useless land.. the decisions for you? however, include the rather We need to be alert to Enshrining Individual Rights to Remove the “Planning System” | 95 There is always uncertainty plunging into the unknown but past experience has shown that whenever we give people power over their own lives they make better decisions overall than those made previously by others on their behalf. Tommy Long lives in Maidstone, Kent, and is a computer programmer working in the insurance sector. A recently joined Lib Dem member, he is passionate about using classical liberal means to increase the quality of people’s lives. 1 House prices have increased from an index of 100 to 8623.9 since 1952 Wellbeing Economics - Jonathan Jones Our Gross National Product, short, except that which now, is over $800 billion makes life worthwhile. As Liberal Democrats have dollars a year, but that long emphasised, the Gross National Product ultimate goal is not income counts air pollution and That was Liberal Democrat or wealth, but wellbeing (or cigarette advertising, and Robert F. Kennedy ‘happiness’). Lord (Richard) ambulances to clear our speaking in Kansas in 1968.1 Layard argues in his book highways of carnage. It But, 45 years later and Happiness: Lessons from a counts special locks for our 7,000 kilometres away, we New Science – the bible doors and the jails for the still obsess over quarterly of wellbeing economics – people who break them. GDP figures as if they, ‘Happiness is that ultimate It counts the destruction above all else, indicate goal because, unlike of the redwood and the the success or failure of the all other goals, it is self- loss of our natural wonder government’s programme. evidently good. If we are in chaotic sprawl. It counts asked why happiness napalm and counts nuclear “There are things matters, we can give no warheads and armoured we think are more further, external reason. It 3 cars for the police to fight important than just obviously does matter.’ the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman’s rifle and increasing GDP; And the Prime Minister Speck’s knife, and the reasons to embrace appreciates this too. Back television programs which or eschew policies in 2006, David Cameron glorify violence in order to beyond their effect on said, ‘It’s time we admitted sell toys to our children. growth.” that there’s more to life than money, and it’s Yet the Gross National time we focused not just Product does not allow A couple of years ago, Lib on GDP, but on GWB – for the health of our Dem business secretary General Well-Being.’4 Of children, the quality of Vince Cable attacked the course, that was a lot their education or the joy “ideological descendants easier to say when GDP of their play. It does not of those who sent children had grown by 4 per cent in include the beauty of our up chimneys”.2 Some the past year as opposed poetry or the strength of our dismissed it as Vince using to 0.5 per cent when he marriages, the intelligence hyperbole to lash out took office. But, to his credit of our public debate or against his Conservative (and thanks in no small part the integrity of our public coalition partners. But he to the Liberal Democrat officials. It measures neither was making the same point influence in coalition), he our wit nor our courage, as Kennedy: there are stuck to his guns and, in neither our wisdom nor things we think are more 2010, asked the Office for our learning, neither important than increasing National Statistics to start our compassion nor our GDP; reasons to embrace measuring wellbeing in devotion to our country, or eschew policies beyond Britain.5 it measures everything in their effect on growth. Wellbeing Economics | 97 are already infused with which the government’s “Without measuring the an understanding that main role is to empower ultimate goal — and GDP is neither the be- individuals to improve their the effect of policies all nor the end-all. Our own wellbeing, rather than commitment to improving intervening to do so for on it — it is impossible mental health – led in them. to form a consistent government by Nick Clegg, and evidence-based Paul Burstow and Norman Just as the last Liberal approach to policy- Lamb, recognising that it government (1905-15) making.” brings benefits beyond the rose to the challenge of ample economic ones – is responding to Charles one clear demonstration of Booth and Seebohm And this matters, for that. Rowntree’s new without measuring the measurements of poverty ultimate goal — and the And, at our conference in (including the concept effect of policies on it — Birmingham, in September of a ‘poverty line’) with its it is impossible to form a 2011, party members radical welfare reforms, so consistent and evidence- backed a policy paper this generation of liberals based approach to entitled A New Purpose will be at the vanguard of policy-making. As Sir Gus for Politics: Quality of Life.7 wellbeing politics. O’Donnell told the All- It set out a broad Liberal Party Parliamentary Group Democrat approach But that doesn’t mean (APPG) on Wellbeing to policy-making that we will have it easy: we Economics in 2011, one of places an appropriate will have to answer the the keys to good policy- emphasis on wellbeing. For question of what exactly a making is ‘If you treasure it, example, it recommends Liberal Democrat wellbeing measure it.’6 that ‘New policies and agenda looks like. At the proposals in future should macro end, do we aim to As the measure is fine- be accompanied by maximise overall happiness tuned and the data rolls in, a Wellbeing Impact or focus our efforts on wellbeing will rise towards Assessment’, along reducing misery? Both its rightful place atop the same lines as the Lord Layard and Professor the political agenda — Environmental Impact Daniel Kahneman – the especially as the economy Assessments that are behavioural psychologist recovers and becomes currently conducted.8 who has been at the less of a concern. Policy- forefront of the science of makers will find themselves It also suggests that wellbeing – advocate the with better evidence future Liberal Democrat latter.12 But how far are we upon which to design the manifestos include a prepared to compromise policies that best improve ‘Wellbeing Thread’, overall happiness to relieve wellbeing, as well as highlighting the policies misery? Where do we greater pressure to enact that will improve wellbeing strike the balance? It’s them. And the Liberal and explaining how 9– the wellbeing equivalent Democrats are well-placed similar to the green tabs of the tension between to lead that process. denoting environmentally focusing on raising GDP friendly policies in our 2010 and reducing poverty. In fact, some already have manifesto.10 Throughout been leading it. It was our the paper, though, the And as the evidence own Jo Swinson who set emphasis is on ensuring builds up, our dedication up the APPG on Wellbeing a ‘distinctive Liberal to evidence-based policy- Economics back in 2009. Democrat approach to making will be tested, and Our policies and priorities improving wellbeing’11, in mustn’t be found wanting. 98 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead We shouldn’t be afraid are both illiberal and crisis and its aftermath of truly radical policies illogical. We must be demonstrated – the British where they are justified vigilant about calling out economy was not nearly – the New Economics such behaviour when we as strong in 2007 as the Foundation, for example, see it, and demanding GDP figures would have has advocated reducing sufficient evidence to back made you think. And the the normal working week up claims about a policy’s same could happen to to 21 hours.13 And when effect on wellbeing. wellbeing indicators. The our preconceptions are four questions asked by the contradicted by the data, There is the further danger Office for National Statistics we cannot afford to cling – inherent in the use of any as part of the Annual to them. For instance, the metric – that the metric Population Survey since evidence so far suggests may not be a 100 per April 2011 (‘Overall, how we may need to worry cent valid indicator of the satisfied are you with your about the detrimental thing it is supposed to be life nowadays?’, ‘Overall, effect performance- measuring. And a failure to what extent do you feel related pay can have on to recognise that problem the things you do in your life happiness by increasing can itself exacerbate it, are worthwhile?’, ‘Overall, our tendency to compare because targeting the how happy did you feel ourselves to others rather indicator rather than the yesterday?’ and ‘Overall, than focusing on what we underlying reality causes how anxious did you feel have actually got.14 the two to diverge further. yesterday?’)15 are currently Just think about GCSE very good indicators of “It will be temptingly results: at first glance, a how people actually feel. easy to use the good measure of a school’s But that will not remain language of wellbeing performance. But when the case if policies are a school targets, say, the introduced to improve the as a new way of number of pupils achieving answers to those questions dressing up old five A* to C grades – without actually improving ideologies, without because that is how its wellbeing – and we must proper, thorough performance is measured guard against this. examination of the – it can improve its score evidence. We must be while actually worsening the quality of education vigilant about calling (by, for instance, focusing “Layard recommends out such behaviour on those just on the C/D banning advertising when we see it.” border at the expense of others). to children ‘to fight the constant escalation But we must be very careful The same has happened of wants’. That may in the ways we analyse and with GDP: governments’ sound illiberal to interpret the data. It will be focus on it has made it temptingly easy to use the a worse indicator of the many, and we should language of wellbeing as a health of the economy. rightly require strong new way of dressing up old Between 1992 and 2007, evidence before we ideologies, without proper, for example, real GDP rose advocate it, but if it thorough examination of by 66 per cent, but at the the evidence. Some are cost of rapidly increasing really would result already trying to do this household debt and too in greater wellbeing when advocating marriage great a reliance on the would we still oppose incentives or immigration financial sector. As a result restrictions, policies which – and as the financial it?” Wellbeing Economics | 99 Now, as liberals we rightly the Cabinet Office in 2010 A focus on wellbeing tend to instinctively recoil and Steve Webb’s rollout may also reveal whole from paternalism, and the of automatic enrolment policy areas that have wellbeing agenda faces in workplace pension been overlooked by our the criticism that it will schemes from October concentration on GDP. result in more government 2012.20 Time spent commuting, interference in our lives. for example, has been But, as Layard responds, Some liberals may be shown to be the most ‘lack of freedom is one uncomfortable with miserable of the average of the major causes of ‘nudging’, seeing it as person’s day. There may, unhappiness worldwide’, so a way for the state to therefore, be considerable a ‘government concerned manipulate people’s scope for increasing with the happiness of its behaviour without them wellbeing by improving people would not trample knowing. But, as the New or reducing that time – on individual freedoms.’16 Scientist said in June 2013, perhaps through additional such concerns ‘don’t really investment in transport But there are times when hold up’. ‘Our distaste for or by encouraging ‘to increase wellbeing’ or being nudged’, it said, more businesses near to ‘to reduce misery’ will sit ‘is understandable, but housing and vice-versa (as uneasily with us as reasons is arguably just another advocated in the Quality of for government action. cognitive bias, given that Life policy paper22). There For example, Layard our behaviour is constantly is both a challenge and recommends banning being discreetly influenced an opportunity for Liberal advertising to children by others. What’s more, Democrats here: coming ‘to fight the constant interventions only qualify up with effective policies in escalation of wants’.17 That as nudges if they don’t these hitherto-neglected may sound illiberal to many, create concrete incentives areas may be difficult, but and we should rightly in any particular direction. it will show that we are require strong evidence So the choice ultimately committed to improving before we advocate it, remains a free one.’21 people’s lives in ways that but if it really would result ‘Nudging’ will allow really matter to them. in greater wellbeing would governments to improve we still oppose it? happiness without infringing I have presented just some individual freedom, and of the challenges that Fortunately, another should play an integral role Liberal Democrats will have recent innovation in in that ‘distinctive Liberal to grapple with if we are to public policy may help to Democrat approach to be the party of wellbeing. alleviate such concerns: improving wellbeing’. But grapple with them we libertarian paternalism, or must, and soon. It will take ‘nudging’, as advocated time to build a detailed by Professors Richard “Coming up with picture of wellbeing in Thaler and Cass Sunstein, effective policies the UK, and to more fully particularly in their 2008 in these hitherto- understand its causes book Nudge: Improving neglected areas may and inhibitors. But we can decisions about health, already begin to set out the wealth and happiness.18 be difficult, but it will importance of wellbeing Their theories have already show that we are and how we will rise to the begun to be applied by committed to improving great task Senator Kennedy the Coalition Government, people’s lives in ways set out 45 years ago: ‘to with the establishment of that really matter to confront the poverty of the Behavioural Insights them.” satisfaction, purpose, and Team (or ‘nudge unit’)19 in dignity that afflicts us all.’ 100 | The Coalition And Beyond, Liberal Reforms for the Decade Ahead Jonathan Jones is 14 Layard, Happiness, p.158 15 Office for National Statistics, Personal Parliamentary Assistant to Well-being in the UK, 2012/13, 30 July Duncan Hames MP. He 2013, p.2 Find out more - http://www.liberalreform.org.uk Email - [email protected] Twitter @liberal_reform Facebook /liberalreform