Why industrial policy isn’t working

There can be good reasons for governments to pursue a so-called industrial policy – that is, a policy that sustains or develops certain industries in order to achieve national goals. In less developed countries, an industrial policy can help develop foundational industries, such as energy or food production. In developed countries, a government might pursue an industrial policy during wartime, providing financial assistance to armaments producers.

But in Britain today, there are several compelling reasons for not pursuing an industrial policy. Excessive corporate welfare is sucking the dynamism out of the UK economy. As things stand, government efforts to shape and direct industry are slowing growth, encouraging corporations to depend on state handouts and distracting from the core role of the state in providing decent public services and infrastructure.

Read the full article here.

The economic change we need won’t come from Labour

Following the UK Labour Party’s annual conference, which wrapped up last week, we now have a better idea of its economic plans. Though plenty could still change before the next General Election, it’s clear that Labour is not planning to offer an alternative to the existing Conservative economic programme. Essentially, what leader Keir Starmer and shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves are promising is the same old muddling through, but without the Tory ‘instability’ and ‘chaos’.

Indeed, in content, Labour’s policies are very similar to those already in operation. And since these policies have done much to keep Britain stuck in an economic depression, this portends a dismal financial future for most of the population. At the heart of the problem lies the quest for ‘economic stability’.

Read the full article here.

Phil Mullan will be speaking at the Battle of Ideas festival in London in the session, ‘Bouncing back or basket case? The state of the UK economy’, on Saturday 28th October.

This is a financial crisis waiting to happen

The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Credit Suisse this month ought to be a wake-up call. The fall of these two very different banks points to a deeper underlying malaise in the world’s advanced economies.

Some have blamed the West’s leading central banks, especially the US Fed, for SVB and Credit Suisse’s demise. They claim that central bankers’ decision to delay interest rate rises, only to rise them aggressively as inflation began to spiral last year, made things very tough for the likes of SVB. But blaming these banks’ collapse on an interest-rate hike ignores the deeper problem. The truth is that Western economies have been held afloat artificially since the 2008 financial crisis, courtesy of super-easy monetary policies. And now we’re starting to pay the price.

Read the full article here.

How not to grow the economy

Despite the many legitimate criticisms of the short-lived Liz Truss administration, it did leave one exceptional legacy. It put the question of economic growth, and the importance of raising productivity, back on the mainstream political agenda.

It took an extraordinary triple whammy – the pandemic lockdowns, the post-lockdown disruptions to global supply chains, and the war in Ukraine – to finally force the British political class, in the shape of the Truss administration, to acknowledge the dire state of the economy.

Hence, over recent months, Conservative and Labour front benches have been talking about the importance of growing the economy. In January, prime minister Rishi Sunak announced five key pledges to address people’s ‘priorities’. The following month, Labour leader Keir Starmer countered with his ‘five missions for a better Britain’. A commitment to economic growth was at the centre of both parties’ five-point plans.

Both plans have been criticised for vagueness. But there is a deeper problem with Labour’s and the Tories’ approach to the productivity slump. While both parties have bought into the new economic consensus – that is, the belief that low business investment is at the root of lacklustre growth – they also share the belief that businesses need more state financial support. In today’s circumstances, though, this would mostly act to entrench the low-growth quagmire.

Read the full article here.

The end of the age of globalisation

The economic consequences of Russia’s bloody and despicable assault on Ukraine are very much a secondary consideration to the immediate human and geopolitical implications. And since the various national responses to the conflict are still so fluid, it is far too early to be able to identify the war’s precise longer-term economic effects. Nevertheless, it is possible to suggest tentatively what could unfold on the international economic front. While today’s military confrontation appears to revive US leadership of the old West, because of its dominant military capabilities, in the longer term it is likely to speed up the shift to a post-American world. The invasion could hasten the demise of the US-led economic order.

Read the full article here.