A circle of extremism

4305

a-circle-of-extremism

If you subscribe to the idea that politics is a straight line, then for you there is a far right and a far left separated by the great central plains of minor differences. This separation is distinguished by the singular outcome of either the right or left establishing a system of governance that is diametrically opposite. The far left would be characterised by the abolition of private property, primarily, privacy and the complete subservience of the population to the pursuit of a commonly held good, excluding those that didn't hold the 'good will' dear. The far-right would exclude those it feared/hated, primarily, abolish/co-opt private property and privacy and attempt to ensure that the population pursued a centrally directed good. It depends where and what the emphasis of political priority falls upon that allows others to define.

Here is where the idea of politics being a straight line breaks down: the realisation that extremists, be they religious, political or just deranged are merely fanatics intent on the violent overthrow of the state. The outcomes of which are fairly certain, and are almost identical. The end result of political revolution has been seen throughout history, Stalin, The Khemer Rouge, Hitler, Mao et al. It is the outcome that should define what type of label is handed to the politics of a tribe. In the UK the BNP is continually referred to as the far-right, yet their policies drip with socialist nationalization, their descriptive is based upon one policy, not all. Yet they should be referred to as an a extremist political party; with no left or right far or otherwise prefixed. The same goes for the SWP, ANL, UAF who are all extremist groups.

The idea that you can break politics into closely defined neighbourhoods with certain areas juxtaposed is a purposely confusing message. Politics is the pursuit of power by representatives of parts of society. Within that society there are outliers who trend to extremist positions. The outcomes are all the same, a rule of centralized power characterized by extreme violence and a fear of the unknown. It is neither left nor right it is merely an expression of hatred of the individual.

ISOS - The Economic and Political Landscape for The Next Generation

4302

isos-the-economic-and-political-landscape-for-the-next-generation-

On Thursday, students from across the UK travelled to Westminster for the ASI’s Independent Seminar on the Open Society. Sir Malcolm Rifkind opened the seminar, discussing the UK’s relationship with the EU and convincingly arguing that the UK’s approach to European integration should be flexible and based upon our national interest. Following this was Brendan O’Neill, who certainly surprised quite a few in the room with his condemnation of moralising environmentalists. Rejecting of their policies of wearing thermals and limiting water use, he argued that climate change is best tackled through the use of large-scale geo-engineering projects.

After the break, the ASI’s own Madsen Pirie forecast a view of Britain after the next election. Drawing on inspiration from public services in Sweden, he considered the likely education and welfare policies that will be pursued in the next parliament. Our final speaker was the ever-exuberant Lembit Opik, who gave a well-received speech about the need for politicians to act with humility, courage and inspiration.

Following lunch, ISOS hosted its first ever debate, considering the motion “This house would prefer to be led by the invisible hand” On the proposition were Rushabh Ravanat, a debater from LSE and James Drey, president of the Oxford Union. Chris Harman, editor of International Socialism and David Ransom, previous co-editor of the New Internationalist opposed the motion. The proceedings were chaired by Peter Barton from Debate Mate. Each side was lively, impassioned and strongly argued their case, while the questions and statements from the floor were excellent and provoked further retaliation between the two sides. However, (and luckily for the ASI!) at the end of the day the motion was carried with an increased majority.

With positive feedback flowing in, the seminar was a great success. However, this would have not been possible without the involvement of the students and the high quality of questions asked, as well the sterling performances given by our speakers and debaters. We would also like to warmly thank The Spectator, Prospect, Private Eye and Total Politics, who very kindly provided magazines for the students.

It wasn't me

4306

it-wasnt-me

Why are 1 in 8 girls pregnant At Robeson High?

Ryanair – The people’s carrier

4304

ryanair-the-peoples-carrier

You need to be a certain age to appreciate how Ryanair, which was featured recently on Panorama, has transformed British air travel – and why many middle-age people believe Ryanair is one of the great commercial successes of recent times.

Back in the late 1970s, you faced a Hobson’s Choice if you wished to visit Poland – or indeed anywhere else behind the Iron Curtain. I can recall a standard £250 (late 1970 prices) return flight price being quoted from BA if you wished to fly to Warsaw - anywhere else, including Krakow, was off the menu.

Despite Panorama’s focus on its ancillary costs, the reality remain that Ryanair’s prices, especially for mid-week flights to its less popular European destinations, defy belief. Of course, Ryanair does levy additional costs to the basic airfare. Some of these are outside its control, notably the Government’s APD (Air Passenger Duty) charges. Others can be readily avoided, notably the cost of transporting luggage in the hold. Is there really a need for a suitcase in the hold for a stay of a few days’ duration?

Ryanair has unquestionably changed Europe’s transport patterns. Flights to Eastern Europe, and to Western Europe, can often be bought at silly prices – a scenario from which millions have benefited. Of course, you do not receive the high quality on-board service that might be offered by other far more expensive airlines. But Ryanair’s punctuality record remains impressive.

There are many Ryanair obsessives, including this writer, who can only rejoice at the derisory airfares that Ryanair offers - often below £1 and well below the cost of a one-stop 300 metre tube ticket between Green Park and Piccadilly - to far-flung European destinations at off-peak times.

Against that background - and assuming the maintenance of top-class safety standards - is any substantive complaint against Ryanair really valid?

Spendthrifts

4307

spendthrifts

This week the British government – which is now borrowing upwards of £20m per hour just to pay its bills – decided to splash some cash on the arts world.

According to the BBC, it will provide £45m to fund a National Film Centre, which will house the British Film Institute (clearly their existing offices will no longer do), host key film events (because obviously London lacks appropriate venues), and contain 5 digital cinemas (something the private sector plainly doesn't provide). Then there's £50m for an 11-storey extension to the Tate Modern, another £22.5m to expand the British Museum, and £10m for a new visitors' centre at Stonehenge.

Frankly, it beggars belief that the government can claim that they are cutting public spending to the bone, that any cuts beyond the pathetic ones they've planned will result in abject destitution, and that anyone who suggests such a thing must be an evil, heartless brute, while simultaneously lavishing £127.5m that they don't have on vanity projects that we don't need.

Couldn't the British film industry pay for a national film centre if they really wanted one? Couldn't the Tate Modern just build a more modest extension with the £75m they've already raised privately? If the British Museum is running out of space, couldn't it loan some of its exhibits to other museums? And as for Stonehenge, does a mysterious pile of rocks next to a dual carriageway really warrant a £10m visitors centre?

Spending taxpayers' money on 'arts and culture' is questionable at the best of times. When you already have the biggest budget deficit in the developed world, it is nigh-on indefensible.

Where economics and responsibility meet

4301

where-economics-and-responsibility-meet

After 12 years of Labour government we are discovering that there was never anything ''new' about them and once again they have destroyed the UK's finances, but this time they have taken society with it. We now live in an era where, as David Cameron suggested, adults are treated like children and children are treated like adults. Correctly he wishes to do something about this and revitalize our lives by handing back much of the responsibility for ourselves that we have lost over the past decade. We hopefully will soon find ourselves at a crossroads where economics and responsibility meet.

There is much debate currently over whether a measly amount should be trimmed from the UK government's budget in the coming years. (Even though Team Cameron have agreed to increase government spending up to 2011). In the likelihood that there are going to be cuts then this means that it is to have a direct impact on public spending and somewhere someone will be found wanting of a public service because of this. To navigate this ridiculous argument over the coming decade, year-on-year the subjugated private sector should be unburdened of regulation and taxation and allowed to grow. At the same time the responsibility that people are being given should come with a carrot attached. For example, choose private healthcare and receive a cut in your overall tax bill; the same could occur when you send your child to a private school.

Rather than cutting public services, incentivize the workers within it to leave. Let them see how much better they could be paid in the private sector, and as the private sector grows then demand will fuel higher wages. As the private sector is freed up then tax revenue will increase as the country once again becomes an attractive place to do business and bring up a family.

Tax havens

4299

tax-havens

With news that Tax havens’ zero rates are coming under threat, we have an upcoming event on the subject, that you may wish to attend. Click here to find out more.

Privatisation – The last refuge of a spendthrift?

4294

privatisation--the-last-refuge-of-a-spendthrift-

The Government’s aim to raise £16 billion through such sales seems optimistic, unless there are plans to sell large stakes in either RBS or Lloyds. Given the £220 billion gilt issuance programme for this year - funded mainly by the money-printing Quantitative Easing policy - even £16 billion is a comparatively modest sum.

Around £11 billion is expected from Local Authority sales: the remainder is targeted from business disposals. Various candidates have been suggested. Most were discussed in last year’s ASI publication: Privatisation – Reviving the Momentum. Subsequently, the Government’s 36% British Energy stake was sold – and the cupboard is getting rather bare.

In reality, it is £billions of proceeds – not £millions – that are now desperately needed. Selling the Royal Mail, ex its burgeoning pension fund deficit, would raise several £billions despite the company’s putative value falling daily as strike action continues.

The Government apparently lacks the political will to privatise Scottish Water, whilst Network Rail is not yet ready to re-enter the private sector. The 33% Urenco nuclear stake could raise c£1 billion, but agreement with the two other shareholders is necessary. The Channel Tunnel rail link may be a viable candidate, along with the CDC Group.

But the plunge in media valuations means that any sales proceeds from selling BBC Worldwide, or especially Channel 4, would be lower than previously. The Tote has long been an obvious target but its valuation keeps slipping. Leading bidder, Gala Coral, is struggling: even Ladbrokes has recently been driven to a rights issue.

British Waterways’ operating returns remain very low, despite its attractive asset portfolio, whose value has fallen of late. Other names in the frame are distinctly small-time. None of the Royal Mint, the Meteorological Office, Ordnance Survey or the Queen Elizabeth Centre is going to generate sizeable sales proceeds.

Which will the Government choose?

The Royal Mail loses another customer

4296

the-royal-mail-loses-another-customer

Well, that's another small monthly earner that the Royal Mail has lost because of its disruptions and strike threats. I have just organised to pay my credit card bills online. I used to send cheques, but if they get delayed in the mail I know I could find myself racking up huge interest payments. So now I'm not going to mail cheques any more. It's even quicker, and it saves the costs of the stamps.

Sadly for the Royal Mail, it also means less revenue for them. Not much, but then how many millions of us are doing the same thing, or something like it? The answer is quite a lot – the number of letters that the Royal Mail carried fell by about 500m over the period 2007/8 and I cannot imagine that the 2009 figures will reverse the trend. Their monopoly status has left them resistant to change, and too willing to raise the price of a stamp to cover their inefficiencies. Unless they do something fast – privatizing themselves, or finding a commercial network partner to breathe some better ways of working into the business and find new things for it to do – then the Royal Mail seems to be in a downward spiral.

Dr Butler's book The Rotten State of Britain is now in paperback.

Working in the UK

4295

working-in-the-uk

Recently I was at dinner speaking to an overseas student doing her PhD at Cambridge University. For someone who has only been in the UK a number of weeks, she told the most unbelievable story about English emigration authorities.

I was told that even though she had already done her undergraduate and masters degree in the UK, she had to complete the full application for a visa in order to do her PhD. If this wasn’t bad enough, she also had to pay a £20 phone bill to get an appointment – "you are now number 25 in line, please hold" – to have a new biometric card made, plus an additional £350 fee to get her new visa.

But the struggle is not over for her yet. The UK is very reluctant to let overseas people, who want to contribute to the country’s economy, in to the country in the first place. This means that you can’t apply to live here unless you have been studying here for 10 years, or been working at least 5 years in the UK. This policy means that all overseas students, after doing their degree, are kindly told to leave the country, unless they are able to get a job directly after finishing university.

The good question is now to consider where the overseas students go. Not surprisingly they tend to go to the US along with many of their British colleagues. So what is really happening here is? Students going to university in the UK, who speak perfect English and whose qualifications are requested to go to the US. The most repelling thing about this case is that the UK is estimated to need about 12 million highly educated emigrants during the next 40 years in order to be able to pay for the social benefits provided to an aging population.

The alternative of this would be an increase in taxes of about 10 percent, which would certainly devastate the British economy. You may have a Labour government, but they know nothing about the labour market, which is unfortunately the case of many European governments.