Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Gerald Warner: It's his party, but he'll cry whether he wants to or not

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 15 March 2009
If Gordon hopes to make his mark at the G20 he is deluded
GORDON has been behaving for weeks now like an excited small boy looking forward to a party which has assumed an exaggerated importance in his fevered mind. Most unwisely, the Prime Minister has invested such remaining credit as he commands in the ho
ped-for success of the G20 meeting in London on April 2. It is the last in a long train of illusions he has cultivated and this time his disappointment may be terminal.

If Gordon Brown were a Roman consul, the priests would be warning him that the pigeon's entrails were revealing auguries of appalling portent. The contemporary indicators are bad enough. The first prerequisite of Brown's planned reinvention at the G20 was to secure his special relationship with Barack Obama. By pleading, cajolery and calling in every favour the US owed Britain for Tony Blair's fawning collaboration, Brown's people were able to secure him a B List invitation to the White House that did him more harm than good.

Gordon may try to convince himself that the world now views him as Barack's key collaborator; but Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel will not be experiencing any jealousy when they converge on the new US president at the G20 meeting. It is a measure of the closeness of the Franco-German axis that the two governments have just held a joint cabinet meeting in Berlin. They are resolutely opposed to the G20 conference committing governments such as theirs to further stimulus spending.

This is one policy on which Obama and Brown are closer; but if Gordon imagined this was going to give him victory at the summit, that delusion was cruelly quashed last week when the White House announced it did not intend to seek a "specific commitment" on the economy. "We're not going to negotiate some specific economic percentage or commitment," said Robert Gibbs, Obama's spokesman. That dispelled any hope of Gordon's Global New Deal – though only a fantasist like Brown could have taken the possibility seriously.

With Gordon's fox shot, that pragmatic approach also lessens the likelihood of a collision between the US and the Franco-German alliance. Where Brown can salvage some common ground with the Sarkozy/Merkel bloc is in pressing for tighter global regulation of the financial sector. Yet in doing so he runs the risk of distancing himself further from Obama.

The messiah talked a good game while he was campaigning for the presidency about America opening itself to the world. That, however, does not extend to allowing the free-market interplay of Uncle Sam's financial sector to be crawled over by a bunch of foreigners. The same intrinsic isolationism that caused Dubya to keep America out of the International Criminal Court, in the juridical sphere, will ensure that globalised regulation of American citizens doing what they do best – making a fast buck – is not going to happen.

If Gordon presses for it, he will only add a second cause of resentment to his faux pas in presenting Obama with a seven-volume biography of the President's most-hated bogeyman, Winston Churchill.

So, what can the G20 summit achieve? Nothing, so far as improving our economic situation is concerned. After all, that is not its purpose. Its purpose is to look purposeful and, in doing so, to improve the credibility and poll ratings of participants among their respective electorates. The Japanese view everybody with suspicion. The Chinese are smarting from America's strictures anent their overvalued currency and the consequent 17.5% slump in their exports.

America is hopping around on one foot trying to pull its socks on, since its Treasury team is still non-existent apart from Tim Geithner at the top. It was revealed last week the US Treasury is not even answering its telephones, so great is the disarray caused by the transition. The British team is composed of Gordon's trusties: Baroness Vadera, of "Grannies will lose their blouses" notoriety during the backdoor nationalisation of Railtrack, is in charge.

If Gordon hopes to make his mark at the G20's £50m knees-up as saviour of the world, he is sadly deluded. There is only one saviour, as Barack Obama will make clear even as he goes through the motions of thanking Gordon the Baptist for his warm-up act.

The necessary remedy for the oncoming depression is tax cuts on a scale the blinkered Keynesian clones at the G20 would never contemplate, even if they balk at the scale of Gordon's coin clipping. This event will be a charade designed for peak time television audiences and will not help us in any way to escape the financial crisis. It will also be a further nail in Gordon Brown's political coffin.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 14 March 2009 7:42 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Gerald Warner
 
1

Itchy,

15/03/2009 01:47:46
"The necessary remedy for the oncoming depression is tax cuts on a scale the blinkered Keynesian clones at the G20 would never contemplate"

Spot on.

No doubt there will be the usual suspects here, posting that the current crisis is the result of capitalism but they are all Marxist idiots, just like Gordon Brown.

Brown loves tax and even his tax cuts are tax rises in disguise.
2

Forward not Back,

15/03/2009 06:34:05
The problem with the tax cuts suggested is that public sector redundancies of at least 30% would be needed as well.

Brown can't face a Winter of Discontent in his desperate and deluded bid to be re-elected.
3

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 15/03/2009 08:41:09
Let us not forget that this laissez faire deregulation began with the full approval of Margaret Thatcher's Conservative Government?

What was it the dear Lady once so clearly stated: "There is no way in which one can buck the market".

Well, the dear Lady's observation has been proved beyond dispute with vastly over-priced stocks and shares, undervalued private pensions, and massive negative equity!
4

FLUB,

a rocky outcrop in eastern central Scotland 15/03/2009 09:16:25
#2 - You're right, however, the problem is who do we trust to dispassionately decide the reduction. Each time there are 'efficiency savings' to use the modern euphemism, we end up losing home carers, school cleaners, dustmen and other vital workers, to give a few examples.

We never lose 'external relations consultants, 'marketing managers' or 'committee administrators'.

The local council here on the rocky outcrop are giving consideration to reducing bin collections from fortnightly to monthly (!)

How many binmen for the chop?
5

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/03/2009 09:34:53
4 You could make vast savings in the public sector by having a bonfire of the regulators and the managers. The whole system is dominated by chiefs and not indians, a mantra brought in by Labour in the mistaken belief that private sector management methods will result in improved performance - which is rubbish.
6

FLUB,

a rocky outcrop in eastern central Scotland 15/03/2009 09:44:15
I think burning is a bit harsh, though I agree with the second half of your sentence.

The attempt to transfer private sector business practices into all parts of the public sector has been an unmitigated disaster.

The public sector did run reasonably efficiently, and I stress reasonably, but as we now see, the private sector was nowhere near as efficient as we were told to believe.

#1 - the current crisis is the result of capitalism; it's just that "Marxist idiots" like GB only understand the theory, they don't understand the practice.

It's a bit like reading the owner's handbook of a car, then expecting to be able to drive it right away.
7

Itchy,

15/03/2009 10:24:28
#6 The current crisis is a result of anti-capitalism, you idiot.

Specifically, intervention in the money supply by means of a central bank. Central banks are a nationalization of the money supply and a key plank of the Communist manifesto.

BTW if you have watched Gordon Brown raise taxes, increase spending and regulation, inflate the currency and generally behave as if the state was omnipotent and still think that we are living under capitalism, then clearly words have no meaning to you.
8

Itchy,

15/03/2009 10:25:36
#3 the litany of woes you describe is the result of state intervention in the market.

Kindly get a grasp of facts before you post.
9

Itchy,

15/03/2009 10:26:46
#2 High taxes and Gordon Brown's client state are crushing wealth and keeping people out of jobs.

Cutting taxes would make the economy grown and create jobs.
10

Observer,,

Glasgow 15/03/2009 14:28:01
Itchy Marx described a trade cycle which inevitably occurs within the capitalist system. Which it has done. Which it is doing now. I know you would like to blame this on Bill Clinton, marxists, socialism, little green men from Mars, whatever, but you can't: it's capitlism so deal with it.
11

Forward not Back,

15/03/2009 21:15:05
#9 - I agree but Brown doesn't have the political will to implement it. Britain has maxed out all the credit cards that available as well hence the reason for creating money out of thin air which will destroy the pound.
12

FLUB,

a rocky outcrop in eastern central Scotland 15/03/2009 21:19:27
Itchy, I'm not an idiot. The state intervention, such as it was, would have been better absent than not, since it's had no effect. I'm not that far from you either - cut income tax to a flat rate on earnings above a realistic ceiling and load purchase taxes to fund local and national requirements.
13

Itchy,

16/03/2009 12:42:32
"10 Observer,,Glasgow 15/03/2009 14:28:01
Itchy Marx described a trade cycle which inevitably occurs within the capitalist system."

Wrong. It happens because of intervention in the money supply, by means of a central bank. That is what has happened.

It is interventionism and not capitalism and you are an idiot.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.