I will be forever grateful to you, you changed my whole life and I will continue to preach on your behalf for the whole world to hear that you saved me from huge financial debt with just a small Investment, thank you Jihan Wu you're such a life saver
As a beginner in this, it’s essential for you to have a mentor to keep you accountable. Jihan Wu is also my trade analyst, he has guided me to identify key market trends, pinpointed strategic entry points, and provided risk assessments, ensuring my trades decisions align with market dynamics for optimal returns.
Jihan Wu Services has really set the standard for others to follow, we love him here in Canada 🇨🇦 as he has been really helpful and changed lots of life's
It's time we had a genuine Centre-Left government......or even coalition. To keep the UK from breaking up. Why not have a coalition of Lib Dem/Green/SNP/Plaid Cymru?? ...yes, I know many would spit their coffee/tea/cereal/ whatever out.....but this just might be the answer. I'm tired of right-wing policies from whoever is in government. They just cause more damage, and more division in society. Such a coalition would indeed be a lot of peoples' nightmare; but I think it's absolutely what the UK needs now, because I believe even more people DO want such a coalition government.
@@nickbarton3191 Are you suggesting that Tufton Street could be influenced by (say) the $200M that Forbes reported was spent on lobbying by the fossil fuel companies back in 2019?
Utter bollocks. If anyone is interested in the plight of the indigenous lower classes of these islands it is Reform. Labour and Tory have long and storied histories of corporate capture.
I am pleased that you touched on the notion of 'personal advantage'. I think that this is the key motivating factor for the majority of politicians. I think a lot of them start with the best intentions but once the lobby begins offering tickets to concerts and free glasses their goals become corrupted, not that they would admit it or perhaps even realise it (if we are being generous). This is why the system needs to change to make politicians subject to the same rules about gifts as civil servants. I don't hold out much hope for it happening though.
As an Aussie, this applies to us and no doubt to all countries that have bought into this neoliberal mindset - quite totally ruining life for the average resident
Driving home this evening from a parents evening in the state school where I’m a teacher I was hearing that Keir Starmer and whichever secretary of state or minister who was on the radio are now blaming the civil service for holding them back. So this video is extremely apposite to the current situation. Thank you RJM.
Richard you are right. I think the majority of people of this country have lost faith with the government, monarchy, political parties, institutions and have little confidence in things getting better! We need a leader with a vision that the vast majority (75%+) could identify with and who had a set of values that everyone could strive to adhere to!
@@davidmead6337let's imagine a country that's decentralised allowing its regions to shape their future development, a clean and green environment that encourages everyone to adopt an active travel lifestyle. Having a national healthcare system that actively encourages prevention rather than cure that is free at the point of delivery. A country that stands for doing the right thing and shows utter contempt to those who don't! Making this idea a reality will take blood sweat and extreme effort from everyone! Are you on board?
The flaw in the system of government & governance is perfectly highlighted by how many Ministers & MP find plum jobs as: directors, non-exec's, "consultants" or "advisors" to big businesses once they leave politics where the earn their former salary for 1 day a week or 6 board meetings a year.
The outsourcing paradigm, and the turning of government departments into firm-like agencies has utterly destroyed the structure of government. Government is no longer hierarchical, the relationships are defined by contracts, often labrynthine, absurdly complex, highly prescriptive and punitive, and with excessive need for upward reporting. The contracts often stand for absurdly long times...10 years or more. They function in exactly the same way as the Soviet 5 year plans, except they hold for even longer! In the neoliberal quest for private sector efficiency we have ended up with the mirror image of the Soviet command economy and politicians and indeed all public servants are tied up in a quagmire of contract law, drowning in paper work. It is insanity, and without a sledgehammer being taken to the neoliberal ideology that is strangling Britain, we are heading for collapse, guaranteed.
Most ministers don't know anything about the department they are in charge of and have little incentive to learn because they will be "shuffled" to another department or to the backbenches in a few months.
I was listening to a US veteran of Iwo Jima and something he said struck a cord with me that I saw in work life today. He said that most of the men on that beech, had their heads buried in the sand just waiting to die and what saved their lives is the few soldiers who were killers, they were the ones in small groups and sometimes alone, that moved forward, cleared the concealed bunkers and allowed those behind them to get off the beech. I think today in work, it’s called riding the coat tails of others. Few people know how to do there whole job and the rest use those people to make themselves look competent.
Under small government with freedom of choice would you even be able to build up an army in an emergency? Perhaps freedom of choice only works one way.
@@lonevoice Rather strange that people be drawn to looking at military comparisons in such a discussion. There are nuances in the pertinent histories which illustrate the need for a broader understanding, and benefits therein for our analysis. 2 books for perusal, in this - 'Secret Affairs' by Mark Curtis (former fellow of Chatham House, i.e. it's a serious work) And, 'Conjouring Hitler', by Guido Preperata < I might not have spelt this correctly
Why is the miltary analogy strange ? it's about leadership, skill and determination, things no military can succeed without ........ and that every government will fail without.
This anecdote misses the point entirely. I also struggle to see how humans react in a war zone is applicable to day to day life. That ~2% of humans can kill other humans without psychological distress does mean they would make good leaders. For a start, half of them are psychopaths. The other half just seem to be able to disassociate their actions on the battlefield from their life off it. Since WW2 the US military has found that rehearsing close combat improves soldiers ability to perform on the battlefield. Unfortunately it doesn't help with the physiological problems that come later, such as PTSD. Anyway, the biggest problem isn't competence, but rather people don't know or can't agree on what they want. They also never like the compromises that have to be made to balance all their wishy-washy wants against each other. I design complicated electronic systems for a living and the hardest part is getting customers to decide what they want. Generally what you get are vague woolly ideas and impossible wishlists. I think that last sentence describes government policy over the last few decades quite accurately!
Neoliberalism is worse than that, it effectively gives power to the corporations thus by-passing democracy. Ultimately, doesn’t matter much who gets elected if enough ministers believe in it. As to Starmer's position, I couldn't say.
These corporations are mostly oligopoly bodies providing network services, which enables them to squeeze out economic rent and pay vast salaries and dividends.
when wearing tens of thousands of worth clothes, watches, rings and shoes from private sector they will believe whatever private sector says them to believe
Handing over more power to business without proper regulation in place plays a massive part. Too often you see corporation's upping costs, spilling waste, fire and re-hirer and wage reduction. If you choose to sell off everything and leave it to business you have to regulate properly.
@@blackwavenoise Private interests managing public services are looking to asset strip the concern. Break it into the most valuable parts and sell it on. Our regulatory bodies have no teeth.
The answer is not more regulation it is to remove the constraining regulation which leads to corporatist control and the squashing of SME’s and entrepreneurs. Limited, judicial regulation can be beneficial but this cannot successfully be brought in from the top down, curated by corrupt and captured central government and NGO’s. The answer to propaganda and disinformation is always more information and more speech and discussion not exclusion, bans and less speech. Common law is the thing that protects us from harm and allows for ground up common sense governance where judicial regulation is required. The “Experts”!have spectacularly failed in regulating themselves.
The worst monopoly is central government, particularly those so called democracies that have two party systems where puppets are installed to give the false idea of democratic choice. People are waking up and the winds of real change are blowing. Too many people have been harmed and personally affected by the coerced injections and the winds of real change are blowing stronger and stronger. 😊
This is a story that most people will never hear in today’s media landscape but when most people talk about the “good old days” they are talking about post WW2 and the post WW2 consensus.
The post WW2 consensus contained the seeds of its own destruction. The economy lurched from crisis to crisis and the period ended with the dash for growth of 1970 and the collapse 1974. Joining the EEC was the death blow.
When I was in my late teens early 20’s I was very interested in politics and spent some time in the company of several MPs. Far from being really smart I was appalled at how thick they were. I think most MPs would earn far less if they were working in the private sector. There might be some clever politicians, I am not saying I met them all, but there is not a large pool of very talented people for the PM to pick from. Therefore to expect them to run large Government departments well for me is fanciful.
Many MPs went to Cambridge or Oxford Universities and illogically believe that makes them clever enough to run any government department. But George Osborne with his degree in history became Chancellor of the Exchequer and was, unsurprisingly a disaster - now of course giving advice to Rachel Reeves. I have a first class degree in chemistry from a Russell group university but of course I understand I wouldn't know enough to run the NHS or UK education . Experienced doctors and teachers make far more sense.
@@gillcorless5273 You understand your limitations, you would therefore look to "Experts" in the field to advise you. This cannot be said for ANY politician that has come through the standard route. They think they know it all.
It's a long time since we had any expectations of Tory ministers. But the failure of the Westminster political class is almost complete now that Labour has unashamedly sold out and become Corporate Labour.
Having read Rory Stewart's book, I can say your analysis is spot on. Whilst I disagree with Stewart on principal, my view is that he paints a good picture of a disorganised rabble, whose only interest was stroking their own egos rather than doing the job they were elected to do
I feel it is not to do with belief, it is to do with whether or not they care. I find most politicians who are in powerful positions are addicted to two things; Power, and other peoples money.
Classic example, Eric Pickles, put in charge of local government by Cameron, he didn't believe that local government should have any services not be delivered other than by private sector contracts, as leader of Bolton Council he wanted to do this but did not achieve it.
It's just the same here in Sweden. Governments have been overreaching for decades. The current troubles are a symptom of inability to cope. The public sector has not been what it ought to be since the golden days of the 1960s. There are many inherent problems with government. One is that people can make bad decisions without having to face the consequences. We need to ask what government is really for, and put the focus on that. Natural monopolies such as network services need to be controlled so that they do not abuse that monopoly advantage. And our destructive, inefficient and unjust tax system needs to be superseded, since it is the prime cause of the obesity of government due to the large scale of poverty and inequality it causes
Excellent in setting out important ideas (often ideas that are not properly discussed at large ie by the 'Media') simply. One of the very few academics who bothers to do this.
What puzzles me is that people like Liz Truss don't believe in government and believe that the private sector has all the answers. Why are they in politics at all if they don't believe in it?
I believe the issue is that there is a difference between state provision of a good thing and one or other party using that thing as a platform to further their ideology. Then of course the other party begins to want to dismantle the platform rather than fixing the ideological interference.
I would suggest that we don't want career politicians, who have not held down a job outside politics for at least five years. Also for 40 years the EU drove the big decisions and our politicians do not have the experience to do so since Brexit.
kudos professor (from china), I have watched several of your videos recently and today I found out that you are a professor at Sheffield, coincidentally, from which I graduated a decade ago :)
I'm not holding my breath either. It strikes me though that in large part, the failure of Privatisation - of Trains, Water, Energy etc - to deliver for the People (but rather for management & shareholders) was due to criminally poorly written Contracts & Regulator's TOS. So much so that one has to suspect the motivation behind it all
Government control or not, ‘real improvement’ will require at least 2 things: time and (large amounts of) money. Money to compensate for the decades of underinvestment and time for the work to be done (rather longer than one parliament). In the mean time, the one thing government ownership might produce is better coordination of different parts of the system. But then again, I remember British Rail….
@@charlesbruggmann7909 Huge amounts of money have been wasted over the past 25 years eg the unnecessary replacement of entire fleets of rolling stock and the incompetent management of electrification. This is largely due to DfT and ORR interference.
@@charlesbruggmann7909 Not you remember the myths & lies of British Rail. It was actually running well & delivering good services in many parts of the country. Inter-City 125 was a great success. By the mid 70's it was free from the drag of having to pay compensation to the Big 4 shareholders as a result of nationalisation (compensation extended by the Heath government) so could invest. Sure bad decisions were made but in large part "This is the age of the Train" signified success. It was the Treasury that prevented the speedy rollout of AWS(Advanced Warning System). Then John Major privatised the railways in a botched & hurried way with Blair & Brown not interested in making things better for passengers.
@@EMidMSO It's not only about ideology here, but also the utter incompetence of ministers. How could they know, hardly any of them have business experience nor of contract law.
What i never understand from politicians is the argument that private sector are better than the public sector. Yes, there are things that are better done run as a business, but is government a business? The other key facet is that there are lessons that can be learnt each way, but if do not understand your own area of responsibility, how can it be improved? Spot on what Richard says here, but perhaps it should be added that many of ministers in government heading departments do not have the necessary competences either, hence how can they ever understand, let alone have belief?
The problem with so many politicians who claim the private sector know best, is that they have never worked in the private sector and experienced the shambolic mismanagement, the poor staff relations, the bad customer service, the wasted money, all covered up and forgotten because the profits are good, the shareholders are happy, and the bosses get their bonuses.
Privatisation is the best way for governments to unload their responsibilities. Starmer has simply created an alternative face to neoliberalism and the sooner voters disown those two parties and the fascist Farage mob, the better.
Public services are effectively being defunded based on a false premise that Taxes fund those services & therefore creates a false ceiling with unnecessary constraints.
There are still limits on what can be spent on public services, and then there is the damage done by our inefficient and punitive tax system, which is rarely discussed
Is government focused on satisfying the needs of the public or the super wealthy? I must admit, I think government is in a transition towards the later, and the increasing use of the private sector and the clamours for small government is all part of that.
British cabinets suffer from the disease of gentlemanism. A good example is the delusion of the effortless superiority of Balliol men in the summer 1914 cabinet. Cabinet ministers believe themselves omniscient though many of them have little experience outside politics. Churchill was picked to be Chancellor of the Exchequer but got wiped out in the 1929 stock market crash along with John Maynard Keynes, the empire's leading light in economics. In the 1660's there were gentlemen running the admiralty who had never set foot on a ship. In America the disease is the belief that any attorney can be a politician and manage anything without any manners, polish, grace in dress, good character or other element of gentlemanism.
Public private partnerships can work. One year my county (USA) was part of a pilot program in which Medicaid benefits within the county were managed by a private health insurance company. I could access better doctors and there was decent customer service. It was wonderful.
There’s a nuance here that nobody seems capable of articulating plainly enough for the lay person to understand. We all want government to be as small as possible but not so small that it can’t deliver the essential services citizens need and that cannot be delivered at best value by the private sector alone. The devil is of course in the details. Which services must be the responsibility of government? Clearly control of the military is one , control of essential infrastructure is another.
I’ve never understood the argument that just because something is publicly funded, rather than private, it becomes bloated and bureaucratic. That if you took the same people, and the same business, but make them answer to a government committee rather than private shareholders, it won’t be run as well. But this is the main argument I have heard about why private equity is more efficient (cheaper) than public bodies.
To be honest small government also means that sometimes it’s better to outsource the running on something and legiferate against it rather than running it directly. This can mean a health service that’s administered by health professionals and not by the civil service, or railways where the rail is still gov property but the manning is contracted every 5-10 years. It does not have to be an ideological battle, you can simply acknowledge that there are perverse incentives in big gov and I can acknowledge there are different perverse incentives in small govt
The most significant relationships contemporary politicians have are with lobbyists, not us their supposed electorate. Ridiculous then to think they put us first.
I don't see many politicians with the intellectual capabilities and public service ideals to plan and implement meaningful and transformative policies to the benefit of society. I do see plenty who are happy to deliver soundbites and be in the service of party machinery for the exercise of power funded by corporates to their advantage. Those they should be serving are seen as tax providers if they are able to earn or shirkers if they require any form of state assistance, quite a mess.
i don't not agree with the pre thatcher conservatives but they believed in Britain it may have stemmed from snobbery and exceptionalism but they where all about king/queen and country . labour where about equality and defending the working man from the ruling class that looked to keep us obeying the rules of the social order "your better than pepole from other nations ,but I'm better than you" i don't recognize any of these politicians. thatcher and her children have sold us asset stripped us and it feels all that remains the vulture picking out or carcass, and when there is nothing more to be had they will fly of to places in country's they told us where making decisions for us that the electorate had no control over . many have already
What we need is a team of proffesionals in their field , and a leader who is just the fulcrum for that team , and they have to deal with the public's concerns , we must get back , to looking after our own . People have lost a sense of belonging , we need to change the welfare state , with a rite to live charter you change the system ,where it does care for its people .with safety nets ,people aren't afraid to fail . We must streamline health service , and put dental surgery amalgamated with GP services. I'll stop there because I'll go on and on ,but it is possible to make the country miles better .
What's that expression "it's hard to convince someone of a position, if their entire livelihood depends on not having it", and in this case it's the coterie at the top of political parties and their donors.
Absence of leadership-kick it down the road, employ a consultant, appoint a commission.... anything but take responsibility and being transparent about what you are doing and why! Just be honest and do your best-the Public want nationalised Public Services from ALL parties!!
The thing is that this has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. As tasks are handed over from civil servants to (very expensive) consultants, the government loses the ability to do things. As it happens, I am employed by a consultancy to do sort-of public sector work and I would much rather be working directly for the organisation (although it doesn't pay as much). The amount of frustration when I have to round up people from 6 different outsourcers to get a change made is huge.
Your point about polititicians being manager's in effect misses the point that when these persons wear the spectacles of office, they become blinded and are not able to perform or even change things for the better and in many cases, the right thing in the wrong hands makes the right thing work in the wrong way - Look around you - QED
Western countries have been enchanted by this neo-liberal mindset for more than 40 years. There are some aspects of our society where financial profit shouldn’t have any relevance. Such as health care, education of all levels, poverty relief in all forms, homes for people that can’t afford to buy, public transport, nowadays internet services are essential for living fully, there is a good argument for providing basic nutritional food to everyone.
Neoliberalism has enabled the disparity between rich and poor to grow in a more or less uncontrolled manner, very much for the reasons you stated: self interest and short-termism. I think a lot of the problem is that we allow people who are fundamentally unqualified to be politicians and ministers, which rolls us back round to education.
Not to worry. We'll just plod on with our privileged, rich, privately educated few in their club that is Westminster, who continue to make themselves even wealthier and not give a stuff at the catastrophic demise of the UK. And the gullible will keep voting, believing it will change things.
A few years ago I was talking with a senior partner at a London law firm. He was describing how, as a younger man, he stood for parliament twice, both times unsuccessfully. I asked him why he would interrupt a successful legal career to do so, and he said, quite simply, "public service", and without a hint of irony or sarcasm. He meant it. His attitude is absent from the mainstream of politics, I fear. Your comments pose the question as to whether politicians believe in government. The better question would be whether politicians in the UK believe in anything other than their own selfish status and aggrandisement. They cannot be interested in much else, given that we have listened to 14 years of promises to do things and nothing has actually been done. Take migration - not as an issue in itself, but as an example of this apathy. For 14 years we have heard a series of promises to curb migration, each in response not to a core need to do do, but in reaction to a newspaper headline or two. You cannot tell me that a government that seriously and faithfully wanted to resolve an issue such as migration could not have done so over a 14 year period. But the truth is few politicians are about solving problems; they are principally interested in staying in office, hence the preference to manage issues with words and promises rather the actions and solutions. UK politicians are also paid way too much in relation to whatever value they add - this has done much to propagate their behaviours.
They enter politics as an opportunity to get their snouts firmly stuck in the trough. We only have to look at Starmer et al. Not wishing to tar all with the same brush. There are a few rare, very rare, exceptions.
The same misery is full swing coming to the USA 🇺🇸 next year! And was already somewhat present under Trump first term with many Corona deaths as a result. Here in the Netherlands we have seen the same, but more gradually over the last 20 years.
As a country we need a revolt against the rot .I just hope all this self centred greed doesn't allow a large swing towards a right wing lunatic just because people are fed up. Anyway - here's hoping Starmer gets chance to change things and he has some answers. Don't hold your breath though, he's another politician😉
What's the use of voting for MP's if they are just going to hand over control to large Corporations? Maybe we should be voting direct for which Corporation will give us the best outcomes for each Government department..
'How can we bring in Blackrock?...' 😆 In all seriousness, this mentality of relying on Private Equity is what will drive cost of living and inflation through the roof, leaving future governments an even bigger problem to deal with.
You may have seen the clip where a news reporter explained comments from a leading financial advisor in China, where regardless of government claims that were inflated, the young weren't interested in working because they couldn't see that there was any gain to be had from it, and only pensioners were seen to be spending since they had their pensions and savings to draw from. The malaise caused by just the sorts of government non-believers isn't restricted to just the UK - there are all sorts of parallel examples. Will that make government ministers more engaged with the work that they have taken on? Or will it take complete collapse of an economy where the young don't want to work and the pensioners cannot?
I guessed this answer before you said it. I firstly thought of Thatcher that started the rot along with Reagan when she sold off all the assets at a bargain. If the government don't really want to govern ,why are we paying them more every year? Surely their pay should be reduced due to their responsibilities being less,and their incompetence beig all the more apparent. I think the trend should be reversed or why would we keep them in a job. Nigel Farrage comes to mind as a person who draws the pay yet hardly ever turns up to do his job. Anyone else would get the sack within the month if this was the case. Nadine Dorris is another one,who despite saying she was going to resign got her parliamentary pay despite not even being there and didn't turn up for constituency surgeries either.
Presumption, that without state welfare things would have been worse. That’s completely unknown and most likely untrue. We know that more freedom results in better outcomes economically and culturally. The evidence exists in East and West German differences. The problem with small vs large Government is it’s a difference devoid of a meaning. Small compared to what ? What really needs sorting is the proper role of the Government, what it should do and not its size.
They were complaining in the past. But we now have platforms to express that dissatisfaction. And we have more information about all the things not working. And there are more things to go wrong. The private sector is almost always better than the state sector. Take cataract operations- now being subcontracted to private clinics, because they do three times the operations for the same cost. Rottenness starts in the gut. That is where the bacteria are.
Hit 240k today. Appreciate you for all the knowledge and nuggets you had thrown my way over the last months. Started with 24k in October 2024…..
I would really love to know how much work you did put in to get to this stage
I will be forever grateful to you, you changed my whole life and I will continue to preach on your behalf for the whole world to hear that you saved me from huge financial debt with just a small Investment, thank you Jihan Wu you're such a life saver
As a beginner in this, it’s essential for you to have a mentor to keep you accountable.
Jihan Wu is also my trade analyst, he has guided me to identify key market trends, pinpointed strategic entry points, and provided risk assessments, ensuring my trades decisions align with market dynamics for optimal returns.
Jihan Wu Services has really set the standard for others to follow, we love him here in Canada 🇨🇦 as he has been really helpful and changed lots of life's
His instructions allowed me to bring up my retirement plan, resulting in an estimated $700 thousand more by the time I retire.
Spot on Richard, as usual. Unfortunately neither of the two major parties believe in governing and Reform is even more in the pocket of Tufton Street.
"Tufton Street" is just the shitlib's "WEF".
It's time we had a genuine Centre-Left government......or even coalition. To keep the UK from breaking up.
Why not have a coalition of Lib Dem/Green/SNP/Plaid Cymru?? ...yes, I know many would spit their coffee/tea/cereal/ whatever out.....but this just might be the answer.
I'm tired of right-wing policies from whoever is in government. They just cause more damage, and more division in society.
Such a coalition would indeed be a lot of peoples' nightmare; but I think it's absolutely what the UK needs now, because I believe even more people DO want such a coalition government.
@@alanrumble7238 Tufton Street are in the pockets of the corporates. It's not about political theory.
@@nickbarton3191 Are you suggesting that Tufton Street could be influenced by (say) the $200M that Forbes reported was spent on lobbying by the fossil fuel companies back in 2019?
Utter bollocks. If anyone is interested in the plight of the indigenous lower classes of these islands it is Reform. Labour and Tory have long and storied histories of corporate capture.
The most intelligent, constructive, good sense we have heard in a long time. If something is missing from 'mainstream media'...this is it
Mainstream media won't stray too far from 'the narrative' as they rely on it to be paid.
Ex-civil servant here. Absolutely spot on 👌
I am pleased that you touched on the notion of 'personal advantage'. I think that this is the key motivating factor for the majority of politicians. I think a lot of them start with the best intentions but once the lobby begins offering tickets to concerts and free glasses their goals become corrupted, not that they would admit it or perhaps even realise it (if we are being generous). This is why the system needs to change to make politicians subject to the same rules about gifts as civil servants. I don't hold out much hope for it happening though.
All donations,lobbying and other forms of enticements need to be outlawed from the political arena.
@@howardosborne8647 Impossible to monitor. I agree though
I think we need to get the politics out of politics and get people doing a competent job like the rest of us have to.
Perfectly said!
And cooperate donors
As an Aussie, this applies to us and no doubt to all countries that have bought into this neoliberal mindset - quite totally ruining life for the average resident
This can be applied to any former British colony for that matter.
@@thismissivemisfit why
They are part of the Smugsville club so yeah you are right...self interest in protecting the Wealth over Public Good.
Driving home this evening from a parents evening in the state school where I’m a teacher I was hearing that Keir Starmer and whichever secretary of state or minister who was on the radio are now blaming the civil service for holding them back. So this video is extremely apposite to the current situation. Thank you RJM.
Richard you are right. I think the majority of people of this country have lost faith with the government, monarchy, political parties, institutions and have little confidence in things getting better! We need a leader with a vision that the vast majority (75%+) could identify with and who had a set of values that everyone could strive to adhere to!
Kind of Like they have in China?? Show us a country that can meet your criteria.
@@davidmead6337let's imagine a country that's decentralised allowing its regions to shape their future development, a clean and green environment that encourages everyone to adopt an active travel lifestyle. Having a national healthcare system that actively encourages prevention rather than cure that is free at the point of delivery. A country that stands for doing the right thing and shows utter contempt to those who don't! Making this idea a reality will take blood sweat and extreme effort from everyone! Are you on board?
The flaw in the system of government & governance is perfectly highlighted by how many Ministers & MP find plum jobs as: directors, non-exec's, "consultants" or "advisors" to big businesses once they leave politics where the earn their former salary for 1 day a week or 6 board meetings a year.
Absolutely spot on. Well said.
The outsourcing paradigm, and the turning of government departments into firm-like agencies has utterly destroyed the structure of government. Government is no longer hierarchical, the relationships are defined by contracts, often labrynthine, absurdly complex, highly prescriptive and punitive, and with excessive need for upward reporting. The contracts often stand for absurdly long times...10 years or more. They function in exactly the same way as the Soviet 5 year plans, except they hold for even longer! In the neoliberal quest for private sector efficiency we have ended up with the mirror image of the Soviet command economy and politicians and indeed all public servants are tied up in a quagmire of contract law, drowning in paper work. It is insanity, and without a sledgehammer being taken to the neoliberal ideology that is strangling Britain, we are heading for collapse, guaranteed.
❤❤❤❤❤
@@themachinestops23 And UK is not unique in this, just more "advanced".
@@nickbarton3191 Totally. The UK and the US are leading the way on this, but it's the same story for most of the west.
Most ministers don't know anything about the department they are in charge of and have little incentive to learn because they will be "shuffled" to another department or to the backbenches in a few months.
Your podcasts now an integral part of my morning. Thank you.
Thanks Richard- another thought provoking insight.
I was listening to a US veteran of Iwo Jima and something he said struck a cord with me that I saw in work life today.
He said that most of the men on that beech, had their heads buried in the sand just waiting to die and what saved their lives is the few soldiers who were killers, they were the ones in small groups and sometimes alone, that moved forward, cleared the concealed bunkers and allowed those behind them to get off the beech.
I think today in work, it’s called riding the coat tails of others. Few people know how to do there whole job and the rest use those people to make themselves look competent.
Under small government with freedom of choice would you even be able to build up an army in an emergency? Perhaps freedom of choice only works one way.
@@lonevoice Rather strange that people be drawn to looking at military comparisons in such a discussion. There are nuances in the pertinent histories which illustrate the need for a broader understanding, and benefits therein for our analysis.
2 books for perusal, in this - 'Secret Affairs' by Mark Curtis
(former fellow of Chatham House, i.e. it's a serious work)
And, 'Conjouring Hitler', by Guido Preperata < I might not have spelt this correctly
@@kwakkers68 PrepArata... Also interesting interviews with him on line.
Why is the miltary analogy strange ? it's about leadership, skill and determination, things no military can succeed without ........ and that every government will fail without.
This anecdote misses the point entirely. I also struggle to see how humans react in a war zone is applicable to day to day life. That ~2% of humans can kill other humans without psychological distress does mean they would make good leaders. For a start, half of them are psychopaths. The other half just seem to be able to disassociate their actions on the battlefield from their life off it. Since WW2 the US military has found that rehearsing close combat improves soldiers ability to perform on the battlefield. Unfortunately it doesn't help with the physiological problems that come later, such as PTSD.
Anyway, the biggest problem isn't competence, but rather people don't know or can't agree on what they want. They also never like the compromises that have to be made to balance all their wishy-washy wants against each other.
I design complicated electronic systems for a living and the hardest part is getting customers to decide what they want. Generally what you get are vague woolly ideas and impossible wishlists. I think that last sentence describes government policy over the last few decades quite accurately!
Neoliberalism is worse than that, it effectively gives power to the corporations thus by-passing democracy.
Ultimately, doesn’t matter much who gets elected if enough ministers believe in it. As to Starmer's position, I couldn't say.
These corporations are mostly oligopoly bodies providing network services, which enables them to squeeze out economic rent and pay vast salaries and dividends.
Another simples explanation of Goverment and its effects. It is for the viewer to draw their own POLITIC views! Well done
when wearing tens of thousands of worth clothes, watches, rings and shoes from private sector they will believe whatever private sector says them to believe
Handing over more power to business without proper regulation in place plays a massive part. Too often you see corporation's upping costs, spilling waste, fire and re-hirer and wage reduction. If you choose to sell off everything and leave it to business you have to regulate properly.
These corporations are mostly monopoly providers of network services.
@@blackwavenoise Private interests managing public services are looking to asset strip the concern. Break it into the most valuable parts and sell it on. Our regulatory bodies have no teeth.
The answer is not more regulation it is to remove the constraining regulation which leads to corporatist control and the squashing of SME’s and entrepreneurs. Limited, judicial regulation can be beneficial but this cannot successfully be brought in from the top down, curated by corrupt and captured central government and NGO’s. The answer to propaganda and disinformation is always more information and more speech and discussion not exclusion, bans and less speech.
Common law is the thing that protects us from harm and allows for ground up common sense governance where judicial regulation is required. The “Experts”!have spectacularly failed in regulating themselves.
The worst monopoly is central government, particularly those so called democracies that have two party systems where puppets are installed to give the false idea of democratic choice. People are waking up and the winds of real change are blowing. Too many people have been harmed and personally affected by the coerced injections and the winds of real change are blowing stronger and stronger. 😊
This is a story that most people will never hear in today’s media landscape but when most people talk about the “good old days” they are talking about post WW2 and the post WW2 consensus.
The post WW2 consensus contained the seeds of its own destruction. The economy lurched from crisis to crisis and the period ended with the dash for growth of 1970 and the collapse 1974. Joining the EEC was the death blow.
When I was in my late teens early 20’s I was very interested in politics and spent some time in the company of several MPs. Far from being really smart I was appalled at how thick they were. I think most MPs would earn far less if they were working in the private sector. There might be some clever politicians, I am not saying I met them all, but there is not a large pool of very talented people for the PM to pick from. Therefore to expect them to run large Government departments well for me is fanciful.
Many MPs went to Cambridge or Oxford Universities and illogically believe that makes them clever enough to run any government department. But George Osborne with his degree in history became Chancellor of the Exchequer and was, unsurprisingly a disaster - now of course giving advice to Rachel Reeves.
I have a first class degree in chemistry from a Russell group university but of course I understand I wouldn't know enough to run the NHS or UK education . Experienced doctors and teachers make far more sense.
@@gillcorless5273 You understand your limitations, you would therefore look to "Experts" in the field to advise you. This cannot be said for ANY politician that has come through the standard route. They think they know it all.
The government's requirement isnt to have ministers who believe in what they are doing, its to have unquestioning ministers who are loyal
It's a long time since we had any expectations of Tory ministers. But the failure of the Westminster political class is almost complete now that Labour has unashamedly sold out and become Corporate Labour.
Having read Rory Stewart's book,
I can say your analysis is spot on.
Whilst I disagree with Stewart on principal, my view is that he paints a good picture of a disorganised rabble, whose only interest was stroking their own egos rather than doing the job they were elected to do
That fact he was willing part of it all says a lot about Stewart. And he was a fervent advocate and participant for the illegal invasion of Iraq.
I feel it is not to do with belief, it is to do with whether or not they care. I find most politicians who are in powerful positions are addicted to two things; Power, and other peoples money.
If the politicians are corrupt nothing will work. It's Greed, Greed, Greed 😊
Classic example, Eric Pickles, put in charge of local government by Cameron, he didn't believe that local government should have any services not be delivered other than by private sector contracts, as leader of Bolton Council he wanted to do this but did not achieve it.
It's just the same here in Sweden. Governments have been overreaching for decades. The current troubles are a symptom of inability to cope. The public sector has not been what it ought to be since the golden days of the 1960s. There are many inherent problems with government. One is that people can make bad decisions without having to face the consequences.
We need to ask what government is really for, and put the focus on that. Natural monopolies such as network services need to be controlled so that they do not abuse that monopoly advantage. And our destructive, inefficient and unjust tax system needs to be superseded, since it is the prime cause of the obesity of government due to the large scale of poverty and inequality it causes
Excellent in setting out important ideas (often ideas that are not properly discussed at large ie by the 'Media') simply. One of the very few academics who bothers to do this.
Meritocracy and competence. Two things that are sadly lacking nowadays.
The social contract is broken.
What puzzles me is that people like Liz Truss don't believe in government and believe that the private sector has all the answers. Why are they in politics at all if they don't believe in it?
To do their bit to expose the Marxist eco loons?
Puppets playing the masters tune.
I believe the issue is that there is a difference between state provision of a good thing and one or other party using that thing as a platform to further their ideology. Then of course the other party begins to want to dismantle the platform rather than fixing the ideological interference.
I often think they have given up long ago.
I would suggest that we don't want career politicians, who have not held down a job outside politics for at least five years. Also for 40 years the EU drove the big decisions and our politicians do not have the experience to do so since Brexit.
Excellently said!
We need this man in government
kudos professor (from china), I have watched several of your videos recently and today I found out that you are a professor at Sheffield, coincidentally, from which I graduated a decade ago :)
A reminder that the word of the year is "enshittification". Everything is getting shittier. It's the world we live in now.
😂
If Lizz Truss proved anything, it is that a too small government run will be a very short government run
Margret Thatcher was a very bad example for whole Europe. Neoliberalism is desastrous for common people.
3 months and already attacking.
If only people had been so concerned for the past 14 years
We have been attacking the Tories for exactly the same issues for the past 14 years. Labour are no different.
Well the railways are going back under government control, so I guess we'll get another chance to see how much better government does.
I'm not holding my breath either. It strikes me though that in large part, the failure of Privatisation - of Trains, Water, Energy etc - to deliver for the People (but rather for management & shareholders) was due to criminally poorly written Contracts & Regulator's TOS. So much so that one has to suspect the motivation behind it all
Government control or not, ‘real improvement’ will require at least 2 things: time and (large amounts of) money. Money to compensate for the decades of underinvestment and time for the work to be done (rather longer than one parliament).
In the mean time, the one thing government ownership might produce is better coordination of different parts of the system.
But then again, I remember British Rail….
@@charlesbruggmann7909
Huge amounts of money have been wasted over the past 25 years eg the unnecessary replacement of entire fleets of rolling stock and the incompetent management of electrification. This is largely due to DfT and ORR interference.
@@charlesbruggmann7909 Not you remember the myths & lies of British Rail. It was actually running well & delivering good services in many parts of the country. Inter-City 125 was a great success. By the mid 70's it was free from the drag of having to pay compensation to the Big 4 shareholders as a result of nationalisation (compensation extended by the Heath government) so could invest. Sure bad decisions were made but in large part "This is the age of the Train" signified success. It was the Treasury that prevented the speedy rollout of AWS(Advanced Warning System). Then John Major privatised the railways in a botched & hurried way with Blair & Brown not interested in making things better for passengers.
@@EMidMSO It's not only about ideology here, but also the utter incompetence of ministers. How could they know, hardly any of them have business experience nor of contract law.
Excellent
Follow the funds of the lobbyists. Direct or indirect.
What i never understand from politicians is the argument that private sector are better than the public sector. Yes, there are things that are better done run as a business, but is government a business? The other key facet is that there are lessons that can be learnt each way, but if do not understand your own area of responsibility, how can it be improved? Spot on what Richard says here, but perhaps it should be added that many of ministers in government heading departments do not have the necessary competences either, hence how can they ever understand, let alone have belief?
The problem with so many politicians who claim the private sector know best, is that they have never worked in the private sector and experienced the shambolic mismanagement, the poor staff relations, the bad customer service, the wasted money, all covered up and forgotten because the profits are good, the shareholders are happy, and the bosses get their bonuses.
Absolutely spot on.
Privatisation is the best way for governments to unload their responsibilities. Starmer has simply created an alternative face to neoliberalism and the sooner voters disown those two parties and the fascist Farage mob, the better.
Public services are effectively being defunded based on a false premise that Taxes fund those services & therefore creates a false ceiling with unnecessary constraints.
There are still limits on what can be spent on public services, and then there is the damage done by our inefficient and punitive tax system, which is rarely discussed
Is government focused on satisfying the needs of the public or the super wealthy? I must admit, I think government is in a transition towards the later, and the increasing use of the private sector and the clamours for small government is all part of that.
What kind of economic theories one might learn in Eton and onwards... I bet they don't teach how beneficial a large public sector is.
Perhaps because a large public sector is not beneficial.
@@physiocrat7143 To whom?
Would it be fair to suggest that the railway may be the onset?
Thank you. 👍
Ministers who believe in the strengths of the private sector, should go work in the private sector BEFORE considering a political career.
British cabinets suffer from the disease of gentlemanism. A good example is the delusion of the effortless superiority of Balliol men in the summer 1914 cabinet. Cabinet ministers believe themselves omniscient though many of them have little experience outside politics. Churchill was picked to be Chancellor of the Exchequer but got wiped out in the 1929 stock market crash along with John Maynard Keynes, the empire's leading light in economics. In the 1660's there were gentlemen running the admiralty who had never set foot on a ship. In America the disease is the belief that any attorney can be a politician and manage anything without any manners, polish, grace in dress, good character or other element of gentlemanism.
Public private partnerships can work. One year my county (USA) was part of a pilot program in which Medicaid benefits within the county were managed by a private health insurance company. I could access better doctors and there was decent customer service. It was wonderful.
There’s a nuance here that nobody seems capable of articulating plainly enough for the lay person to understand. We all want government to be as small as possible but not so small that it can’t deliver the essential services citizens need and that cannot be delivered at best value by the private sector alone. The devil is of course in the details. Which services must be the responsibility of government? Clearly control of the military is one , control of essential infrastructure is another.
The Commons and the Lord's are rotten to the core.
I’ve never understood the argument that just because something is publicly funded, rather than private, it becomes bloated and bureaucratic.
That if you took the same people, and the same business, but make them answer to a government committee rather than private shareholders, it won’t be run as well.
But this is the main argument I have heard about why private equity is more efficient (cheaper) than public bodies.
To be honest small government also means that sometimes it’s better to outsource the running on something and legiferate against it rather than running it directly. This can mean a health service that’s administered by health professionals and not by the civil service, or railways where the rail is still gov property but the manning is contracted every 5-10 years. It does not have to be an ideological battle, you can simply acknowledge that there are perverse incentives in big gov and I can acknowledge there are different perverse incentives in small govt
The most significant relationships contemporary politicians have are with lobbyists, not us their supposed electorate. Ridiculous then to think they put us first.
I don't see many politicians with the intellectual capabilities and public service ideals to plan and implement meaningful and transformative policies to the benefit of society. I do see plenty who are happy to deliver soundbites and be in the service of party machinery for the exercise of power funded by corporates to their advantage. Those they should be serving are seen as tax providers if they are able to earn or shirkers if they require any form of state assistance, quite a mess.
i don't not agree with the pre thatcher conservatives but they believed in Britain it may have stemmed from snobbery and exceptionalism but they where all about king/queen and country . labour where about equality and defending the working man from the ruling class that looked to keep us obeying the rules of the social order "your better than pepole from other nations ,but I'm better than you"
i don't recognize any of these politicians. thatcher and her children have sold us asset stripped us and it feels all that remains the vulture picking out or carcass, and when there is nothing more to be had they will fly of to places in country's they told us where making decisions for us that the electorate had no control over .
many have already
What we need is a team of proffesionals in their field , and a leader who is just the fulcrum for that team , and they have to deal with the public's concerns , we must get back , to looking after our own .
People have lost a sense of belonging , we need to change the welfare state , with a rite to live charter you change the system ,where it does care for its people .with safety nets ,people aren't afraid to fail .
We must streamline health service , and put dental surgery amalgamated with GP services.
I'll stop there because I'll go on and on ,but it is possible to make the country miles better .
Professional managers are part of the problem.
What's that expression "it's hard to convince someone of a position, if their entire livelihood depends on not having it", and in this case it's the coterie at the top of political parties and their donors.
Absence of leadership-kick it down the road, employ a consultant, appoint a commission.... anything but take responsibility and being transparent about what you are doing and why! Just be honest and do your best-the Public want nationalised Public Services from ALL parties!!
The thing is that this has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. As tasks are handed over from civil servants to (very expensive) consultants, the government loses the ability to do things. As it happens, I am employed by a consultancy to do sort-of public sector work and I would much rather be working directly for the organisation (although it doesn't pay as much). The amount of frustration when I have to round up people from 6 different outsourcers to get a change made is huge.
Excellent!
Fish actually rot from their guts, not their heads.
Your point about polititicians being manager's in effect misses the point that when these persons wear the spectacles of office, they become blinded and are not able to perform or even change things for the better and in many cases, the right thing in the wrong hands makes the right thing work in the wrong way - Look around you - QED
If any of you hadn't worked out what Starmers Blue New Labour WMD v2.0 was about long before July then you've got it coming to you if not already.
This is not the fault of Starmer mate.
@@billB101
What isn't?
@@NoMoreVoxPops Ain't you blaming shit on Starmer here, sounds like you are.
@@billB101
What am I blaming on him?
@@NoMoreVoxPops Ahh Ok, so this is just generally disparaging Labour and Starmer then for effect. Good job.
Western countries have been enchanted by this neo-liberal mindset for more than 40 years. There are some aspects of our society where financial profit shouldn’t have any relevance. Such as health care, education of all levels, poverty relief in all forms, homes for people that can’t afford to buy, public transport, nowadays internet services are essential for living fully, there is a good argument for providing basic nutritional food to everyone.
Neoliberalism has enabled the disparity between rich and poor to grow in a more or less uncontrolled manner, very much for the reasons you stated: self interest and short-termism. I think a lot of the problem is that we allow people who are fundamentally unqualified to be politicians and ministers, which rolls us back round to education.
Example Mr. Trump's self-serving ideology and his picks for "his" executive legislature and judiciary.
Couldn't agree more. Keep going.
No one is accountable !
Uk is a club which is run for the few. Unfortunately it does not represent good value nationally nor internationally.
We keep electing the same two party’s , so we will keep getting the same results , what a surprise
This is why they ousted Louise Haigh - she believed in public transit (and the railways).
Option n.3 - a minister can work to profit from their position of power.
Completely agree
The problem is none of them have any clue of how to run a department they couldn’t run a piss up in a brewery 😂
Hoover tried this. Didn't work. Here in the states we somehow have his and Cromwell's lovechild too so it's a BOGO sale on nightmare.
Not to worry. We'll just plod on with our privileged, rich, privately educated few in their club that is Westminster, who continue to make themselves even wealthier and not give a stuff at the catastrophic demise of the UK. And the gullible will keep voting, believing it will change things.
A fish rots from the head, an old Roman proverb, what did the Romans ever do for us
Fish actually rot from their guts, not their heads.
A few years ago I was talking with a senior partner at a London law firm. He was describing how, as a younger man, he stood for parliament twice, both times unsuccessfully. I asked him why he would interrupt a successful legal career to do so, and he said, quite simply, "public service", and without a hint of irony or sarcasm. He meant it. His attitude is absent from the mainstream of politics, I fear.
Your comments pose the question as to whether politicians believe in government. The better question would be whether politicians in the UK believe in anything other than their own selfish status and aggrandisement. They cannot be interested in much else, given that we have listened to 14 years of promises to do things and nothing has actually been done. Take migration - not as an issue in itself, but as an example of this apathy. For 14 years we have heard a series of promises to curb migration, each in response not to a core need to do do, but in reaction to a newspaper headline or two. You cannot tell me that a government that seriously and faithfully wanted to resolve an issue such as migration could not have done so over a 14 year period. But the truth is few politicians are about solving problems; they are principally interested in staying in office, hence the preference to manage issues with words and promises rather the actions and solutions.
UK politicians are also paid way too much in relation to whatever value they add - this has done much to propagate their behaviours.
They enter politics as an opportunity to get their snouts firmly stuck in the trough. We only have to look at Starmer et al.
Not wishing to tar all with the same brush. There are a few rare, very rare, exceptions.
The same misery is full swing coming to the USA 🇺🇸 next year! And was already somewhat present under Trump first term with many Corona deaths as a result. Here in the Netherlands we have seen the same, but more gradually over the last 20 years.
And now trump has surrounded himself with dual Israeli citizens, so much for America first.
Coming from the US
As a country we need a revolt against the rot .I just hope all this self centred greed doesn't allow a large swing towards a right wing lunatic just because people are fed up.
Anyway - here's hoping Starmer gets chance to change things and he has some answers. Don't hold your breath though, he's another politician😉
The key to successful government is to get out of the way.
100%
What's the use of voting for MP's if they are just going to hand over control to large Corporations?
Maybe we should be voting direct for which Corporation will give us the best outcomes for each Government department..
What percentage of MPs in Westminster believe any such things about the roles of government?
I'd say it tends to zero.
'How can we bring in Blackrock?...' 😆
In all seriousness, this mentality of relying on Private Equity is what will drive cost of living and inflation through the roof, leaving future governments an even bigger problem to deal with.
Selling England by the Pound has never been truer.
You may have seen the clip where a news reporter explained comments from a leading financial advisor in China, where regardless of government claims that were inflated, the young weren't interested in working because they couldn't see that there was any gain to be had from it, and only pensioners were seen to be spending since they had their pensions and savings to draw from. The malaise caused by just the sorts of government non-believers isn't restricted to just the UK - there are all sorts of parallel examples. Will that make government ministers more engaged with the work that they have taken on? Or will it take complete collapse of an economy where the young don't want to work and the pensioners cannot?
Politics is a career path with a good chance of well paid jobs on the side. They don’t like risk which is a part of a transformation process.
I guessed this answer before you said it. I firstly thought of Thatcher that started the rot along with Reagan when she sold off all the assets at a bargain. If the government don't really want to govern ,why are we paying them more every year? Surely their pay should be reduced due to their responsibilities being less,and their incompetence beig all the more apparent. I think the trend should be reversed or why would we keep them in a job. Nigel Farrage comes to mind as a person who draws the pay yet hardly ever turns up to do his job. Anyone else would get the sack within the month if this was the case. Nadine Dorris is another one,who despite saying she was going to resign got her parliamentary pay despite not even being there and didn't turn up for constituency surgeries either.
You do know Thatcher liberalised pension legislation as the government has never made more than half a percent p.a. right?
Presumption, that without state welfare things would have been worse. That’s completely unknown and most likely untrue. We know that more freedom results in better outcomes economically and culturally. The evidence exists in East and West German differences.
The problem with small vs large Government is it’s a difference devoid of a meaning. Small compared to what ? What really needs sorting is the proper role of the Government, what it should do and not its size.
They were complaining in the past. But we now have platforms to express that dissatisfaction. And we have more information about all the things not working. And there are more things to go wrong.
The private sector is almost always better than the state sector. Take cataract operations- now being subcontracted to private clinics, because they do three times the operations for the same cost.
Rottenness starts in the gut. That is where the bacteria are.