Disenchantment With Democracy

Bryan Gould writes:

The disenchantment of British voters with democracy, we are told, is to be explained by the anger they feel at the failings of politicians.

Those failings, it is supposed, are to do with the perception that politicians are “on the make”; but that conclusion - while no doubt partly justified - is surely far from the whole truth.

The Guardian/ICM poll finding that 50% of respondents chose “anger” as their principal sentiment when thinking of politicians may well conceal a deeper malaise.

The scale and depth of public disaffection is, I believe, to be explained by something much more fundamental than the sadly all-too-common instances of politicians breaking the rules governing their “perks” and allowances.

What is in play instead is a growing realisation that the political class - which extends far beyond the ranks of elected MPs to include the whole of what used to be called the establishment - has failed a country that is now in a state of unmistakable national decline.

Those responsible for what passes for serious debate about the state of the nation - and that includes business leaders, the media, civil servants, leading academics and experts, as well as politicians - have contributed to a process that has not only meant manifestly hard times for many of our citizens but also offers little hope of a better future.

Despite constant assurances that better times are just around the corner, the UK has over the last four or five years suffered the sharpest fall in living standards in over a century.

Those who have borne the main brunt of that precipitate decline have been the weakest in our society, for whom the safety net is regressively being withdrawn.

Economic decline and social disintegration are now seared deeply into the national consciousness.

None of the major contenders for government seems to offer anything but further retrenchment. The voters look in vain for an alternative to the current orthodoxy.

Labour continues to suffer the burden of the New Labour legacy. The Tories commit themselves to self-harming austerity and promise to make life tougher for the already disadvantaged. 

he Liberals look for ways of distancing themselves from Tory failure without giving up the fruits of office. Even those voters tempted by UKIP recognise that they offer a counsel of despair rather than redemption.

Little wonder that voters feel a sense of frustration and anger.

They understand that the democratic process has not protected them from national failure and decline and that - although the formal power of decision is exercised by government - the shots are really called by global business interests whose dominance over what actually happens has, if anything, increased as the failure of the policies they enjoin has become more evident.

What the voters expect from those who govern them is what they expect from any other group of supposed professionals - simple competence.

What they see instead is a bunch of amateurs with little understanding of the economy they are supposed to manage and therefore totally at the mercy of political prejudice and vested interests.

The cure for voter disaffection with democracy is simple.

Politicians have to convince the electorate that they are able to abandon a failed orthodoxy that continues to smother new thinking, in favour of a fresh and more positive economic policy - and then deliver on that promise.

What should be the elements of that new policy? It should focus on real issues and not on imagined problems. It should take as its starting point the need for a sustainable rate of growth which current policy is incapable of delivering.

It should recognise that decades of comparative failure have left us with a profoundly uncompetitive economy and a manufacturing industry that is on its last legs. We cannot rebuild our productive base for as long as we cannot compete in international markets.

The loss of competitiveness means that we cannot and dare not grow for fear of ballooning trade deficits and rising inflation. It means that the government’s debt - even while public spending is being cut - will continue to grow faster than the economy as a whole.

And while growth languishes, unemployment continues to cost us lost output, acts as a brake on recovery, and undermines our social structure.

We need to face facts and to engineer an exchange rate that allows us to make a fresh start by immediately improving competitiveness.

We need a new approach to monetary policy, treating it not primarily as a means of restraining inflation but as an essential facilitator of increased investment in productive capacity.

We need an agreed industrial strategy and new investment institutions to ensure that an increased money supply goes into productive investment rather than into consumption or bank bonuses.

Above all, we need to restore full employment as the central goal of policy.

An economy that offered productive work to everyone able to work, that provided ample finance for those ready to invest in new and competitive businesses, that found ready markets around the world for all it could produce, would not only restore faith in the value of government and democracy; the Labour Party should note that putting such proposals forward might get them elected as well.