IN WASHINGTON this week, the leaders of the major industrial countries have the biggest opportunity in a generation or more to shape the rules of the global economy in a way which rejects the epidemic of greed which has plagued the system and the world’s poorest countries and peoples and replaces it with a fairer system which addresses the needs of today. As Barack Obama, who won’t be there, and Gordon Brown, who will be present in the form almost of a lauded guru with a plan to save the planet, have already hinted that the current economic meltdown provides opportunities beyond immediate solutions. Mr Brown should use his position to take those nations present back to a few Bretton Woods basics – the need for stability in the currency markets and effective regulation to prevent the scandalous orgy of money-making by gluttonous, amoral traders.
But whatever comes out of the so-called Bretton Woods II, 64 years after the world leaders attempted to restore some order after the Second World War, it must include some powerful measures for governments to clampdown on the banks, energy companies, credit card chiefs and others who appear to show no sign of remorse at the effects of their continued striving for fat bonuses at the expense of the people who are most vulnerable to the credit crunch and recession. The Barclays deal with Abu Dhabi and Qatar – to pay more of its shareholders cash on a deal to avoid Government intervention over huge bonuses for the bosses – is reprehensible. It is tempting to draw into focus the judicial penalty of “economic crimes” implemented under communist regimes, at least in principle. Banks have to accept what they appear determined not to learn, that the world has changed. And so must they. Mr Brown could start with a display of determination by blocking the Barclays deal (analysed in detail by Prem Sikka on page 12).
If it is to be successful in producing a new order rather than a half-baked resuscitation of the present one, Bretton Woods II must deliver a paradigm shift in global principles in which both finance houses and the market join with governments in running currencies, placing more faith – and cash – in the International Monetary Fund, and clamping down on the casino culture with further regulation of the hedge fund and derivatives markets. He must use this opportunity to make a difference to society with a clear signal that the spiv culture is over and that social responsibility, redistribution, social cohesion and a closing of the wealth gap are worth more as prizes than million-dollar bonuses for – an increasing large – few.
* * *
THOSE who see the Glenrothes by-election victory as the political resuscitation of Gordon Brown, and therefore the Government, are right only up to a point. For one overriding reason: Labour cannot campaign as an opposition party at the next election, as it did in Fife.
In a campaign which had a long lead time, careful planning, a candidate who ticked all the right political and local boxes, Labour positioned itself squarely as the “new voice for Fife”. Victor Lyndsey Roy, exploiting the Scottish National Party’s rule in both Holyrood and Fife itself, was introduced everywhere as “not a politician”. Labour veterans of recent
by-election campaigns were astonished to see accurately targeted messages going out to switchers and voters with concerns over specific issues. It should provide lessons for the party in all quarters of Britain.
Yet the big plus for Scottish Labour is that Mr Salmond’s bubble has burst. He has until now been looking invulnerable. Now Labour, and perhaps more importantly his own members, know he can be beaten.
There is now dissension in the SNP ranks, with complaints that the party is a being run as a one-man-band and that the word “independence” was never featured in the SNP campaign. Mr Salmond is suffering from the leveller of power and responsibility: accountability. And for all that, for now, Mr Brown may make the best of his recession-threat bounce, it is responsibility for years in power, not just one potentially career-saving
by-election, that will hold him to account at the next general election.
About The Author
