Liberal Vision

Mark Littlewood: Liberal Voice of the Year

Congratulations to Mark Littlewood, formerly of this parish, for winning LDV’s Liberal Voice of the Year.

As we posted hear a couple of days ago, we thought Mark was a deserving candidate – but even we were somewhat surprised by the decisiveness of the vote.

Mark Littlewood 32%

The Occupy Movement 13%

Ken Clarke 13%

Mohamed Bouazizi 11%

Nick Davies and the Guardian 10%

Ai Weiwei 8%

Hugh Grant and the Hacked Off Campaign 6%

Hilary Rodham Clinton 4%

Barack Obama 3%

Tags: IEA, Lib Dem Voice, Liberal voice of the Year, Mark Littlewood

Government priorities gone bananas

I was reading Professor Philip Booth’s excellent blog post yesterday on David Cameron’s red tape challenge to ministers. Here is an extract that caught my eye.. (emphasis is mine) .

“Of course, this is just what we need – more employment regulation. It comes in a long line of announcements and enactments over the last two weeks about executive pay, council house tenancies, the disastrous implementation of the moratorium on employment regulation for small firms, alcohol regulation, the extension of employment rights to temporary workers and the regulation of the scrap metal industry. I am wondering if I have misunderstood the government’s red tape challenge – is the challenge to ministers to produce as much red tape as possible? “

And I found myself cheering his point that..

“If somebody is not very clever but good at building networks, why should they be looked down upon more than somebody who is clever but not good at building networks? The hard work that one puts into networking is not obviously less virtuous than the hard work that one puts into developing one’s intelligence. The good luck that comes from being born with a good brain is no more virtuous (indeed it is not virtuous at all) than the good luck that comes from being born with a set of well-networked parents.”

But that is perhaps because I was not a particularly brilliant scholar but had “the gift of the gab” (though sadly no “connections”). Goodness only knows what job I would have ended up with if my application had gone in “blind” rather than me tracking potential bosses down to seedy pubs to pester them into giving me an interview.

Professor Booth’s point is not that dissimilar to a point I made recently. Why is it that Government seems happy to go after highly paid bankers and CEOs on such issues as bonus’/ pay differentials etc whilst ignoring the vast sums earned by Premier League Footballers, pop stars and the like?  After all the pay differential between the average Manchester United fan and their top players is vast – and the penalty for failure? they get transferred to another team quite often for even more money. Why is it, I wonder, that it’s OK to earn fortunes because you are good at kicking a ball about – but not if you happen to be masterful at running a company? (Note this is NOT a demand that the Government starts meddling in sports pay as well.)

But returning to David Cameron’s challenge – maybe it is time for him to reconsider giving a wider challenge to ministers and put it in really simple terms – since they do seem to be having trouble grasping the point.

“If it doesn’t cut costs, improve effeciency or help business get the economy going, then JUST DON’T DO IT – unless there is a bloody good reason why you have to – Dave”

I know ministers like their headlines, feel the need to be seen to be doing something, but really! Most of us are sitting in our homes wondering what the hell this government is up to? What we want are jobs, an economy that gets going, the clearing of our debts. What on earth has alcohol regulation or executive pay got to do with any of those things?

Mark Littlewood has been asked by the Government to help them on red tape. Perhaps the Government needs a similar expert to help them sort out Government priorities – ( I say “expert” all we need is a person with an ounce of common sense and a large red pen). Here is one example concerning my current hobby horse. Why is Andrew Lansley devoting vast amounts of time, money and resource undertaking a consultation on tobacco plain packaging, when we can sit back for six months and wait for the REAL evidence to come from Australia (where plain packaging is about to be introduced). With the time and resource released he could devote that to sorting out the current crisis in the NHS now- and return to plain packs if/when the evidence from down under suggests that it warrants it. It’s just about priorities. Surely?

Enjoy Professor Booth’s musings – definitely worth a read.

Tags: Andrew Lansley, David Cameron, IEA, Mark Littlewood, Professor Philip Booth, red tape challenge

David Laws interview now available to view

For those of you unable to attend (or just want to watch again) Mark Littlewood’s cracking interview with David Laws MP at the IEA last week, the video is now up. My favourite line from David Laws.. “The Lib Dems… are the party that best fuses social justice and economic liberalism”. Overall however, you will notice that it is a rather cautious David that turned up for the event. This is no bad thing in my view. As much as David might loathe speculation about his return to the front bench, his answers and demeanour on the night suggest we may be getting closer to just such an announcement.

Go to IEA to watch video.

Tags: David Laws MP, IEA, Mark Littlewood

Gloves off: Littlewood v Laws

Hat Tip: This is surely an event not to missed? Stuff David Haye vs Wladimir Klitschko … This is Mark Littlewood face-to-face with David Laws MP. It promises to be THE interview of the year. Yep that’s right … David Laws has agreed to meet Mark Littlewood for what promises to be a splendid evening of cross examination and inspection.. We can’t wait..

WHERE: IEA, 2 Lord North Street, London, SW1 (door on Great Peter Street)

WHEN: 22nd November, 6.30pm

HOW TO GET A TICKET: email iea@iea.org.uk

WANT MORE INFO: go to the IEA website

Tags: David Laws MP, IEA, Mark Littlewood

The Lib Dems: In search of new voters (part 2)

A couple of weeks ago I suggested here on this blog that the Lib Dems were the natural party of small business (The Lib Dems: In search of new voters…) and that with about 23million people working in small and medium sized businesses, they were a pretty attractive voting sector to pursue.

A study out today provides us with another damn good reason why the Lib Dems really should think about its relationship with small businesses – they disproportionately employ vulnerable people – making them both economically and socially important.

The IEA report Self-employment, Small Firms and Enterprise, by Peter Urwin, says that

“…small businesses provide vital opportunities for those who often struggle to find work in the rest of the labour market – those with no or few qualifications, immigrants, women with domestic responsibilities and those with poor English language skills. There is therefore not only an important economic, but also a social dimension to ensure the government is not holding back this sector.

…11% of employees of small firms had no qualifications, compared with 4% of employees of large firms.

…Only 8% of people working in large companies had a language problem, whereas in companies with less than ten employees this is 18%.”

That’s pretty compelling stuff .

So what to do ?

Well , consider the IEA’s conclusions….

“At a time when Britain’s economy requires thriving businesses, this research shows that complex regulation such as employment protection legislation and costs such as National Insurance prevent the self-employed from taking on employees.

There is therefore an increasing tendency for people to be self-employed without employees or to work for larger companies that are better able to cope with the costs of regulation. In short, there are too many barriers preventing people from moving from self-employment to becoming employers of small numbers of people and this affects vulnerable groups in the labour market.”

My advice to the policy makers within the Liberal Democrats is not only take note of the importance of small business. But to to embrace the IEA’s recommendations to help support this important sector.

I won’t go into all the  IEA’s recommendations here (go read for yourself) but essentially it argues for government  to lift the regulatory burden on businesses that is currently preventing many self-employed people from developing their businesses and employing people.

All of this would not only demonstrate the Liberal Democrat’s commitment to” the small and the local” (see previous post) – but is also a real strategy for growth and employment.

Sounds like a win-win to me.

Tags: growth, IEA, Institute of Economic Affairs, Peter Urwin, Self-employment Small Firms and Enterprise, small business