a lurch to the left

Hardly. A slight trimming away from the furthest reaches of ‘light touch’, market idolatry, possibly. Not a lurch to the left.
Compare the Netherlands.
Courtesy of the 13thDukeofWybourne marvellous commentary:

an interesting contrast between Dutch and UK business leaders vis a vis job creation and the economy that would cause multiple coronaries at the CBI conference.

On friday, 40 prominent Dutch businessmen urged the Government in a letter to various newspapers to invest at least €1bn in creating 300,000 plus “high value jobs”. In order to do this, they say the money should be spent on reducing school drop out rates, high speed broadband across the country and investment in hi-tech industry, farming, IT and medicine.

The business leaders estimated that the future return would be at least €30bn with the knock on effect that even more jobs would be created.

But here’s the Trotskyite-Gramscist-Stalinist-Bolshevik-Baader Meinhof-Red Brigade-Shining Path science bit. They say if necessary, taxes should be increased to pay for this.

Yes, businessmen in the country that according to the IMF and World Bank negotiated the recession strongest are arguing for Government investment in training, job creation and long term future planning for the Dutch economy. With tax increases if necessary.

The Dutch equivalent of the CBI are clearly a Maoist sleeper cell hellbent on enslaving Western Society under a murderous communist yoke.

A party needs to do this. There has to be a real alternitive from what society has been subjected to over the past 30 years. The tide is turning for an alternitive to appear.

Welll. Just look at the Germans. By far they’ve emerged from the recession faster and better than any other European country. They have their highest growth in 20 years and the also a failry low jobless rate.
They’ve invested heavily – not in bailing out banks that they didn’t have to bail out (because they’re economy was not so based on bullshit…unlike us especially during the Blair years) – but in sustaining their manufacturing sector.
Yes, it cost a bit of money. But they’re reaping the harvest now.

Claude

ILO unemployment rates:

UK
2004 4.1
2008 6.1
2009 7.9

Germany
2004 9.9
2008 7.1
2009 7.6

I’m a big fan of Germany, but let’s not exaggerate their labor market success.

Also, if you are implying either that we did not have to bail out the bank, or that bailing out the banks somehow used up money we were then not able to spend elsewhere, you are wrong on both counts.

sorry – UK 2004 should be 4.6

Luis Enrique.
But you failed to provide Germany’s unemployment rate for 2010 – that is after the crisis. In 2009 they were caught in the crisis themselves as well.

Here it is. From Eurostat: October 2010: 6.7% and it keeps getting lower.

So, back to your figures. UK unemplyment kept going up. Germany’s keeps going down.

For the record, I didn’t imply that bailing out the banks was wrong. I implied that bailing out the banks and then savagely cutting is VERY wrong.

I forgot the link to Eurostat: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&language=en&pcode=teilm020&tableSelection=1&plugin=1

thanks claude – I didn’t have those figure to hand. you’re right, Germany has boomed in 2010.

No probs. You’re welcome.

Of course, the successful record of government intervention in industry means this will be a great idea.

This is just another statement of Labour not having any new ideas: retreating to a default position where the state is the only way to ensure fairness, and the only tool the state has is direct action. It is not part of any coherent programme, but rather simply a bit of political positioning.

In fact, what this most reminds me of is Michael Heseltine in his Tarzan phase – about the same tone and level of intervention implied (and probably equally ineffective). If a break from neo-liberalism means early 90s Conservatism is being revised, you may well be heading for electoral anihalation – even Conservatives did not like that much.

“Good government can create the right conditions for economic growth,”

Absolutely no one would disagree with that statement. I think the Independent article is exaggerating by saying it is a lurch to the left. Helping small and medium sized firms to grow is obviously good. However, the article is bit light on how they are actually going to achieve that. I have a suggestion, stop taxing them so much.

Kinda funny to see lefties arguing in favour of the German model because Germany are currently doing well off the back of German workers.

” Germany likes to see its international competitiveness as the fruit of hard work and productivity. Yet, German productivity growth since 1999 does not stand out. What stands out is wage stagnation. Germany’s improved competitiveness was derived from reducing German wages relative to its European partners; the equivalent of a beggar-thy-neighbor devaluation in pre-euro times. The consequences of this strategy have proved disastrous: domestic demand stagnation in Germany, housing bubbles in partner countries with higher inflation, given that the ECB sets one rate that has to fit all. ”
http://www.eurointelligence.com/index.php?id=581&tx_ttnewstt_news=2765&tx_ttnewsbackPid=901&cHash=7383fd50dc

“Germany entered the eurozone at an uncompetitive exchange rate and embarked on a long period of wage moderation. Macroeconomists would say Germany benefited from a real devaluation against other members.”
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/08/why-germanys-rebound-is-not-such-good-news.html

A graphic example of the real effective exchange rate vis-a-vis Spain, and an illustration of the pain that the likes of Spain will have to endure to regain competitiveness.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ngczZkrw340/THzFZUxvTTI/AAAAAAAARXw/CULEBNM0isg/s1600/reer.png

The German current account. Notice it was in deficit until wages were held down and the euro effectively gave Germany an exchange rate devaluation.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ngczZkrw340/THwLewt3R7I/AAAAAAAARVQ/gDCm9Ipi2m4/s1600/Germany+Current+account.png