Your Country Needs You: Why Northern Ireland Needs a Think-Tank Dedicated to Small Government

Image of Northern Ireland in the UK

Northern Ireland is in the Red. Image via Wikipedia

Last year the Treasury published a consultation document seeking ideas as to how Northern Ireland’s economy should be rebalanced.

The document pulled no punches in defining the endemic problems of Northern Ireland’s economy and its massive over-dependence on the British public purse. It stopped short at pointing fingers at some of the underlying causes of this dependency culture – such as a stunted Party-political system and successive British governments that preferred to throw money at a problem rather than deal with the systemic disease. The troubles were part of the reason for the creation of a Potemkin economy – but not the whole reason.

However, the document at least details, in its ghastliness, just how sick our economy really is:

  • Productivity remains low, with productivity per filled job being 85.3 per cent of the UK average, lower than all other regions other than Wales
  • Low productivity is largely due to under-representation of high productivity sectors in Northern Ireland
  • Levels of venture capital funding are lower in Northern Ireland than in all other UK regions – and the few VC firms that are ‘active’ are largely dependent on state funding
  • Over the past five years business expenditure on R&D in Northern Ireland has averaged 0.69 per cent of GVA compared to 1.23 per cent for the UK as a whole. In addition, business expenditure on R&D in Northern Ireland is heavily focused on a small number of companies, with just 10 companies accounting for some 57 per cent of all business R&D investment in 2009.
  • Over 30 per cent of all Northern Ireland jobs are in the public sector compared to a UK average of around 21 per cent
  • Northern Ireland’s economic inactivity rate remains high at 28.4 per cent compared to the UK average of 23.3 per cent, and is the highest rate in all of the 12 UK regions.

The long and short of all of this is that Northern Ireland’s fiscal deficit is vast: equating to over £5,000 per person – which is some three times larger than the UK average.

And nothing, substantial, seems to be being done to address this. Yes, the consultation resulted in lots of submissions, but radical action needs to be taken to address the endemic problem.

In terms of addressing the problem the Executive at Stormont is not fit for purpose – nor are the Departments responsible for economic development. The political parties all define their effectiveness based on how much cash they can wrestle from the Treasury – thereby perpetuating the economics of hand-out.  And there are no strong lobby groups arguing the case for the following:

  • Active reduction of the size of the State’s involvement in the economy
  • Intolerance for absurd State-funded hand-outs to people and groups who don’t deserve them
  • Reduction in ludicrous and crippling local taxes – especially taxes on business and commerce
  • Accountability of political Parties based on hard, tangible economic related outcomes

So I’m proposing creating such a Think-Tank, Lobby Group – whatever you think it should be called.

If you would like to get involved in this initiative please contact me by completing the little form below. I’d be keen to hear from you if you’d like to join a steering committee, write some blog posts, undertake some research or just lend your support.

Why the Labour Party and Jim Murphy are hypocrites on the Union

English: Floral Badges of the United Kingdom o...

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday Jim Murphy, Shadow Defence Secretary, made clear that the Labour Party would be leading the charge to defend the Union in Scotland. However, he may have missed that the fact that Union he is defending is the Union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Labour conveniently ignores the fact that the Labour Party does not defend the Union here.

It is constitutionally offensive for a Party that aspires to govern the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to systemically refuse to seek a mandate in a part of it (i.e. the Northern Ireland bit). Moreover Labour’s sister party here – the SDLP – only appeals to Nationalists (and almost exclusively Catholics). It’s a Party whose elected representative cannot even bring themselves to refer to Northern Ireland as Northern Ireland. Instead they refer to “The North”, or “the region”.

The SDLP also takes diametrically opposite positions to Labour on local issues. For example it opposed the last Labour government’s positions on a host of issues (like uncapped domestic rates for Northern Ireland). It certainly is not the manifestation of the British Labour Party in Northern Ireland. Indeed most SDLP voters would be Conservative voters if they lived in Great Britain.

The Labour Party’s position is to deny left of centre pro-Union voters in Northern Ireland any opportunity to support the Party or vote for it. And yet it supports the Hillsborough Agreement which maintains the status quo of continuance of the Union with Britain so long as the majority so wish. In short, therefore, Labour’s position in terms of organisation and seeking a mandate is pro Irish Nationalist (as its sister Party is pro Irish Nationalist). That is the reason why the Party’s Unionist position for Scotland is fundamentally hypocritical – and why Jim Murphy needs to get his act together.

Friends’ School LipDub

So here it is…the global video phenomenon from Northern Ireland’s finest school (according to the Sunday Times, don’t take my word for it).

I’ll let you guess which of the stars is my daughter.

Over 1,000 kids, staff and supporters were involved in the making of this and it shows the wonderful sense of community at a wonderful Grammar School.

(I should make a disclaimer that I also attended the school – although rather a long time ago).

Iron Lady: A Review

Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher

Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher. Image via Wikipedia

I makes no bones about it. I was a Thatcherite. I acknowledge that her track history is far from faultless. As Education Secretary she did not do enough to defend Grammar Schools, or academic selection (a system that gave her the opportunity to gain entry to Oxford and to subsequently climb the greasy pole). Her arrogance and obstinacy over the Community Charge/Poll Tax issue was flawed also. But Thatcher was unquestionably the greatest British Prime Minister of the last century. Indeed, I’d argue that she was greater than Churchill.

When the film-makers set out to make Iron Lady they did not necessarily want to make her appear great. Some say that the movie is more of a study of ageing and  dementia.

However, they miss the point. What makes Thatcher remarkable was her leadership, not her dementia.

Thatcher was a remarkable leader – remarkable in that she was an exceptional woman in a male dominated political world. And remarkable in that she defined her leadership on the basis of her ideological passion. She also changed the United Kingdom (massively for the better, I would argue, but others might disagree).

Therefore the focus of the film on her dementia or ageing was overdone. Indeed, from a cinematic point of view, it became boring. The opening sequence drags on too long (with Carol and her helpers having muttered conversations about her not being “let out”) and the metaphor – of her constantly talking to a dead Dennis – becomes simply annoying. It becomes a dramatic device that grates.

Moreover the political narrative becomes a catalog – with none of her defining leadership characteristics explored in any real depth (because so much time is taken up with her clearing her husband’s wardrobes).

And what were those defining characteristics? Without question, the most important was her ability to lead on the basis of commitment to what she believed. She believed in the primacy of the individual. She believed in the requirement to lead based on legitimacy of argument rather than requirement for populism. And she understood the nation because she came from from it rather than hovered above it.

Lord Feldman Commits to Cutting Ties with UUP

Lord Feldman’s recent statement, written for the Belfast Telegraph, is to be welcomed. It makes clear the Conservative Party’s intention to do what it should have done decades ago – namely to seek a mandate to govern, and to organise, in every part of the UK. The statement is especially welcome as it includes sections that I wrote myself, on behalf of the Party, several years ago – before the ill-fated UCUNF debacle.

I wish the new Northern Irish Conservatives every success. At last we may start to see the normalisation of our politics.

Peace and Love to All Men…

Just in case you thought it was just Northern Ireland where various Christian sects have seething hatred for eachother (that occasionally manifests itself as violence) here’s the scene in that most holy church in the world, the Church of the Nativity in Bethlemen.  Bless.

It’s now Up to the Tories…

Is this how the new Party logo might look?

After a few weeks thinking time, the UUP leader, Tom Elliott, has responded to Conservative Chairman Lord Feldman’s letter – the one that suggested the the UUP should wind-up and go home.

As expected, Elliott has dismissed Feldman’s suggestions - rather than the UUP Party executive.

So, it’s now over to the Conservatives to do something.  And that something, it would appear, would be to establish a new Northern Irish flavoured right-of-centre political party with formal ties to the Conservative Party in London but with local leadership and electoral ambitions.

As I’ve said in the past I would wish this new organisation success.  But I would hope that – from launch – the organisation sets out a secular, non-sectarian stall, free from the baggage of the past. The new Party needs to define itself very quickly as something fresh, different, cross-community and attractive.  It will need a confident and articulate voice and it will need to be well organised and well-funded – two qualities the local Conservatives never really achieved.

I’ll be watching 2012 developments with interest.

Death of a Hero

Christopher Hitchens had cancer and knew he was dying. But, nonetheless, his passing is immensely sad. His polemic was brilliant and his incisiveness was both alarming and wonderful. His oratory, simply spellbinding.

Given his passing, this quote is more apt even now than when he wrote it.

“The only position that leaves me with no cognitive dissonance is atheism. It is not a creed. Death is certain, replacing both the siren-song of Paradise and the dread of Hell. Life on this earth, with all its mystery and beauty and pain, is then to be lived far more intensely: we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more.”

I’m on Seven Days Tomorrow

I’m on Seven Days on BBC radio Ulster tomorrow. Topics include the UK in Europe, Historical commemorations and life on other planets.

BBC Radio Ulster logo

Image via Wikipedia

Even the Church thinks the government has gone too far in its proposals for Bishops in the Lords

Dr Rowan Williams PC, DPhil, DD, FBA the 104th...

Even Rowan Williams thinks the government is going too far...

This article is republished from the British Humanist Association website…

Bishops sitting in the House of Lords should not be exempt from “serious offence provisions” the Church of England stated today, opposing the government’s proposals set out in its draft House of Lords Reform Bill. The British Humanist Association (BHA), which had strongly criticised the government’s proposals in its own submission to the parliamentary Joint Committee currently scrutinising the Bill, welcomed the statement from the Church, and described the government’s proposals as ‘seriously disturbing’.

In a written paper signed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, the Church of England stated that it had not sought exemptions proposed ‘by the Government for the Lords Spiritual from the tax deeming provisions, the serious offence provisions and those on expulsion and suspension’.

BHA Chief Executive Andrew Copson commented, ‘As they stand, the government’s proposals mean that on the most serious matters, Bishops in the House of Lords would be accountable to the Church of England and not to parliament. Even the Church now does not want that, so in whose interest has the government made these seriously disturbing proposals?

‘Given that the Church’s position is firmly to support having automatic seats for its Bishops in our parliament, including on a different basis from other members, its rejection of the government’s proposals to exempt those Bishops from the serious offence provision and those on expulsion and suspension is certainly surprising but welcome.’

The BHA and the All Party Parliamentary Humanist Group submitted evidence to the Joint Committee scrutinising the draft House of Lords Reform Bill.

Next Page »


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 24 other followers

Musings on things political and secular…

This is my site where I share my world views for anyone who might be remotely interested. Visit only if you think the content is interesting. Oh and comment is free. So go right ahead and agree or disagree. But, please, be kind and polite (especially to me).
Add to Technorati Favorites

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.