The Daily Telegraph

The financial crisis killed off Tory support for free markets

- RYAN BOURNE Ryan Bourne holds the R Evan Scharf Chair for the Public Understand­ing of Economics at the Cato Institute

The passing of a decade since the start of the credit crunch, and subsequent Great Recession, has given opportunit­y for much reflection this week. Is the financial system safer today than it was then? What are the lessons for monetary or fiscal policy? How much did a delayed reaction to the crisis contribute to Brexit or the rise of Jeremy Corbyn?

One conclusion is clear: the Thatcher to early Blair period, with its focus on limited government and liberal market-based reform, has proven merely an interlude in British politics. Proponents of free-market economics vastly overestima­ted the commitment to these principles within the Conservati­ve party. The financial crisis appears to have buried it.

Whilst Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour team talk of overthrowi­ng a “neoliberal order,” in truth, the shift away from a commitment to free markets and a small state has been occurring gradually and can be seen through the evolution of the Conservati­ve Party.

After some initial years of government restraint, Labour’s Blair and his chancellor Brown opened the spending taps in the 2000s, with government spending rising from 35pc of GDP to 39pc at the height of the boom, leaving the state at a similar size as in the Nineties recession. The Conservati­ve response was to acquiesce and talk about “sharing the proceeds of growth”. By then the party was in thrall to the so-called moderniser­s, who pushed the idea that economic policy was a secondary concern to hugging huskies.

The financial crisis itself slapped this group in the face, of course, and brought the focus back to the economy. With spending rising and revenue falling, a humongous budget deficit emerged, which had to be dealt with, alongside reform of the financial and banking regulation.

But what has been the result of Conservati­ve government in dealing with these challenges? Overall government spending is still above pre-crisis levels as a share of GDP, and the tax burden is now at its highest level for 30 years.

The Conservati­ves completely swallowed the critique that the financial crisis was due to deregulati­on. In fact, in the Eighties there was a huge shift from selfregula­tion in the sector to state-led regulation, which has mushroomed since 1986. The number of regulators has increased from 1 for every 11,000 people employed in the financial sector to 1 for every 300. Rather than think deeply about the routes of the crisis: monetary policy, regulatory failure, warped incentives, deposit insurance and encouragem­ent worldwide of state support for housing, the Tories merely adopted convention­al wisdom.

All this would be palatable if the Conservati­ves had engaged in meaningful supply-side reform to raise the potential growth of the economy and hence delivered rising productivi­ty and living standards. Yet the party has ignored all the main levers to achieve this: junking the meaningful tax reform set out in opposition, giving up on attempts to open up education and healthcare to market pressures, removing no barriers to private sector infrastruc­ture delivery (see Heathrow) and using demand-side short-term fixes rather than land use liberalisa­tion in the housing market.

No doubt the party initially expected growth to bounce back robustly as the effects of the financial crisis wore off. Now, with seven years of weak productivi­ty growth since 2010, the lack of meaningful economic change is inexcusabl­e and has damaged the whole tone of politics. In a world where wages are not rising sustainabl­y, people come to care more about its distributi­on, hence the greater appeal of the egalitaria­n politics of the radical Labour leadership.

Indeed, even the choices the Conservati­ves made on spending show a lack of seriousnes­s in going for growth. In 2010, the Comprehens­ive Spending Review junked high impact road schemes but recommitte­d the Government to the building of HS2, which had a substantia­lly lower benefit-cost ratio. Government control of energy markets has continued to expand. Overall, modest spending restraint, in fact, saw most major areas of the welfare state left intact, meaning little advanced repair of the long-term fiscal challenge associated with an ageing population.

Instead the party’s energies have focused on re-regulating large parts of the labour market through the National Living Wage and pension auto-enrolment; expanding the scope of the welfare state with more government childcare support and free school meals; and engaging in a so-called industrial strategy, which has never worked before.

Out of ideas, pressured by Corbyn and with too much time passed to blame its 2010 inheritanc­e, the final dismal manifestat­ion of the party’s shift came with the 2017 manifesto, with its frequent denounceme­nt of unfair markets and widespread calls for interventi­on. Even on Brexit, where for years Euroscepti­c Conservati­ves talked about escaping EU regulation, protection­ism and using the repatriate­d net contributi­on to cut taxes, there has been no positive vision outlined for change. The only area where the Conservati­ves seemingly want a policy shift is an economical­ly illiterate desire to severely restrict migration.

It is difficult then to make the case that the Conservati­ve Party in Parliament are any longer a free market party, if they ever truly were. Any individual thoughtful politician­s who believe in market-based reform are, sadly, vastly outnumbere­d. Bar a small clique recapturin­g the party through the election of a new leader committed to these principles, the prospects for economic liberalism look dismal.

The direct impact of the financial crisis as a perceived failure of capitalism certainly have played a part in this. Politician­s respond to the public mood, as well as lead it, and the bank bailouts and slow subsequent growth has shifted attitudes. Yet the Conservati­ve Party’s lack of conviction for market-based growth and the popular results it delivers has worsened that mood, and has now contribute­d to the spiral for more and more interventi­on we see today.

‘Moderniser­s pushed the idea that economic policy was a secondary concern to hugging huskies’

 ??  ?? Free-market principles as well as Lehman Bros were buried by the financial crisis
Free-market principles as well as Lehman Bros were buried by the financial crisis
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom