The idea that George Osborne is a part-time chancellor with a second job (Osborne reeling as economy enters the disaster zone, 26 July) misses the point. Osborne is a full-time party strategist and he has made running the economy a subsidiary part of that role. In 1979, the Conservative party successfully exploited the crisis of the "winter of discontent" to pin economic failure on to the Labour party, project social democratic measures as illegitimate and create a political hegemony that lasted nearly two decades.
The Conservatives' attempt to repeat the trick in 2010 faced two problems. First, it was the bankers, not the unions, that the public identified as the villains of the piece, and the Conservative party needs bankers in the same way that drunkards need breweries. Second, Alistair Darling's mix of deficit reduction and Keynesian economics was working.
To create a crisis that would produce another Conservative hegemony required Labour's promising economic approach to be tarred with a similar brush to that used by Saatchi and Saatchi in 1979 and an economic policy driven by the needs of Tory political strategy. If Conservative strategy requires economic disaster, the answer is: so be it.
Dr Chris Stevens
Canterbury, Kent
• Your report on the immediate slump in GDP suggests that the prime minister will attempt to blame his government's failure on the eurozone crisis.
As a major decline in the building construction industry is the principal cause of the present disaster, this is a little difficult to accept, unless he believes that recovery depends on selling houses to Greece, modernised schools to Italy and new roads to Portugal and Spain.
Roger Truelove
Sittingbourne, Kent
• The GDP figures reveal that the economy has shrunk further, yet employment has increased. This has led some commentators to suggest that the GDP figures are inaccurate. I disagree.
The apparent contradiction between the contraction of the economy and the increase in the number in work can surely be explained by a reduction in full-time work, which has been replaced by part-time and self-employed work. So, as a society we are less productive because we are working fewer hours.
Dana Carlin
London
• Reacting to the rapid contraction of the UK economy, David Cameron has trotted out the childish response this government uses to every problem it faces: "It's not out fault: Labour caused it." In June 2010, after Cameron, George Osborne, Danny Alexander et al had seen Treasury books showing the state of the finances they had inherited, they accepted the Office for Budget Responsibility's GDP growth forecasts, which projected growth this year of 2.8%. Any divergence from that forecast has nothing to do with past governments. If the prime minister and the chancellor aren't willing to accept the responsibilities of their offices, they should do the decent thing – resign.
Martin Quinn
Tavistock, Devon
• Sheila Lawlor misrepresents Gordon Brown's record as chancellor when she blames him for a public spending rise from 36% of GDP to about 50% (Is George Osborne responsible for the double dip?, 26 July). In 2007-08, just before the recession, the share was 41%, which is fairly low historically, having risen from 39% in 1996-97. If only Brown had been allowed to continue to lead us out of recession.
Christopher Jordan
Derby
• Aditya Chakrabortty (G2, 31 July) rightly points to our likely economic decline among the world's nations – but is this necessarily a source of dismay? GDP, as several commentators have pointed out, is no measure of human happiness. If a point or two off growth meant less money spent on aircraft carriers or foreign wars, I for one would celebrate. We might even pay more attention to Europe and worry less about the value of our "special relationship" as expressed in recent comments by Mitt Romney.
Dr Simon Harris
Wrexham
 |
| READ THE ORIGINAL POST AT www.guardian.co.uk |