***
In one of his more that usually stupid comments our Prime Minister said this:
"We're the Government doing the most for the people of this country."
Unlike all the other Governments in the country who aren’t doing nearly as much.
However, this got me to thinking. Why not have competitive government – it works for everything else. Rather than just the one Government with all the power, we could have an open market – any group can set up a government, raise taxes and deliver services but they do so in competition with others.
Tricky I know and we’d end up with a new government to mediate the disputes between the various governments – and so on like the proverbial fleas on a dog’s back. We need some central authority to administer the laws and prevent arbitrary seizure of property. And that authority must be under popular control so as to prevent it become itself arbitrary.
However, the principle underlying the admirable “free schools” ideas could – and in my view should – be translated into the genuinely competitive delivery of government services. If it is right for schools to break free from bureaucracy, the same must apply to health, to waste management, to social services…to the police. The great reforms of the 1945 Labour government created a producer bureaucracy that is no longer suited to today.
A major change is possible in government – delivering through voluntary choice and the decisions of individuals the rapid improvements in service quality, care and cost-effectiveness that bureaucratic fiat can no longer deliver. A truly radical government will start the transformation by handing over power and control to neighbourhoods, to communities of interest and to the creators and innovators now stifled by the dead hand of our centralised state.
...
4 comments:
Wasn't it Dan Quayle who said 'We're going to have the best-educated American people in the world'
If having a government that closely resembles a market is the answer, why not just have a market?
"We need some central authority to administer the laws and prevent arbitrary seizure of property. And that authority must be under popular control so as to prevent it become itself arbitrary."
Alright then. What's to stop the majority of people using the authority to seize the property of bankers? Or footballers? Or anybody who happens to be the national hate figure?
"The great reforms of the 1945 Labour government created a producer bureaucracy that is no longer suited to today."
It was never suited to this country.
"A major change is possible in government – delivering through voluntary choice and the decisions of individuals the rapid improvements in service quality, care and cost-effectiveness that bureaucratic fiat can no longer deliver."
The state can never be efficient, because it will never have the profit motive. It does not compete for business by providing good products at a low price – it steals as much income as it can get away with, and spends it ineffectively.
Good services will come to us when the profit motive is restored, meaning that we need to turn public services private.
Oh, and by the way, please turn your comment moderation off.
Thank you.
Regional assemblies, please.
Post a Comment