One would hope that the run-up to the UK’s general election on July 4 would feature not just weeks of political insults, dubious statistics and empty promises, but also a serious discussion about the country’s state. While such a discussion is unlikely to make British voters more optimistic, it could help pull the UK out of its doom loop.
In addition to the UK’s diminishing economic prospects following 14 years of Conservative Party rule, the country has also been roiled by two major scandals: One is the Post Office scandal, which involves the wrongful prosecution and imprisonment of hundreds of postmasters for crimes they did not commit. The other concerns the revelations about the British National Health Service’s use of infected blood and blood products, which led to thousands of people contracting HIV or hepatitis between the 1970s and the early 1990s. Both are examples of state failure that destroyed lives — and sometimes ended them.
The British government was once viewed as a model of competent and fair management, but it is impossible to make such a claim with a straight face today. While British governance is undoubtedly better than it appears, and Britons still have many things to be justifiably proud of, the upcoming election offers a unique opportunity to put the country back on the path to economic prosperity.
Illustration: Kevin Sheu
Given their abysmal economic track record over the past 14 years, it is hardly surprising that the Conservatives are likely to lose power. It would be very difficult for them to argue that things could be worse under Keir Starmer’s Labour Party. Since the 2008 financial crisis, which erupted about 18 months before former British prime minister David Cameron assumed office, wage growth has been lower than at any time since the Napoleonic Wars.
To be sure, Cameron inherited a mountain of economic problems from his Labour predecessors, unlike the stable economy that former British prime minister Tony Blair’s Labour inherited from his predecessor John Major’s Conservative government in 1997.
However, while public spending needed to be reined in to reduce the debt incurred during the 2008 financial crisis, the Conservative cuts were probably too severe, as public spending dropped from 44 percent of GDP in 2007 and 2008 to about 38 percent in 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic. The Conservatives’ austerity policy led to severe reductions in public services, from defense and policing to schools and local governments, and resulted in significant sociopolitical upheavals, particularly when it came to public-sector pay.
Moreover, despite the cuts and a rise in taxes — which reached their highest level since the 1970s — the UK’s national debt has climbed to a record ￡2.7 trillion (US$3.45 trillion). Both Labour and Conservative politicians have promised to increase spending without raising taxes, prompting the IMF to question whether existing public spending plans can be maintained.
Fortunately for British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, inflation fell to 2.3 percent in April as energy prices tumbled. Under former British prime minister Boris Johnson, the Conservatives also handled the COVID-19 lockdowns well by effectively paying the wages of those who could not work.
However, while COVID-19 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have undoubtedly made it more difficult to rebuild the economy, they do not fully explain the UK’s dismal productivity and GDP growth. Simply put, British politicians are arguing over how to cut and distribute slices of a shrinking pie.
While the dreadful legacy of his Conservative predecessors — the morally vacuous Johnson and the reckless Liz Truss — would make it extremely difficult for Sunak to offer a credible vision of a better future, many of his problems are self-inflicted. For example, he supported Johnson’s bid for the Conservative leadership, a decision that reflects poorly on his judgement. Sunak has also been a euroskeptic since he was a schoolboy and was an early supporter of Brexit.
So, what is to be done? To convince voters that they can lead the UK to a better future, the Britain’s next political leaders — whether Labour, Conservative, or otherwise — must be honest about the country’s challenges instead of trying to bribe voters or butter them up with cheery platitudes. Britons deserve to know how tough things are going to be and how difficult it would be to turn the economy around.
That means British leaders must outline their plans for addressing the daunting challenges facing the country. First, they need to acknowledge how damaging Brexit has been to the UK’s economy and trading prospects, potentially reducing GDP by 5 percent or more and constraining the government’s ability to increase investment.
Second, policymakers must make the case for closer cooperation with European allies on foreign policy, defense, energy, environmental issues, health and food standards. While this would likely provoke vigorous opposition from those in the tabloid press advocating populist nationalism, it is crucial for the UK to tap into larger markets.
The UK should also engage with its neighbors and other developed countries to manage migration waves from poorer countries. There are other areas of potential cooperation as well, such as social care, where successive British governments have been too afraid to implement an excellent plan that has been on the table for more than a decade.
Crucially, if the UK wants to remain a world leader in research, science and higher education, it must increase funding for universities and vocational training. Policymakers should also consider empowering municipalities and ensure that support for local authorities does not favor the wealthiest parts of the country over poorer ones — an imbalance that was one of the main factors behind the 2016 Brexit vote.
If all this is too much to expect from politicians vying for voters’ trust and democratic legitimacy, then it does not really matter who wins the upcoming election. However, for the UK to have any real chance of reversing its decline, it needs leaders willing to stand up for responsible policies — and fast.
Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong and a former EU commissioner for external affairs, is chancellor of the University of Oxford and the author of The Hong Kong Diaries.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS