John O'Sullivan: A Tale of Two Britains - Official myths, Market realities.

National Journal ^ | April 15, 2005 | John O'Sullivan

[quidnunc]

My first opinion piece for the Evening Standard appeared this morning. It's an attempt to give an overview of the election campaign — and the broad political environment that is shaping it. Once again, with the permission of the Evening Standard's editor, to whom I am grateful, I reprint it below. It has one or two minor amendments, explaining things to a non-British audience, but it is otherwise unchanged except for copyediting:

“Henry Kissinger was once asked why academic disputes were so bitter and famously replied: ‘Because the rewards are so small.’ The narcissism of small differences in this election campaign is even more extreme. All three parties struggle over very modest differences in public spending and public-service reform with the unpersuasive bloodthirstiness of professional wrestlers. Large and real differences of interest and opinion yawn in front of them. Yet somehow or other these go unnoticed in public debate.

An exile returning to Britain after years abroad in Canada and the U.S. — even years punctuated by regular visits — perhaps notices this oddity with fresher eyes. In particular he observes that there are two Britains — no, not the rich and poor, nor the Anglo and the "ethnic," nor even the native-born and the immigrant,, but the unavoidable division between Market Britain and Official Britain.

Market Britain he knows well enough from abroad. It is the Britain that makes things, provides services, competes in markets at home and abroad, and pays taxes. That Britain did not always enjoy a favorable reputation. Forty years ago it was synonymous with strikes, go-slows, poor quality, late delivery, zero spare parts, and unreliability. Today it is the fourth largest economy in the world with a reputation for capitalist efficiency. That is why innocent tourists arrive at Heathrow expecting to find a country as well run as Claridges, Conrans, Tesco, and Switzerland.

Official Britain is what they actually find. This is the Britain of Whitehall, the public sector, the immigration service, the police, the universities, the National Health Service, the courts; local government, and various supervisory quangos such as the Commission for Racial Equality.

These bodies all provide "public services" of one kind or another (including the provision of stern moral criticism). They are monopolies funded mainly by taxation and un-stimulated by competition. And, by and large, they are bad at what they do.

Police don't catch criminals; the immigration service admits terrorists; schools send out illiterates after years of compulsory "education"; the courts free dangerous criminals; welfare agencies station orphans with child abusers; hospitals keep patients in pain waiting for months (the plural of an NHS patient seems to be patience); and so on.

This poor performance, demonstrated in every second headline, ought to be the main election issue. Instead, the main election issue seems to be how much Official Britain should grow. How come?

-snip-

[hershey]

Well worth reading, by the way, and thanks for the post. More bureaucracy, more regulations, more paper pushing, and for what? Everything meaningful slows to a crawl or worse. We've all lost our common sense. Not simply a British problem of course. Here in the US, a friend's husband, a veterinarian, had knee surgery the other day. Having paid more than $800/mo. for health insurance, and having performed many knee surgeries on animals, himself, he knew what was wrong with his knee after his skiing accident. But the battle with red tape went on for several weeks, whether he should have an X-Ray, did he need an MRI, etc.. Shouting matches on the phone. Everything seemed coordinated to push up the cost, which, I guess is the basic goal. His Italian born wife describes it all in a great accent, with assorted operatic gestures wondrous to behold. He's survived the operation well, although was sure there was 'air trapped in there', a dreaded condition that leads to infection, etc.. More doctor's visits are scheduled. His wife thinks his imagination is working overtime. More redtape to come.