The Northern Rock's problems, and those of the Treasury, and by proxy taxpayers, continue to rumble, and with each new day the looming fear of nationalisation being the only way taxpayers will get their money, in the long term, looks more inevitable.
The first person to openly propose it as an option, although he stated it to be the "least desirable" one was Vince Cable, the erstwhile Lib Dem Treasury Spokesman, who was then acting Lib Dem leader. Whilst dismissed at the time, by the government, they are now giving the proposal serious consideration because of fears of a financial black hole for tax payers if no private sector solution is found. Whilst none of us want nationalisation, the government has to plan for the worst case scenario.
So it is slightly socking to hear that the Tories are saying that they would not support nationalisation of The Northern Rock. Why ? So what is their solution ? Well, there isn't one. The Conservative party has nothing new to bring to the debate, no magical solution, or wisdom. They simply state that they would refuse to support nationalisation.
So what does this mean ? Well, in the first instance it is opposition for opposition's sake. It is just opposing the government for the sake of it. The Conservatives may have an ideological loathing of nationalisation (although they did nationalise Rolls Royce in the 1970's), but when it comes to the economy, when it comes to securing the best deal possible for shareholders, isn't there a responsibility on political parties to do their best for the country, and not just have debates on political philosophy ?
And what does this say about the Tories ability to be trusted to run the economy ? The "Don't ask us what we should do" line the Tories are taking does not smack of a party able to run an economy.
3 comments:
No taxpayers' money should have been given to the Northern Crock in the first place. The government has put all our futures at risk by underwriting commitments it doesn't understand (at the Crock and elsewhere). It should cut its losses. It would only be nationalising so as to defer failure until after an election (for it to happen on the Tories' watch, probably).
That is at least politically logical (if characteristically dishonest and careless). What's the LibDem's excuse for proposing anything other than that Northern Rock should go bust and the shareholders should take their losses?
I think they have a little problem with Labour nicking every serious suggestion they come up with. Labour also did something similar during the last days of the Major regime withholding policies because they were afraid of the Tories "borrowing" them.
The "they did it to us" argument does not wash if people are to start taking politics seriously and accept politicians as people who can offer solutions, not simply be wise after the event.
Post a Comment