Toolbox

Britain’s preoccupations

The statement by Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling last week that the British economy is likely to go through its worst experience for sixty years, will probably have come as a shock to many within the country as well as to others in the international community. For it is not so long ago that a British government, then led by Tony Blair and with Gordon Brown as Chancellor of the Exchequer, could boast that with the assumption of office by a Labour government in 1996, Britain had seen a period of prosperity that had exceeded the expectations of most people.

Britain now seems to be experiencing a so-called credit crunch, with some of its private financial institutions faltering, and a crisis in housing mortgage payments similar, though not yet as deeply, as the United States. In addition the pound is now recorded as falling to a two-year low against the euro, and a record low, in recent times, against the dollar. And predictions are that it is likely to continue to fall.

Yet, not so long ago too we were being told that the nature of the expanded global economy today, with a variety of substantial drivers (none though as powerful as the United States) meant that there could be a diversification of exports so that when the United States economy sneezed, other countries would no longer be bound to catch colds. If the increasing evidence that is appearing before us is correct, then it seems many of the big powers were living in a land of illusion, fascinated by a temporary phenomenon, and the capitalist system retains its characteristic of period booms and slumps.

The developing gloom about the slide of the economy coincides with what appears to be a considerable political gloom within the ruling Labour Party government about its future. Contrary to the reputation which Prime Minister Brown had developed as an economic wizard and political tactician during Mr Blair’s reign, the British public’s estimation of his capabilities in both spheres seems to have fallen disastrously. Not only do the polls show his and his party’s standing persistently falling, but the more valid tests, recent by-elections, have shown the same. The last by-election in Scotland, rock-solid Labour ground and Mr Brown’s homeland, saw Labour squarely defeated. And in the face of Mr Darling’s statement on the economy Mr Brown seems to have been letting it be known that he is displeased that his Chancellor has been so vocal and direct on the issue of the future of the economy.

In the meantime, Mr Brown’s tenure cannot be said to have brought much improvement in Britain’s relations with the European Union. He dithered over the signing of the Lisbon Treaty designed to institutionally strengthen the EU, and then has continued to dither over how and when the United Kingdom will give its assent to the treaty. In a sense, fortune smiled on him with the defeat of the Irish government in its recent referendum on the treaty, but that has not prevented the Conservative opposition from maintaining its harassment of the government over its intentions. Commentators are now contrasting Britain’s posture to European integration with that of the active leadership of France under President Sarkozy as President of the Council. Mr Brown’s obviously lukewarm attitude to further integration of Europe is not likely to gain him particular sympathy from his larger European colleague states, though they probably have to take into account that the Conservative Party, at least as it is currently in opposition, is even less sympathetic to some of the changes that they would like to see. And now, in the face of all of this, Brown is perceived by the public as dithering over when to call a general election which he had been hoping to do much earlier, to get, as they say, a mandate of his own.

The decline of the British economy – there are no estimates yet as to how long it might last – when coupled with the difficulties of the American economy, do not bode well for us in the Caribbean. A real threat exists of significant declines in the tourism arrivals to the Caribbean as often happens during a European recession. And likely to exacerbate this are possible cuts in air transportation to the region as a result of the pressure of oil prices on the British carriers. Secondly, there is some evidence already of a slowing down of remittances from Caribbean residents in Britain, at a time when for some countries, Jamaica foremost perhaps, these constitute a significant source not only of foreign exchange, but also of daily living at a time of a certain slowing down of some Caribbean economies. The fall of the pound, which not long ago was running well against the dollar, will not help us in the Caribbean either.

How this will further affect our Caribbean is a matter for some speculation. We have already known for some time that Britain’s preoccupation with the Caribbean is not as strong as it was, say, two decades ago. It is true that Mr Brown has shown a certain consistency in the councils of the Group of Eight industrialized countries in asserting more aid to the developing countries, and particularly to the least developed of the African continent. It is also true that British Labour Party representatives within the European Union, led in particular by Mrs Glenys Kinnock, wife of a former British Labour leader and senior member of the European Parliament , have generally taken a favourable position towards the Caribbean, as some are currently doing today in respect of the need, in their view, for some revision of the Economic Partnership Agreement. (But of course the EPA is a construct of the EU Trade Negotiator Peter Mandelson, a former ministerial colleague of Prime Minister Brown, and a former key political adviser of Tony Blair.)
The fact of the matter is, however, that Britain, and other major European countries, are turning their medium-term eyes to the larger continents that show promise of being good locations for investment as well as sources of needed raw materials. Undoubtedly, as China and India turn to countries in Africa in particular in this regard, Britain’s efforts to maintain her place in that competition will induce relatively more attention to them than to us. It is noteworthy that Britain was, like the other main European countries, supportive of the decision of the EU to lower the tariffs on bananas from the Latin American countries, as a means of gaining their concurrence, and therefore a conclusion, to the Doha Development Round negotiations. Our objections fell on deaf ears.

The conclusion for us is that there is an evolution in Britain’s place in the world. There can be no doubt that her economy has gone through a substantial restructuring induced by Mrs Thathcher’s policies. At the same time, in part, the British economy has benefited from migrant labour from the old Eastern Europe in recent years, and from new developments in the financial services industries. But there is no doubt that the conditions of domestic liberalization that gave her some competitive advantage during this period have become available to other economies; and that the German economy which had suffered some decline over the last two decades, has now regained a degree of competitiveness. In that context, whether under Labour or under a new Conservative government, the British are likely to be more self-centred, responding to countries from which they can gain substantially in return.

That leaves us, as far as that part of the world is concerned, to pay more attention to the European Union as a collectivity, and to organize a diplomacy that gives us more visible presences in other European states. As the strength of our major ally diminishes, so we need, in order to maintain some leverage on the European continent, to diversify our relationships (a now somewhat hackneyed phrase in Third World diplomacy) and to find new medium-term allies on the Old Continent. But none of that absolves us from pressing ourselves on Britain, the country which is the homeland of many of our citizens and their descendants.

Comments

About Comments

We thank all readers who have contributed to this site since its relaunch. This section of the website is intended to provide a forum for reasoned and reasonable debate on the newspaper's content and we hope that readers make full use of it as many have already done.

The comments section is an extension of the newspaper and what it has become well known for over its history: accuracy, balance and fairness.
In recent weeks a large proportion of the comments posted have contained attacks on other users, slander, coarse language and profanity. Comments of these types will be deleted.
Comments which contain gratuitous and incendiary references to race and ethnicity will be struck.
We reserve the right to edit/delete comments for length, any libel and taste. We moderate all comments so be patient while your message waits to be approved.
Curious about the little images next to each commenter's name ? Go here and sign up using the same email address you used to register for Stabroeknews.com then upload your image and confirm it.

4 Responses to “Britain’s preoccupations”

Satish
on September 3rd, 2008 4:15 pm

This editorial is very high-browed and impressive. I am not sure how many Guyanese will pore thought the technical notes and revelation but it illustrates how advanced and sophisticated Guyanese thought is becoming.

Medicine was not taken by the UK when it should have been.
Now the patient is ill, other alternatives need to be looked at.
Britain is conspicuous by its failure to give up its currency, (pound Stirling) and adopt the Euro. This move although was self-serving in the short term, it will have negative long term ramifications for the British people.

The xenophobic British still have the mindset that ‘Britannia rules the waves’ and they want to be their own captain.
The result of this is that Britain remains more linked to the US than Europe and will therefore reflect what is happing in the USA, which does not help it in the current ‘credit crunch’ climate.

The final two paragraphs of the editorial contains much wisdom:

1 Germany spent much of its wealth embracing and reintegrating with East Germany and that amalgamation seems to now have been successful. Great things can now be expected of Germany in the short, medium and long term too.

2 Guyana should keep pressing on the UK for further enhancements and assistance and this will indeed be fruitful.

3 Guyana needs to enlarge its lobbying of the European Union because this can be a rich seam of gold to mine for the future.

[Reply to this]
Joe Coxall
on September 14th, 2008 9:02 am

Britain and the USA have become victims of their own excesses, and as with every great ponzi scheme, it reaches its mathematical limits and come crashing down.

But what is the alternative apart from reverting back to their old method of sending out their great armadas to confiscate and control the worlds goods and resources?

Well for now, they choose to plug up the leaks, in a desperate but futile attempt, so that the world will go on thinking that the ship is still seaworthy.

At the same time they are trying to bring in more shark bait to satisfy their enormous feeding frenzy, that must forever continue for the system to repair and heal itself.

The only suckers left are the breakaway former soviet colonies, who just like the earlier colonies of the Caribbean, are still intoxicated in their false sense of “freedom and independence” So that is where the EU’s attention is primarily focused right now, that is their next free meal ticket.

They have been very careful to divide these countries into separate ethnic enclaves, in preparation for the IMF kill.

What would happen in these countries where the entire population is armed with old kalishnokove rifles and mortar rounds, is that when the economic hardships brought on by the IMF becomes too overbearing, ethnic tensions will flare up and these boys all posess the weaponry to destroy the entire farm and kill the profit incentive of the UE and their money police the IMF.

As in every crisis, opportunities do arise, the trick is to be able to spot them early enough. History has repeatedly shown that with every empire, a time comes when their belief that they can keep expanding and conquering forever, falls victim to the sheer weight and burden of never ending expansionism.

Finally there is are cracks, followed by complete collapse. Are we witnessing this final collapse at this moment? I thing we are, but only time will tell for sure.

The big question is::::Is anyone in the Guyana government peering through their telescope to find those emerging opportunities?

Joe.

[Reply to this]
Satish
In reply to the above comment on September 15th, 2008 2:33 am:
Some mature and thought provoking points, Joe.
Stabroek News readers are blessed with your wisdom.

[Reply to this]
Joe Coxall
In reply to the above comment on September 15th, 2008 5:47 pm:
Thank you very much, my friend::::Hey a little attaboy every now and then, always feel refreshing.

Joe.