Where did Britain go wrong?

[Bletchleyite]

Then the tabloids will moan about high public spending, the tories will promise slashing taxes, win an election and the whole sorry cycle starts again

At least in that case it's not permanent austerity.

 

[Meerkat]

Building HS2 in full would be a good start.

Thats a very debatable one......for another thread. I certainly imagine it is very much one of his lowest priorities considering its dubious electoral impact. Better off making promises on NPR and city transport networks/buses.
But to bring it back to this thread government control of the railways didn't seem to improve things.

 

[duncanp]

I certainly do think Starmer needs to come out with some actual policies.

Yes, the entire Labour manifesto could be summed up as "...We're not the Tories, vote for us..."

 

[Kite159]

Yes, the entire Labour manifesto could be summed up as "...We're not the Tories, vote for us..."

Or "we have a leader who is less unpopular than Sunak, vote for us"

 

[birchesgreen]

Yes, the entire Labour manifesto could be summed up as "...We're not the Tories, vote for us..."

They have announced policies, the Tories have a habit of stealing them.

Great British Nuclear *cough*

 

[DarloRich]

I'm no expert but the yards and factories were still competing for contracts weren't they? Possibly they were told what they couldn't produce (ie new railway carriages) and had to adapt, but I thought they offered to make particular things rather than the government allocating who would do what.

It was a bit of both depending on the period of the war. Early in the war it was all a bit unstructured. Competing types and companies all offering stuff and a government keen to buy anything. The government never took charge of thier suppliers but they did tell them what to do.

It took people like Beaverbrook coming in to bash heads together and get central control over production. He had almost unlimited powers to direct and control aircraft production - and he did! Thereafter there was pretty tight governmental control of industry. They set out what was to be built and by whom.

The shadow factory scheme is worth looking at.

...as well as people allowing themselves to be convinced that "...things can only get better..." if Labour come to power.

Hint : they won't.

They did for me and my family under the last Labour government. They did for a lot of people around me. Few of them seem to have done well out of the last 12/13 years though.

As I said above. Labour have been in power for c.30 years of thier 122 year existence. People aren't getting convinced often!

EIDT - I wasn't, clearly, being entirely serious. The problems we face as a country cant by simply assigned to one party, even if Tory policy has been in the ascendancy for long periods since 1900. I think things would be different if we had less Tory control during that time but I know you wont agree.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Britain has not in modern times suffered the wars, invasions or revolutions that most countries have undergone, and which have allowed them to rebuild and refocus their societies, at least to some extent. Here we have never forced the rich and privileged to give up their ultimate control of the country.

My father told me on a number of occasions, Britain's problem is we won the 2nd World War!!

Since 1900 Labour have won 8 out of 32 elections. Only 3 leaders have won elections: MacDonald, Wilson and Blair.

What about Clement Attlee? - Sorry, I now see you have admitted that - but not corrected your OP.

 

[Gloster]

It is Attlee - two t.

 

[RT4038]

My father told me on a number of occasions, Britain's problem is we won the 2nd World War!!

It may be a problem, but hardly where we went 'wrong' !

 

[nw1]

While there were problems before (notably at times during the Thatcher years and the early 90s recession) things ebbed and flowed in the late 20th century and very early 21st. I'd say long-term decline started with the credit crunch of 2008, and then an unfortunate "domino" effect kicked off, which has partly led to what we have now.

The Cameron-Osborne austerity of 2010 was seen as "medicine", but it was the wrong medicine, and just widened the gap between rich and poor and caused hardship to many.

Then, the hard-right (such as Farage) exploited people's anger and hardship, making people blame all their problems on immigrants, which led to Cameron being scared into running the disastrous referendum.

The nonsense of Brexit followed, which (in addition to its own problems) then triggered the final in the sorry sequence of events: their sense of "victory" in the Brexit war, and the 2019 election, massaged the ego of both Boris and the Conservative Party in general. This appears to have given them the carte blanche to do what they like ever since and apparently at best ignore, and at worst shut down opposing views.

The other factor of course, which we can't, by contrast, blame on the government, is Covid and the economic damage that has caused.

 

[Broucek]

Yes, the entire Labour manifesto could be summed up as "...We're not the Tories, vote for us..."

Which is not uncompelling to me as a usual (but not always) Conservative voter.

Interestingly, on Mumsnet, there's a groundswell (which may not be statistically significant) away from Labour due to gender issues

 

[nw1]

Western women are generally encouraged to put childbearing on hold and put their career first. Equality of opportunity and all that. Sadly mother nature doesn't take overly kindly to this principle and many find themselves childless by 40 with no winner of a man wanting to procreate with them. My present place of work is absolutely full of this particular demographic. Loads of 40-50 something educated women (and men for that matter) who wanted a family at some point but don't have one. Of course its easy to say the cost of raising a family is high but that's never stopped the bottom 10% of society from being prolific in this respect.

Not everyone wants children. It's only one of a range of possible lifestyles. Some women might not want children, and might want to focus on their career. Nothing wrong with that!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It is Attlee - two t.

Thanks - now corrected.

 

[yorksrob]

I don't buy Tesco Value meat, and I don't want Tesco Value public services either.

But the blue and white stripey train livery would at least be quite striking !

 

[urbophile]

I certainly do think Starmer needs to come out with some actual policies.

Building HS2 in full would be a good start.

As would reversing Brexit. But neither of them are likely vote winners.

I'm neither a historian nor particularly knowledgeable about political theory. What follows is I'm sure grossly oversimplified and maybe even caricature, but as a framework for understanding our plight it makes sense to me.

Someone upthread mentioned 1066 as the start of it all, and while it's maybe a tongue-in-cheek suggestion I can see some sense in it. Britain (or rather England) was ruled by an aristocratic élite from a different culture; the land was parcelled out among them; and the descendants of those lords and barons had the upper hand over the rest of us from then on.

From this developed the Empire. Much of the wealth of the country was generated by exploiting (often extremely cruelly) other lands and cultures, including nearer at home the Irish, Scots and Welsh. The pioneers of the industrial revolution were often of humble origin but all too soon the wealth was siphoned off from the heartlands (now the Red Wall territories) to the City of London and the upper classes.

The class system distorted our education system, with the majority having been taught just enough for their roles in life, at best as pen-pushers, minor administrators and such like. The devaluing of art, music and literature (more and more these days seen as an unnecessary frippery) has never affected those in the so-called 'public' schools, but it creates a massive cultural split across the whole of society. (Can you imagine opera in Italy being restricted to the rich minority?) More than that, the culture strongly discourages asking questions, and we see the results of that in the attempt to censor people like Gary Lineker.

The beneficiaries of this distorted and unjust system do everything in their power to manipulate the majority to accept it. For far too long they have dominated the print media; now they have much more obviously got their hands on the broadcast media too, destroying any pretence that the BBC is impartial.

Most of our other problems (the North-South divide; the selling off of industry; 'short-termism' and ostrich-like thinking especially about the environment; racism and xenophobia; and particularly Brexit) are either the direct result of, or greatly encouraged by, this mindset.

 

[Fleetmaster]

More than that, the culture strongly discourages asking questions, and we see the results of that in the attempt to censor people like Gary Lineker.

Our culture is debate. Advance and defend a position via argument.

The Lineker debacle showed where we have gone wrong. Nobody, least of all Lineker, is interested in debating their position anymore. He stayed silent throughout, and his agent has now admitted this was deliberate. Silence the beast.

As for where things went wrong, since a comedian said in response to it all, Tiwtter is not where you go If you don't already know what you think, I guess we have to say, the invention of (anti-)social media.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Mar 2023 ==

I never liked the London-centricism that this economy has. I find it insane that my mother and I have to do long distance commuting from Peterborough, to afford to buy a home but still work in our respective fields.

Levelling up was a long overdue. Far sighted policies shot down by small time politicians all too scared by their own base to even consider engagement in the national interest.

People will look back on Johnson's whopping majority, achieved so soon after a supposedly far more qualified leader Theresa May crashed and burned while attempting the exact same thing, and wonder why people from both sides thought it was wise to ignore the message it was sending to the politicians from the public about what matters to them.

I.e., things went all to crap when "in the national interest" ceased to be an actual thing in Parliamentary politics.

 

[Envy123]

Levelling up was a long overdue. Far sighted policies shot down by small time politicians all too scared by their own base to even consider engagement in the national interest.

People will look back on Johnson's whopping majority, achieved so soon after a supposedly far more qualified leader Theresa May crashed and burned while attempting the exact same thing, and wonder why people from both sides thought it was wise to ignore the message it was sending to the politicians from the public about what matters to them.

I.e., things went all to crap when "in the national interest" ceased to be an actual thing in Parliamentary politics.

Tell me about it. Having lived in Huntingdon and now in Peterborough, I can see the lack of investment. Especially in Peterborough, I notice the deprivation.

My colleagues and some of the locals I’ve spoken to, find it weird or insane to commute so far daily. But London house prices are out of reach and even Huntingdon’s prices are unaffordable.

Even some locals are getting priced out because of the commuters living here. I feel like it will never end, unless levelling up does happen on a much wider scale.

 

[Bevan Price]

That's a fair point - the Tories didn't privatise early enough. But it was Labour, and socialist tendencies more widely, that caused the problem.

Labour nationalisation policy was in part a reaction to the shabby way workers had been treated by "big business" for hundreds of years. Expendable at the whim of rich management, poor wages, poor housing, etc. I am not saying that the government needs to own everything, but some of the Thatcher / post-Thatcher privatisations have been a disaster from the point of view of customers.

Rail - a disjointed, fragmented mess.

Buses - a total disaster. Anyone not living in a large suburb connected to a major road has probably lost most of the bus services they had prior to 1986. Many bus stations were closed - sold to property developers.

Steel - hardly a big success; many factories closed, others sold to overseas owners.

Water, Gas, Electricity - even without Putin's war, charges mostly risen way above the inflation rate.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The other factor of course, which we can't, by contrast, blame on the government, is Covid and the economic damage that has caused.

You say that, but the amount of money they’ve spaffed up the wall- to borrow a phrase from the man in charge at the time- is quite staggering.

The £50bn on test-and-trace is the poster boy, but the rampant price-gouging and corruption in PPE contracts and the rampant fraud in the Covid business loan scheme IS all on the government. Recent estimates are that, of the £75bn in Covid loans under the various schemes, as much as £15bn will never be repaid. Between test-and-trace and the PPE and the fraud we could have paid for HS2.

They did for me and my family under the last Labour government. They did for a lot of people around me. Few of them seem to have done well out of the last 12/13 years though.

As I said above. Labour have been in power for c.30 years of thier 122 year existence. People aren't getting convinced often!

Quite. I had my first child at the end of New Labour and I did well out of it: plenty of support, and not just financial. I had my second at the end of Cameron’s austerity and I got bugger all.

As you say, Labour don’t get in often. Even in my lifetime, reaching adulthood at Blair came to power, most of my working career has been under the Tories. Which is why, when I left the UK in 2020, I was earning the same as I was in 2010. Just the 35% real terms pay cut.

 

[Fleetmaster]

some of the Thatcher / post-Thatcher privatisations have been a disaster from the point of view of customers.

My eyes lit up there...restricted only to the customer view, things are not so clear

Rail - a disjointed, fragmented mess.

But gone were the days that customers were treated as passengers, and gone were the days that it was seen as acceptable to manage demand by artificially pricing out certain customers entirely.

We don't bat an eyelid that customers face disjointed fragmented markets in other day to day purchases, so why should we be treated like simpletons when purchasing a simple thing like conveyance?

Buses - a total disaster. Anyone not living in a large suburb connected to a major road has probably lost most of the bus services they had prior to 1986. Many bus stations were closed - sold to property developers.

But it makes perfect sense to a customer who appreciates that since 1986, the law has been perfectly clear. Was it wrong to allow customers a choice, with access to finite council owned resources duly regulated and charged for, and with a safety net of council funding for socially necessary services? Doesn't look so wrong when you consider this is how the aviation sector works. Being back BOAC/BEA? Not exactly a vote winner with air travellers.

Steel - hardly a big success; many factories closed, others sold to overseas owners.

You couldn't get a more obvious example of customers dictating the fortunes of a poorly performing business. Customers really don't care if your lack of competitiveness is down to forces outside your control. It's not like state ownership ever worked the other way, is it? Here mate, have your steel half price, 'cos we really appreciate you employing thousands of Brits in your global construction business.

Water, Gas, Electricity - even without Putin's war, charges mostly risen way above the inflation rate.

Not sure about that tbh. As I understand it, before the war, the issues were squarely down to the regulators not ensuring the private companies were meeting their investment obligations. Customers have no role in that, and we of course have lots of other private sectors which necessarily require regulation in the public interest. Nobody calls for them to be nationalised when the regulator screws up. We nationalised the big banks, not the banking industry, for example. Do customers like having a choice of bank? Probably about as much as they enjoyed having a choice of energy supplier.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Mar 2023 ==

You say that, but the amount of money they’ve spaffed up the wall- to borrow a phrase from the man in charge at the time- is quite staggering.

The £50bn on test-and-trace is the poster boy, but the rampant price-gouging and corruption in PPE contracts and the rampant fraud in the Covid business loan scheme IS all on the government. Recent estimates are that, of the £75bn in Covid loans under the various schemes, as much as £15bn will never be repaid. Between test-and-trace and the PPE and the fraud we could have paid for HS2.

Desperate times, hindsight, etc.

Is Labour any more competent?

PPI, selling our gold, unrestricted movement (leading to Brexit), invading Iraq, Horizon and tbh any IT contract you care to mention

All tremendously costly policies, implemented with the luxury of time to think ahead.

Tony Blair was notorious for making decisions by consulting only a small group of special advisers. Jeremy Corbyn was no different.

The mention of HS2 is of course apt, given the the absolute farce that was the WCML upgrade almost completely parallels New Labour's term.

 

[Intercity110]

But it makes perfect sense to a customer who appreciates that since 1986, the law has been perfectly clear. Was it wrong to allow customers a choice, with access to finite council owned resources duly regulated and charged for, and with a safety net of council funding for socially necessary services? Doesn't look so wrong when you consider this is how the aviation sector works. Being back BOAC/BEA? Not exactly a vote winner with air travellers.

those ‘council resources’ largely don’t exist anymore. They’re either a failed FirstBus venture or a handful of routes in the town/city center (in my experience they were out-competed by stagecoach) and yes, places like blackpool exist but they’re the exeption that prove the rule.

 

[RT4038]

those ‘council resources’ largely don’t exist anymore. They’re either a failed FirstBus venture or a handful of routes in the town/city center (in my experience they were out-competed by stagecoach) and yes, places like blackpool exist but they’re the exeption that prove the rule.

But why would you think that a nationalised bus operator would be any less susceptible to the same budgetary constraints as local authorities? Seems hardly likely that they would be any more able to suspend the laws of economics, which is somehow what people want?

 

[simonw]

Three pages in, but we don't seem to have an agreed statement of what is wrong with the UK.

One cannot have a discussion on where it went wrong, if we haven't agreed on what is wrong, IMHO.

 

[RT4038]

Three pages in, but we don't seem to have an agreed statement of what is wrong with the UK.

One cannot have a discussion on where it went wrong, if we haven't agreed on what is wrong, IMHO.

There is no likelihood of an 'agreed' statement of what is wrong with the UK, because that is an individual highly subjective opinion! (if indeed one feels it has gone 'wrong') Therefore where it went 'wrong' will be likewise.

 

[AlterEgo]

Three pages in, but we don't seem to have an agreed statement of what is wrong with the UK.

One cannot have a discussion on where it went wrong, if we haven't agreed on what is wrong, IMHO.

A good place to start is wage stagnation, low productivity and declining fertility.

 

[nw1]

A good place to start is wage stagnation, low productivity and declining fertility.

The first of those, certainly.

 

[simonw]

There is no likelihood of an 'agreed' statement of what is wrong with the UK, because that is an individual highly subjective opinion! (if indeed one feels it has gone 'wrong') Therefore where it went 'wrong' will be likewise.

Well yes, that is the point I'm making.

 

[Meerkat]

I guess it would help if someone who thinks that it has gone wrong gives a comparator country. Then we can look at what has been done differently (hopefully beyond just Tories Grrrrr)

 

[GS250]

What has gone wrong with Britain? Well it's not exactly all harmonious the other side of the channel is it?!

 

[nw1]

What has gone wrong with Britain? Well it's not exactly all harmonious the other side of the channel is it?!

We're not talking about Britain now versus Country X now, though. We're talking about Britain now, versus Britain, say, 20 or 30 years ago. Or, for some, longer.