Dogmatic Cloth-Cutting

Saturday 19 June 2010

The Prime Minister recently launched his PR operation for a cuts agenda that will change “Britain’s whole way of life.” Despite his reluctance to be so frank during the general election campaign, no one living on planet earth ignored the elephant in the room that was the UK’s whopping £156 billion deficit.

And despite the Prime Minister’s emphasis on ‘consultation’, of involving ordinary citizens in the process, of us all being ‘in this together’, it is a dead cert that when the cookie crumbles, the dogmatic Westminster mindset will prevail. I use the term ‘Westminster’ rather than ‘Tory’ intentionally, because the occupation of the centre-right by the three Westminster parties has resulted in a consensus on policy and that is apparent in their collective attitude to cuts.

The consensus in Westminster for a like-for-like replacement of Trident is a well-used example, but further examples of costly nationalistic self-indulgences exist.

Let’s consider the UK’s huge overseas diplomatic representation.

I recently obtained a breakdown of the costs of the UK’s diplomatic presence in Australia. All of us I’m sure can agree that UK relations with Australia are healthy; Australia is an ally, a member of the Commonwealth, a trading partner and for the time being at least, we share the same head of state. So the UK presence there is not simply to build string relations.

I recognise that there are a large number of UK citizens in Australia which merits a sufficient diplomatic presence. Consideration must be given however to whether things can be done more efficiently.

There are five UK ‘posts’ in Australia in Brisbane, Perth, Canberra, Melbourne and Sydney. The cost of this level of representation in 2008/09 was over £8 million – maintenance costs alone were over £1 million (and a modest £100,000 spent on ‘direct entertainment’. There was no breakdown for indirect entertainment…)

I’m not questioning the legitimacy or otherwise of the individual costs involved in this specific instance but I’m in no doubt that if we take a radical approach to the UK’s overseas presence then we can save money, and crucially we can improve international relations.

What I suggest as a starting point is greater EU collaboration on overseas representation. Not necessarily in the field of policy – the Tories will never entertain such an outrageous proposition (that Westminster mindset again) – but why can’t we become diplomatic room-mates with our EU partners? Let’s share the buildings, the utility bills and the canteens.


Why are we (as individuals and nations) ‘all in this together’ when the proverbial hits the fan, but not as a general rule?

The French have diplomatic representation in the same cities in Australia as the UK, the Germans too have several offices as do the Spanish and the list goes on. And keep in mind that I’m using Australia as a case in point; imagine the duplications that occur all over the world.

Out of the ashes of the current economic crisis, a positive approach to international cooperation can arise. It makes not only financial sense, it is also sound foreign policy.

The Tories' decision to overlook such an option is a reflection of their continued refusal to ditch their out-dated and dangerous political dogmas. Rather than starting with cutting the cloth of the British State to reflect its current place in Europe and the world, the Tories would rather wield the axe in the direction of public sector workers, their families and all the communities and businesses that rely upon them.

Read more...
Banner picture of Mynyddislwyn Mountain reproduced with kind permission of www.crosskeys.me.uk

  © Blogger template The Professional Template II by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP