National Economic Council - (how) will it work?

NB Sun Oct 05, 2008 at 05:40:03 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

Gordon has set up a National Economic Council with 19 members and 2 secretaries. It will apparently "meet frequently to coordinate economic policies across Government [since] Britain is facing a period of immense economic challenges".

What do people think about this?  Is it a PR stunt or is it expected to do useful work? If so, how?





tags: , , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
National Economic Council - (how) will it work? | 15 comments (15 topical)

Re: National Economic Council - will it work? (#1)

by NB on Sun Oct 05, 2008 at 05:47:03 PM GMT

My worries about this are:

  1. (the main problem) A 19-person committee is far too big to do effective management, especially in any kind of crisis.
  2. Having bosses and subordinates on a committee is a receipie for confusion.
  3. Why on earth is Transport not represented when Schools and Universities are?
It seems to me that either Gordon really doesn't know that such committees wont work, or he is doing it as a PR stunt (remember the "Business Council for Britain") and this committee wont meet much.


Re: National Economic Council - will it work? (#2)

by e10rifles on Mon Oct 06, 2008 at 09:54:32 AM GMT

Just as importantly, given that it is supposed to represent the nation, why is it stuffed full of bosses without any visible representation from the trade unions?

We used to have these sorts of things back in the days of Keynesianism: but then you had representation from employers, unions and government.

This is government of the city, by the city, for the city:

http://www.johnmcdonnell.org.uk/2008/10/government-of-city-by-city-for-city.html


[ Parent ]

blazing guido? (#3)

by rightruffled on Mon Oct 06, 2008 at 02:47:38 PM GMT

has guido upset someone?

http://sparkedoff.blogspot.com/


Re: blazing guido? (#4)

by adwilliams134 on Mon Oct 06, 2008 at 04:56:29 PM GMT

Didn't this already exist by another name and it's merely rebranding?


[ Parent ]

rebranding (#5)

by rightruffled on Mon Oct 06, 2008 at 08:42:10 PM GMT

that sounds quite painful!

more likely guido's eaten a few too many beans and is trying to do something about unwanted inflation

<a href="http://sparkedoff.blogspot.com>what a stinker!</a>


[ Parent ]

will cool hand gord shoot it now... (#6)

by rightruffled on Mon Oct 06, 2008 at 08:58:31 PM GMT

...and put it out of it's misery? no point taking any chances

whoops sorry, went off in my hand, hairline trigger, bit like the one's used by SIR ian blair's boys...or that rather delicate little flower otherwise known as errr...our sickly economy

http://sparkedoff.blogspot.com/2008/10/guido-fawkes-friday-caption-competition.html


[ Parent ]

Alex, why is the subject always too long to post? (#7)

by LabourMatters on Mon Oct 06, 2008 at 09:01:45 PM GMT

The notion that relatively large groups/committees can't function is a bit of a myth. It all depends on how they're expected to work, frankly. Have individuals and/or sub-committees investigate specifics and report back and you've got the basis of much of our democracy. Have 20-odd people trying to thrash out the way forward there and then and you'll have a road crash.

I don't think this is a PR exercise, nor will it be a road crash (Gordon's too smart for that), but I do wonder how effective it will be. Time, as they say, will tell.


A group that would work in a crisis (#10)

by NB on Tue Oct 07, 2008 at 01:02:55 PM GMT

So: we're in a major financial crisis and something urgent happens (eg a major bank's shares collapse by 25% in a day). We agree that this committee is far too big to make effective decisions. So is it irrelevant or does it meet, commission a report from a subgroup, the subgroup reports, and then what?

Meanwhile the bank's shares continue to collapse...

This committee will either not meet (and be useless) or meet and waste people's time and be harmful in the crisis.

If Gordon were serious about addressing this problem in a competent way he'd have an emergency management group of 4-5 serious people (Darling, Milliband, Straw, Mandelson) and have all the other cabinet ministers reporting to one or other of them. 


[ Parent ]

Re: A group that would work in a crisis (#12)

by rwendland on Tue Oct 07, 2008 at 01:57:11 PM GMT

I doubt this Council is intended to address the immediate banking crisis, but coordinate for the inevitable recession and extra unemployment that will follow over the next year or more. Looked at in that way, it may very well be useful.


[ Parent ]

Re: A group that would work in a crisis (#13)

by NB on Tue Oct 07, 2008 at 07:34:30 PM GMT

Or indeed Darling, King and Turner. 4 key players, with official support and advice from colleagues no doubt, can get things done and take decisions...


[ Parent ]

Re: National Economic Council (#8)

by LittleJackiePaper on Tue Oct 07, 2008 at 10:39:19 AM GMT

Why is such a council even necessary? I thought Gordon Brown had ended "Tory boom and bust"?


Re: National Economic Council (#9)

by Floating voter on Tue Oct 07, 2008 at 12:40:34 PM GMT

I said and listened to Mrs Balls on Today (yesterday) as she was needled by the interviewer about Boom and Bust. "If this isn't bust", he said, "then what is?".

She sidestepped that one.... 


[ Parent ]

Re: National Economic Council will it work? (#11)

by AngryVoter on Tue Oct 07, 2008 at 01:05:36 PM GMT

Following the logic here, and reminding any Journos who read this that I am a Tory. Ok?

There are 22 members in the Cabinet overall who control most workings of government, with an additional 6 "other" ministers dealing with various other things such as housing and the olympics.

The NEC has 19 members.

 To me it seems like only... 8 people are being "snubbed" for this cabinet which to me smacks of massive PR Stunt as an attempt to say "Yes we're doing things!" but still being rather unwieldy in the process.

In reality this "War Cabinet" should be about immediate and quick decisions and should consist solely of the Great Offices of State and Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Ministry, the offices that used to control most of the country.

To me it's a bit telling of either:

Labour's Over-bureaucratization of the state that such a "Slimmed down Cabinet" means only 8 people sit on the sidelines.

Or Brown, or whoever advises him is now at the point where he can't make a proper decision in an obsession with being as un-Blair like as possible and thus basically includes the entire cabinet.


Re: -(how) will it work? (#14)

by NB on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 06:14:07 AM GMT

Alice Miles makes very pertinent comments in The Times here.


Re: National Economic Council (#15)

by NB on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 06:18:00 AM GMT

And the FT describes the whole thing as "Another botched reshuffle" and quotes an (un-named) "insider" as saying "The council means a huge weakening of the Treasury. It's saying that ministers don't trust the Treasury - either that or it's pure window dressing, designed to distract people from other problems. The one thing we can be sure of is that it won't work"

Clearly though it will have delayed the bank rescue package which should have been in place over the weekend - a blunder which has cost tens of billions.


National Economic Council - (how) will it work? | 15 comments (15 topical)