Britain's government has long boasted about its election wins, promising to roll up their sleeves and make changes. Yet, time and again, ministers are shocked to find that nothing happens. The reason for this lies not in the politicians themselves, but in the size and inefficiency of the British state.
At both local and central levels, the capacity for government intervention has been eroded over the years. Council services have been outsourced, leaving professional expertise in short supply. What's left to do is alleviate the consequences of failure, which are becoming increasingly pressing.
The problem runs deeper than this. A decades-long aversion to state intervention has taken root, driven by the misguided idea that governments should get out of the way of the private sector. Instead of picking winners and losers, Britain has adopted a cult-like devotion to market forces. This mindset is not unique to Britain; other countries have also been wary of government interference.
However, this approach may be misguided. East Asian nations like South Korea and China have shown that conscious decision-making can lead to success. These countries identified key sectors for growth, invested heavily in them, and forced through change when necessary. The UK has had similar opportunities, but has failed to seize them.
China's dominance in the solar panel market is a notable example of this. By identifying clean energy as a global growth opportunity and investing heavily in it, Beijing was able to create a sector that would have been impossible without government support. Meanwhile, Britain's talk about a new industrial strategy built around a net-zero future has so far yielded little concrete action.
Even the US, supposed bastion of free market ideology, has found ways to deliver an industrial strategy through targeted investment and interventionism. The federal government pumps millions into universities and defence companies, creating links between the state and industry that drive growth.
Britain's problem is not a lack of ideas or resources; it's a lack of willpower and a failure to bring together disparate parts of government to achieve common goals. The 1945 Labour government was able to make significant changes because it inherited a fully functioning planned economy, which allowed it to direct labour effectively towards key industries.
In the 1960s, Britain flirted with indicative planning – setting broad targets and working out how to achieve them through cooperation with private companies and trade unions. This approach showed promise, but ultimately failed. The lesson is that the state needs to be more effective at driving growth and change, rather than just reacting to market forces.
To do this, the British state needs a fundamental overhaul. The power of the Treasury must be broken by creating alternative economic power bases within Whitehall. A standalone ministry with real clout is needed, or a revamped National Economic Development Council that can identify and nurture potential growth sectors.
Investment is crucial, but it will only work if the state is willing to experiment and accept failure as part of the process. Other countries have shown the benefits of a pragmatic approach, and Britain needs to follow suit.
Failure to reform the state will only entrench public cynicism about politics. Voters will tune out when faced with empty promises, and their experience of everyday life – from potholed roads to inadequate healthcare – will become increasingly negative.
Britain's government must wake up to its own limitations and stop relying on hot air. It needs a bold new approach that harnesses the power of the state to drive growth and change, rather than just reacting to market forces. Anything less risks leaving Britain in the dust as other countries continue to thrive.
At both local and central levels, the capacity for government intervention has been eroded over the years. Council services have been outsourced, leaving professional expertise in short supply. What's left to do is alleviate the consequences of failure, which are becoming increasingly pressing.
The problem runs deeper than this. A decades-long aversion to state intervention has taken root, driven by the misguided idea that governments should get out of the way of the private sector. Instead of picking winners and losers, Britain has adopted a cult-like devotion to market forces. This mindset is not unique to Britain; other countries have also been wary of government interference.
However, this approach may be misguided. East Asian nations like South Korea and China have shown that conscious decision-making can lead to success. These countries identified key sectors for growth, invested heavily in them, and forced through change when necessary. The UK has had similar opportunities, but has failed to seize them.
China's dominance in the solar panel market is a notable example of this. By identifying clean energy as a global growth opportunity and investing heavily in it, Beijing was able to create a sector that would have been impossible without government support. Meanwhile, Britain's talk about a new industrial strategy built around a net-zero future has so far yielded little concrete action.
Even the US, supposed bastion of free market ideology, has found ways to deliver an industrial strategy through targeted investment and interventionism. The federal government pumps millions into universities and defence companies, creating links between the state and industry that drive growth.
Britain's problem is not a lack of ideas or resources; it's a lack of willpower and a failure to bring together disparate parts of government to achieve common goals. The 1945 Labour government was able to make significant changes because it inherited a fully functioning planned economy, which allowed it to direct labour effectively towards key industries.
In the 1960s, Britain flirted with indicative planning – setting broad targets and working out how to achieve them through cooperation with private companies and trade unions. This approach showed promise, but ultimately failed. The lesson is that the state needs to be more effective at driving growth and change, rather than just reacting to market forces.
To do this, the British state needs a fundamental overhaul. The power of the Treasury must be broken by creating alternative economic power bases within Whitehall. A standalone ministry with real clout is needed, or a revamped National Economic Development Council that can identify and nurture potential growth sectors.
Investment is crucial, but it will only work if the state is willing to experiment and accept failure as part of the process. Other countries have shown the benefits of a pragmatic approach, and Britain needs to follow suit.
Failure to reform the state will only entrench public cynicism about politics. Voters will tune out when faced with empty promises, and their experience of everyday life – from potholed roads to inadequate healthcare – will become increasingly negative.
Britain's government must wake up to its own limitations and stop relying on hot air. It needs a bold new approach that harnesses the power of the state to drive growth and change, rather than just reacting to market forces. Anything less risks leaving Britain in the dust as other countries continue to thrive.
. They keep promising to make changes but nothing ever comes out of it. The real problem lies not with the politicians, but with the size and inefficiency of the state 
. It's like they think the private sector can solve everything on its own 
.
. They actively invested in certain sectors and forced change when needed 
. And did you know that even the US is doing industrial strategy through targeted investment? 
. The state needs to be more proactive, not just reactive 
. They need to create an alternative economic power base within Whitehall 
and stop relying on the Treasury alone.
. The public is already skeptical, and if nothing changes, people will tune out 
. Anything less will leave them behind 
.
I'm getting so frustrated with our government's lack of action. They keep promising to fix things but nothing ever changes 
. It's like they're waiting for something to magically happen instead of actually doing stuff 
. They're showing us that with a bit of planning and investment, we can achieve great things 
. Come on, UK, let's get our act together! 
bc of how inefficient it is 
and they keep thinkin market forces r the ansr 
meanwhile other countries r over here like china & south korea investing big time in clean energy & getting results 
britain needs 2 wake up & stop bein so cynical 
& have a bold new approach 2 drive growth & change 
.
. What's stopping us? It's not about lack of ideas or resources, it's about willpower and cooperation between different parts of gov 
. Anything less is just empty promises and public cynicism 
. Britain needs a bold new approach, not just hot air 
.
the thing is, theyre not even tryin 
. To break this cycle, the government needs to empower a new economic power base within Whitehall, one that can drive growth and innovation without being beholden to special interests 
.
. Anything less just feels like empty promises 
.
and yeah I get that the size and inefficiency of the state is a problem, but I think part of the issue is that they're too afraid to take control and make some real decisions 
.
it's like they think magic will make everything better, but deep down they know they're out of touch with reality 
. Look at China and South Korea, they're killing it with conscious decision-making 
.
. The current approach is just a bunch of hot air 
. Britain needs a bold new approach to stay ahead of the game 
.
. Meanwhile, countries like South Korea and China are over there making real progress, and we're just sitting around twiddling our thumbs 
. We need some real leadership, not just empty promises 
It's like they think the private sector is a magical genie that will grant all our wishes 
. We need some real pragmatism here, not just a bunch of ideology 
.
.
thinkin that just cuz theres a lot of inefficiency in the state, doesnt mean u cannt make changes. its all about bein strategic and takin calculated risks 
theyve got this mindset that u need to make conscious decisions and invest in things thats gonna drive growth and change. britain needs to do the same 
it's so sad to see britain struggling with its own limitations 
their government is all talk and no action 
it's like they're stuck in a rut and can't find a way out 
it's not too late for them to learn from other countries like china and south korea who have shown that conscious decision-making can lead to success 