As Boris Johnson contemplated his latest u-turn, this time introducing the nationwide lockdown he had insisted was not right, the hard left commentator Aaron Bastani tweeted what he surely thought was a clever remark: that Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the UK’s most powerful man, could be argued to be in charge of the worst run major organisation in the country. A big statement but one to which many could probably agree after his chaotic leadership during the pandemic. Some would say we shouldn’t be surprised. Boris is a good campaigner, they say, but not a good administrator. In other words, he is no good at running a country. His adversaries on the left are likely to enthusiastically subscribe to that view, much like Bastani.
But for Bastani and his leftwing buddies, Johnson’s pandemic management is not the only problem. The NHS, a sacred cow in British politics, is not safe in the hands of the Tories, according to many on the left – by which they primarily allude to the fact that not enough money is allocated to the health service. Yet the Tories have been in charge of the NHS for around 2/3rds of the time since its introduction. A health service which is not safe 2/3rds of the time may strike some as a problem but not Bastani, who is a firm opponent of privatisation which would distance parts of the health service from the unsafe hands of the Tories.
Of course the Prime Minister is not the only Tory politician who Bastani does not think highly of. He thinks Grant Shapps, the Transport Secretary, is a liar.
Liar or not, Bastani presumably approved when Mr. Shapps effectively nationalised Britain’s passenger train franchises over the summer, delivering a policy that has been on the wish list for leftwingers since privatisation in the 90’s. The railways, they argue, are an essential utility which should be owned by the state. Now, however, this essential utility is being managed by a liar. Presumable not an optimal state of affairs.
This should be a cause for reflection for democratic socialists like Bastani. Democracy necessarily implies the risk of your opponents winning and the more power you concentrate in government, the more power your opponents will have when they from time to time gain office. And with government being a monopoly, voters on the losing side have no alternative but to accept whatever is being offered. The railways may end up being managed by untrustworthy people. Voters who wish to obtain better health insurance may instead see health spending cut. Of course, even if your own side wins, the risk is that the people in power did not get there because they are any good at the job. Many Conservative voters may wish for a more competent manager than Boris Johnson, even if they agree with his politics. The problem is obvious. Once in office, a government discharges its duties free from competition. Unlike in the private sector, ineptitude and mismanagement have no consequences, except when occasionally facing the electorate. The largest, most powerful organisations in the country can indeed be the worst run, as Bastani tweeted. Such incompetence at the top of large organisations would be unthinkable in the private sector where only well managed businesses grow big and only highly qualified people are hired to run such organisations.
The left should be careful what is wishes for. The more power is concentrated away from the disciplining forces of the free market, the more power will inevitably end up in what many voters will regard as the wrong hands. Away from government monopoly, it is consumer choice which in the end decides which provider gets to deliver a good or service. If management changes and you don’t like the product anymore, you can find a new provider.
Government will always have the power to shape our lives. And no matter who wins elections, a large part of the population will hand over critical life decisions to people who they do not agree with and who are often unqualified for the job. The best way to address this is to reduce the scope and remit of the state as much as possible and leave decisions in the hands of the individual. The British left should agree. For decades, they have had two traditions which seemingly conflict: one is calling for more centralisation of power in government, the other is to lose elections to people they profoundly mistrust.