Having any industrial strategy is probably a good thing, and having one that acknowledges the woeful inequalities that exist between different parts of the UK is better still. So what’s the problem with Greg Clark’s industrial strategy? In a nutshell it’s this rather well-worn story: the rhetoric is compelling, but the substance is lacking. Two of the five “foundations” of Clark’s strategy are people and places, and of the four “grand challenges” two are our ageing society and clean growth. Productivity is mentioned throughout and back in the summer he talked
Topics:
neweconomics considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Matias Vernengo writes Elon Musk (& Vivek Ramaswamy) on hardship, because he knows so much about it
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Klas Eklunds ‘Vår ekonomi’ — lärobok med stora brister
New Economics Foundation writes We need more than a tax on the super rich to deliver climate and economic justice
Robert Vienneau writes Profits Not Explained By Merit, Increased Risk, Increased Ability To Compete, Etc.
Having any industrial strategy is probably a good thing, and having one that acknowledges the woeful inequalities that exist between different parts of the UK is better still. So what’s the problem with Greg Clark’s industrial strategy?
In a nutshell it’s this rather well-worn story: the rhetoric is compelling, but the substance is lacking. Two of the five “foundations” of Clark’s strategy are people and places, and of the four “grand challenges” two are our ageing society and clean growth.
Productivity is mentioned throughout and back in the summer he talked about increasing the earning power of our country and our people. So far, so good.
But peel back the rhetoric and this begins to look more like government policy as usual, rather than a practical manifesto for addressing the deep economic malaise that grips the UK as it faces Brexit.
I write more about what’s missing from yesterday’s Industrial Strategy in The Times.