Making two parties work together would 'serve the national economic interest'
A letter in the Financial Times today from the Chairman of Corporate & Public Affairs, at Weber Shandwick, suggests that far from being a problem, a hung Parliament would be economically beneficial:
From Mr Jon Mcleod.
Sir, I keep reading that a hung parliament would be bad for business, create market uncertainty and stagnation (“Finance directors fear effects of a hung parliament on economy”, April 12). Mmm. Are we really sure?
What clear majority governments do is pump through endless legislation in the Westminster law-making sausage machine. Many of these laws or the prospect of them create blight, uncertainty, cost, and general economic mayhem. Yet no one says: “A clear majority would be bad for business.”
Making two parties (or more – government of national unity anyone?) work together would actually serve the national economic interest by forcing the executive to focus on good governance and economic management rather than legislative self-actualisation in parliament.
That is what happened in 1976 to 1978, when the Liberal-Labour pact actually called the economy to order, brought inflation to heel, and introduced some fiscal discipline.
The job of fattening the statute books can take a back seat for once.
Chairman Corporate & Public Affairs,
London WC1, UK
Select the newsletter(s) to which you want to subscribe or unsubscribe.