<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Chris Buford stated that :-" Within
countries like the UK, there are from time to time waves of popular discontent
against an aspect of the financial system. For example it became apparent that
hundreds of thousands of people were defrauded of a significant portion of their
pension rights by biassed unprofessional advice. Many others were incorrectly
advised that an endowment mortgage was in their interests. From afar Louis
Proyect may say that Gordon Brown's plans to impose a financial and securities
regulatory body on the City of London, is a mere reform of capital of no
interest to the working class or working people. Ditto for the plans for
regulation within the European Union. But Brown has only been able to move
forward on this because of the wave of public opinion from working people.
"<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>I can't say that I've noticed.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>The main pressure exerted by "public
opinion" was to elect Gordon Brown in the first place. He then
proceeded to hand the Government's power to set interest rates to the Bank of
England ! This was hailed as some sort of exciting, radical measure
by the mass circulation press. In fact, by any reading of economic theory,
it represented a complete surrender to ultra-monetarism. Even the Tories
didn't go that far ! Rather interestingly one of the members
of the Bank of England's rate-setting body is De-Anne Julius, a former CIA
employee. She claims that she was always a humble number-cruncher
for the firm, but since you swear an oath of lifetime loyalty, you wonder where
<EM>her</EM> interests actually lie.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Once they were given these powers, the Bank kept British
interest rates and hence the pound, relatively high. Manufacturing
and agriculture lost out in export markets and began to demand a rate
reduction. Some white-collar unions, like the Bank Employees, actually
protested for this outside the Bank of England. A curious vision of
pressure-group politics indeed. Was this a correct trade union
position ? I think not. Ultimately, the manipulation of
interest rates and competitive devaluations are measures which gain one country
a temporary advantage until other countries retaliate.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>The kind of regulation being proposed by Brown is entirely
consistent with the privatised market-driven economy that New Labour has
embraced. A collection of private interests governed by a regulatory
system controlled by rich lawyers and auditors. I see nothing faintly
progressive about it whatsoever. </FONT><FONT size=2>The idea that
nationalisation is impossible nowadays isn't true at all. Indeed, the
nationalisation of banks in the far East may be the only way for the local
capitalists to keep control of their national banking
systems. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>New Labour won't even go this far. They are to the right
of Edward Heath's Conservative government in 1970. Heath actually
nationalised Rolls Royce to prevent it going to the wall. Blair in
contrast has stated, in the face of redundancies in his own constituency, that
market forces can't be challenged. Capital gains taxes and upper band
income taxes under Blair's government are much the same as under
Thatcher's. Blair and Brown aren't even reformists !</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>