Vince Cable loses the plot?

[Chil1234]

I'll confess I haven't read the speech he is to deliver today but, judging by the early reports, he's been mugging up on his Das Kapital for inspiration... Interesting if our Coalition Business Secretary is developing anti-capitalist sentiments!

just seen him on t.v. - he's a cool dude. Says it's been taken out of context - though a lot of what I have heard I do agree with!Not lost plot at all. Just a bit nervous to reveal how much of the plot he has discovered more like.

I don't think he's lost the plot, far from it. Ensuring that markets aren't rigged is a central part of Liberal Democrat philosophy. Being against rigged markets, crony capitalism and monopolies isn't the same as being anti-market or anti-capitalism.

""Let's be very clear, my speech today - it's pro-business, it's pro-market," he told BBC Breakfast. "I want to protect consumers. I want to look after shareholders. I want a level playing field for small businesses - that's the message." (from the Telegraph story).

sorry, should have said Liberal philosophy - goes way way back. There's a big fear in the Lib Dems that the Tories are cronyistic, and Cable's just making it clear that he's alive to the issue.

as can be seen from e.g. Winston Churchill's Socialism vs Liberalism speech before he went over:

"Socialism would kill enterprise; Liberalism would rescue enterprise from the trammels of privilege and preference"

"Socialism attacks capital, Liberalism attacks monopoly."

Of course markets should be well regulated - but this is classic Vince - old Labour hard socialism.

He needs to be put out to pasture. He is dangerous - one of the biggest obstructions to creating growth and jobs in this country. His position as business secretary is going to become completely untenable if he continues making remarks that belong in the Morning Star.

The Tories can work with the likes of Nick Clegg, David Laws, Jeremy Browne. Working with Mike Hancock, Vince Cable and other SDP throwbacks is just not possible.

lfn - you work with all the Lib Dems or none at all. I also think you're drawing distinctions between Clegg and Cable that just aren't there.

Which of his statements belongs in the Morning Star? There's murky corporate behaviour and Vince wants to shine a "harsh light" on it and root out malpractice. What's socialist about that?

as Janet Daley says:

"In fact, as everybody and his wife has pointed out, Mr Cable?s wildly over-briefed speech is saying little about the dangers of monopolistic capitalism that is not already accepted by the most successful captalist countries."

It's not about what he is saying - everyone other than anarchists agrees with regulating markets.

It is the way in which he is saying it which reveals his motivations.

He is framing it as an attack on business, an attack on capitalism - even though he has been forced to row back this morning. Why else would the Federation of Small Business, the CBI, and all the other major business organisations condemn his speech?

His anti-business stance is shocking. It will cost the UK tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of jobs - and totally unnecessarily.

David Cameron has said essentially the same thing - but more gently and reasonably, talking about corporate responsibility. Instead, Vince Cable seems to be determined to sound more like Arthur Scargill.

The thing about Clegg and Cable is that they're both reformers. As is Laws. That's why I like them.

He's not anti-business, not remotely, just anti-malpractice. And you can't be gentle about that kind of thing. You can't just waffle about corporate responsibility.

Where's the criticism from the Federation of Small Businesses? I can't find any.

Argh - I am sure I saw it but can't find it.

It might have been the FSA not the FSB, sorry.

The head of the FSA appears if anything to back him, here.

The FSB criticised aspects of Huhne's Green Deal here, but haven't seen any reaction to Cable.

In his Mansion House speech yesterday:

www.moneymarketing.co.uk/politics/cable-to-attack-capitalism/1018867.article

FSA chairman Lord Turner used his Mansion House speech yesterday to ask that the debate ?move beyond the demonisation of over paid traders.?

He said: ?In finance and economics, ill-designed policy is a more powerful force for harm than individual greed or error.?

He said what was needed was to ?ensure that we address the fundamentals of what went wrong?.

Vince Cable is an arse, with an inflated sense of his own importance.

lfn, I saw that (Turner's speech) but I didn't see it as critical of Cable.

Anyway, Cable's speech is up now: here.

"Capitalism takes no prisoners and kills competition where it can, as Adam Smith explained over 200 years ago." :)

It was a rubbish speech - rabble rousing for the sake of it. He doesn't seem to realise that he is in government now. He still seems to thrive on the cheap populism he dined out on in opposition.

Even the Labour representative on the Daily Politics said it was too anti-business. He is the business secretary, for heaven's sake!

I hope he quits in a huff soon. I am glad he is being shown up for the fool he is.

well yes, Labour were pretty cronyistic too, so I take their criticism with a pinch of salt.

If you were a successful foreign CEO why would you expand and create jobs in Britain after such a speech? Given Vince Cable's attitude, it is much better to set up in Poland or the Czech Republic or Shanghai or Mumbai or Singapore or wherever.

It says to the world business community: we don't want your companies and your money here. We want to nanny you and punish you for being successful.

What is rabble-rousing about this?

"I want to protect consumers and keep prices down and provide a level playing field for small business, so we must be vigilant right across the economy ? whether in the old industries of economies textbooks or the newer privatised utilities and cosy magic circles in auditing, law or investment banking. Competition is central to my pro market, pro business, agenda."

"The structure of banking must be reformed to prevent future disasters and promote competition."

It.does.not say we want to nanny you!

you know what's really telling, though - the fact that the Labour shadow business secretary says that Cable has to decide whether he's in opposition or government. Because one of Labour's problems in government was that they let businesses - and banks in particular - get away with things they shouldn't have done. They weren't interested in having proper competition and preventing monopolies. And Pat McFadden still seems to think that that's the way things should work.

it isn't about being 'successful' is it? Payment out of any proportion to any sense of what's reasonable is just creaming funds off customers, ultimately 'the public'.

it is easy to find the "you need to pay for talent" arguement pretty tiresome. Esp. when unions are being accused of 'holding teh country to ransome.'. WTF d owe thing "top bankers" are doing?

I'll go again..."WTF do we think "top bankers" are doing?

there.

I think you need to pay for talent if the market is genuinely functioning properly - if there is real competition in it. Vince Cable's argument is that there isn't enough competition in the banking sector (as the FSB also said yesterday.

Nick Clegg has apparently refused to repeat what Vince Cable said on Sky News.

Also Gary Gibbons of Channel 4 News thinks that the Clegg/Cable relationship is reminiscent of the Blair/Brown feuds

blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/vinces-message-to-nick/13768