Author: Damian Merciar

Damian Merciar is Managing Director of Merciar Business Consulting, http://www.merciar.com, a niche business economics consultancy founded in 1998. He has over twenty years experience in the areas of commercial Business Strategy. He is experienced in the transition environments of nationalized to private sector state utilities and the senior practice of commercial management, advisorial consultancy, and implementation. He has carried out policy advisory work for government ministries and been an adviser to institutional bodies proposing changes to government. He holds an MSc Economics from the University of Surrey’s leading Economics department and an MBA from the University of Kent. Also attending the leading University in the Middle East, studying International Relations and Language, for which he won a competitive international scholarship, and has a BA (Hons) in Economic History and Political Economy from the University of Portsmouth. He is currently based in London.

Halls of Power – Westminster…

Westminster Village is precisely that – a village; it has all the gossip and intrigue of a medieval palace, and of course, the courtiers to go with it.

However, this is a little more serious than regular speculation on who’s up and who’s down; the standing of the country is at stake. In the USA they cannot believe that we could be on the brink of removing the most Statesman like of Prime Ministers, since Lady Thatcher. For all his brilliance, Gordon Brown projects an image not a million miles away from those Premiers of the former USSR – a little harsh perhaps, but as with every stereotype, there are elements of truth to it.

Tony Blair is a fantastic politician. This does not mean he has been a fantastic Prime Minister – he hasn’t. Unless of course, your criteria are huge increases in the scope, role, power and cost of Government – in which case, he has yet to be surpassed. Here lies the problem. Gordon Brown actually could increase further the tax take, and spend, as a proportion of the National Economy. After 12 years as part of the public head of Government, we have effectively NO idea about where GB stands on International Diplomacy – on various of the UN Treaties of the last decade (notably Israel). We do not know his view towards the Ministry of Defence (MOD) – is it under funded, or are we at the correct pitch for a World Power, slowly relinquishing it’s status to the emerging Titans of India and China (and an increasingly Internationalised and revitalised Japan, and a slowly outward facing Germany – one could go on)

Our Drama unfolds, and we the British public watch on from the wings, reluctant to let go of a world figure, and yet quietly excited at the hoo ha – how long will this last, once Gordon is safely in place?

Collateral Damage is a bizarrely levelling force

Collateral Damage is a bizarrely levelling force. It presents an unjust and unedifying mordant dread for those caught unawares in its blistering range. And for those deliberate enough to exploit and capitalise on the vulnerable within their geographic range, they are merely, it seems, a hand to be played.

This past week has brought all the main rudiments of loss of life and limb to innocent participants in others’ conflict. British holiday makers suffer miserably as a splinter group of Kurdish separatists use their presence to publicise a cause that is both known, and widely supported in the democratic European Union, to which Turkey seeks entry. Ironically, such actions can only further jeopardise Turkey’s chances of successful entry into the EU. No matter, reason the separatists – their concerns are more immediate than the lengthy ongoing accession negotiations.

Similarly, in our last Blog item, we wrote about Hezbollah and their manipulation of the local population in Southern Lebanon. Collateral Damage knows no borders, no ideologies nor moralities. It is what it is, a blunt and terrifying presence – not showing favour as too which side suffers more acutely. Which side, that is, of the perpetrators: the victims are non-aligned – that is their designation.

Hezbollah and Israel – a battle fought out?

As we approach the five week point in the fighting between Israel, a sovereign state and Hezbollah – effectively an occupying force in south Lebanon – there appear signs of hope, with the acceptance of the UN drafted peace accord by both parties.

Hezbollah agreed to the terms of the deal, significantly before Israel. Israel, for their part – at time of writing (Sunday 13/08/2006) are going all out to cram as much aerial bombardment into the time remaining, before the Official Ceasefire (00:00 New York time 14/08/2006). We consider Israel’s actions to be disproportionate and excessive: there are numerous cases of targeting fleeing vehicles, simply because they are fleeing. On most occasions these have been carrying innocent civilians.

Chest beating is an effective form of foreign diplomacy – for precisely as long as the other side decide to comply with the inferior status that this display demands of them. In this case the provocation was all Hezbollah’s – their tactics were mercenary and brutal, using the local population of southern Lebanon as proxy fighters, when of course they were simply civilians being used as ground cover by fighters they didn’t necessarily support.

It is a cliché of both conflict and journalism, to say that truth is the first casualty of war. In this case it was ethical concern for one’s fellow man and integrity of action. Hezbollah knew precisely what they were doing in mounting the ambush that resulted in eight dead and two captured Israeli soldiers. This does not clear Israel from the accusation of crimes against humanity; “they started it” is also a little tired as a justification. A response has to be deliberate, efficient and just – and as the casualty figures show a ten to one ratio in favour of the Israeli’s, it is clear that their response has been anything but.

The BBC compiles the outcome so far as:

Lebanon deaths:
1,071 (Lebanese govt)
900 – 1,150 (news agencies)
Israeli deaths:
Soldiers: 114 (IDF)
Civilians: 43 (IDF)
Lebanon displaced:
700,000 – 900,000 (UNHCR; Lebanese govt)
Israeli displaced:
500,000 (Human Rights Watch)
Lebanon damage:
$2.5bn (Lebanese govt)
Israel damage:
$1.1bn (Israeli govt)

Ideas have consequences…

We have written before about the critical importance of ideas: what they are; where they emanate from; what and who influences them. However, just as it is important to both understand and appreciate ideas, it is equally important to value the efforts of the educators in disseminating those ideas.

Original thought is often complex, provocative, demanding. It can lie dormant in someone’s mind for a very long time, before something prods them out of their complacence – a sharp recognition of the value of one’s position of relative safety. Here, although the ideas in support of both a liberal economy and society haven’t entirely won out, we are on the winning side of the battle. At a time when reactionary and dirigiste forces raise old demons of sub-collectivist rhetoric and neo-socialism, these ideas again demand the weight and attention required to help suppress such forces.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is to stand for re-election in presidential elections due in October. President Hugo Chavez is flexing his economic muscles, at the expense of the United States, purely because of Venezuelan oil wealth. The Americas are again being subjected to the old, statist ideologies.

To counter this, Ideas for a free society (http://ideasforafreesociety.org) have published a CD containing some of the seminal texts from the field. As Linda Whetstone has written: “the CD contains a selection of contributions by some of the primary scholars and thinkers who have developed ideas which relate to the free society. Their contributions explain some of the general intellectual concepts and challenges, and the application of these ideas to public policy.”

“This CD is designed for those who are interested in what these beneficial economic and political arrangements are that lead to economic growth and have the capacity to eliminate poverty. It does not pretend to provide a definitive answer but rather to point people in the right direction. The title of the CD, “Ideas for a Free Society,” was inspired by the observation that the political and economic arrangements that seem to be most conducive to peace and prosperity are those that exist in free societies.

In such societies, there exist certain institutions that guarantee political, economic and social freedom, and those institutions are in turn underpinned by ideas. Such ideas have been explored by individuals from many different perspectives, starting with ancient Chinese, Roman and Greek philosophers and continuing to the present day. The reader will find that a rich intellectual debate about the nature of these ideas exists even among the authors of texts on this CD.”

Information is power, and readily transferable, easily accessible information, more so. We wish this project luck.

MBC attends Globalisation Institute Summer Party

On Monday, we sallied forth into the cut and thrust of the Westminster Summer Party circuit. Our destination – the Globalisation Institute, whch held its summer reception in a rather grand London house. As Alex Singleton, Director General of GI wrote on the widely read and influential Globalisation Institute Blog:

“Last night we hosted a summer drinks party along with the (then) Shadow DFID Team at the former home of Prime Minister Gladstone, now the Foreign Press Association in London. Guests included friends and supporters of the Institute, representatives from organisations like Oxfam, CAFOD and Christian Aid, the Prime Minister’s Office, journalists like the FT’s World Trade Editor Alan Beattie, Danny Krueger of the Daily Telegraph, and so on. Andrew Mitchell MP (Shadow International Development Secretary) gave an informative and excellent speech putting the case for a Pan-African Trading Area. The speech is available here.”

“The Globalisation Institute is a think tank founded in 2005 with the aim of examining how globalisation can be harnessed to work for the world’s poorest.

We are philosophically ‘liberal’, regarding the Manchester School anti-Corn Law campaigners like Richard Cobden and John Bright as our key intellectual influences. We were officially launched at a reception at Soho House in June 2005 with speeches by Bill Emmott, Editor of the Economist, and Alan Beattie, World Trade Editor of the Financial Times.

We believe that globalisation is a force for good. Only by integrating the poorest into the world economy can we put an end to the poverty that still blights much of world today.”

We at MBC have been fortunate to have played a role in the identification and development of policy on the economically liberal wing of UK politics, for almost two decades. It is this involvement that brings a clarity and intellectual depth to our business dealings, that many of our competitors in consultancy can sometimes lack.

Of course it shouldn’t need to be said, but neverthess: the Globalisation Institute is an independent charity free from political and business allegiance

copyright Globalisation Institute.

Debt of gratitude…

We at MBC have been very privileged to be both witness and participant in the broad policy debate on the centre and economically liberal right of British politics for almost twenty years now. From the inception of the Social Market Foundation in 1989 and the individual membership of Damian Merciar, through to his contribution in a non party aligned capacity, to both the Adam Smith Institute and the Institute of Economic Affairs – the leading intellectual forums of their kind in Europe, we have participated in the debate on the future of our regulated and former monopoly State industries.

We have witnessed and worked in these industries in their privatised and liberalised form, and witnessed the benefits derived from this liberalisation. We have argued for greater accountability of funding for Government sponsorship of “safe” sectors, such as aviation and sponsored medical research. We have helped promote and articulate the case for free trade in Damian’s personal involvement in the new and influential think tank, the Globalisation Institute.

We have argued the case for decreasing regulation as the benefits of competition develop a sector’s market – most obviously witnessed in the mobile telecoms arena, an area that didn’t exist twenty years ago, and one that flourished on the back of a liberalised fixed telecoms market. Who would have thought that not too long ago the Post Office was responsible for telephony in the UK?

Whilst it may be the new hegemony, its safety is not guaranteed. The rise of micro-management, the interventionist instincts of the present Government and particularly the indication that a future Government under Gordon Brown would make things worse – all these are cause for concern.

There is a simple clarity to non-interventionist commercial policy; our business benefits both immediately and in the longer term. The strictures of price transparency and free competition open our activities to the vagaries of customer loyalty, and the requirement to foster this loyalty. Whilst it is very stimulating to discuss Hayekian principles of Economic Liberalism, and the canon of Liberal Greats stretching from John Stuart Mill to Buchanan, it is more profound to contemplate them in practise, amidst the greater prosperity of personal choice.