That industrial policy with strict conditionality

As we all know the latest irruption of the Tutto Nello Stato idea is that if we just got the really intelligent people to plan everything for us then life would be better. Not that this has ever worked anywhere but hope springs eternal.

The most obvious problem is who gets attracted to such power? Even if we do accept - we don’t, which will come as little surprise to regular readers - that having those Rolls Royce minds doin’ all the thinking for us would be beneficial. A major problem is going to be that power attracts those who desire power like sh - ah, no, this is a family think tank - honey does flies. And there really is no indication, let alone guarantee, that those who desire to exercise power are those with the Rolls Royce minds.

This is a concept which we can subject to empirical testing:

The number of new apprenticeships has fallen by up to two fifths since the introduction of the government’s “broken” levy system, new research shows.

There has been a 41 per cent decline in the number of apprenticeship starts for those under the age of 19 since the scheme came into force, according to analysis by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD). For those aged between 19 and 24, participation has fallen by 36 per cent.

The levy, introduced in 2017, requires employers with an annual wage bill of more than £3 million to pay 0.5 per cent of payroll costs into a fund for training. It has come under fire from businesses such as AO World, Timpson, Tesco and the Co-op, which have argued that inflexibility, unsuitable courses and programme lengths are the biggest barriers.

As a result £4.4 billion raised by the levy had been kept by, or returned to, the Treasury over the past five years, rather than being spent on apprenticeships. It has also led to a decline in training opportunities and to the emergence of lower-quality schemes.

Government taking more control has led to less and worse. This is not evidence in favour of government taking control. Even that saving grace of there being less of what is now worse is cold comfort.

Industrial policy, even with strict conditionality, fails out in that real world. Possibly because of the complexity of the economy, the impossibility of the centre ever having enough information and so on - a Nobel was awarded for this insight do not forget. Or, it could just be that those who desire to exercise that policy power, conditionality and all, have Trabant minds.

Could be, could be, and we would at this point make mention of how we’ve met and even spoken to an awful lot of British politicians and civil servants. Papier mache that sounds like angry bees rather than smoothly purring elegance - it is possible to take the car analogy too far but we’re not sure we have, not yet.

Or to be less jocular. To test how more government would improve the economy compare with how well current government affects the economy. Well, you want more of this?