Randy McDonald ([info]rfmcdpei) wrote,
@ 2009-01-28 14:50:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:canada, economics, links, ontario, politics, united kingdom

[LINK] "The Good News About the Bad Times"
While the Conservative government is reacting to the hollowing-out of Ontario's industrial sector by creating a regional development agency, the Southern Ontario Development Agency, Toronto Life's Philip Preville suggests (The Good News About the Bad Times") that southern Ontario may recover by becoming an international financial centre, auded by the self-destruction of Wall Street.

This wouldn't be the first time Toronto cashed in on another city’s financial devastation. Though it is synonym­ous with money, power and high rolling in this city, Bay Street was created by a mass stampede away from uncertainty, namely the election of the separatist Parti Québécois in November 1976. Separatism has since become such a staple of Canadian life (with its own political party in Ottawa, its MPs drawing salaries and pensions from Canadian taxpayers) that it’s hard to recall the panic that gripped the country, and especially Montreal’s business community, in the wake of separatism’s first election victory. Sun Life Assurance made a show of its exodus. Royal Bank, Bank of Montreal and others moved out quietly, department by department, over a period of years. Once in Toronto, the industry thrived, and the city now ranks consistently among the world’s top 20 financial centres. The September instalment of the Global Financial Centres Index, which is the industry’s gold-standard ranking of where money and power are located, showed that Toronto had jumped from 15th place to 12th, leapfrogging over Paris (which was in free fall, dropping from 14th to 20th), San Francisco and Dublin. Such financial centres as Boston, Sydney, Frankfurt and even Chicago were now within striking distance.

I met Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan in his boardroom early one November evening. “I think it should be a goal for Toronto to rank among the top 10 in the world,” he said. More than any finance minister in recent memory, Duncan, with his heavy, neckless frame, looks the part of a stereotypical banker—albeit a banker in bad times, with dark circles under his eyes. He’d spent the previous week in the riding he represents, Windsor-Tecumseh, an area heavily dependent upon the auto industry. It’s starting to look like most of the 150,000 manufacturing jobs the province has lost in the past two years are gone for good. Ontario is now experiencing what the U.K. went through under Margaret Thatcher: a final, massive shift from manufacturing jobs to service jobs. In the new economy, Ontario doesn’t make stuff anymore. We let other places do that; our new job is to lend, invest, and manage people’s money.


It'd be nice if my readers in the United Kingdom could tell us whether Thatcher's sectoral reorganization of the British economy was a good thing in the long run.



(1 comment) - (Post a new comment)


[info]gyptis
2009-01-29 02:56 pm UTC (link)
I suspect you can guess my response to this.

Certainly, in the 1970's, this country was in dire straits. Our manufacturing industry was a joke. Ruled by too-strong unions, it was unproductive, and certainly unresponsive to change. Basking, perhaps, in the aftermath of a history when the UK had had an empire to sell its gadgets to.

My parents tended to buy "foreign" - Swedish cars, German technology, French ... ummm ... French onion soup stuff. That sort of thing. Not because there weren't British alternatives, but because those locally produced alternatives were expensive, unreliable, and available "later". Shoddy is the word.

Thatcher set out to destroy the unions and, with it, manufacturing industry. And she did it rather well. But what she failed to do (and did this rather well too) was to give those newly-unemployed the opportunities to rebuild and reskill their lives, in order to be productive in the New Economy. The eighties were full of mindless platitudes - "get on your bikes and look for work", "trickle-down economics". Very little practical support and aid to the poor and effectively disenfranchised of the time.

That remembered public resentment is, I think, what stills frightens the Tories today. Not "on the job done", since it ultimately needed doing, but on the failure to see through the whole thing, and to bring the people with you.

Unfortunately for us, our Labour party at the time was in the pockets of the unions. Perhaps a more progressive and independent Socialist outlook would have been able to restructure the economy to a service role whilst still maintaining the help and benefits of those most at risk of suffering.

In the early nineties (when hordes of yuppies wandered the Square Mile) I spent some time wondering how an economy could run, could be said to be successful, when all it did was sell services within itself, and shuffle money around to cover the costs.

It was a long time coming, but the current economic crisis perhaps highlights this "Emperor's New Clothes" for modern western economies. What do we actually produce?

We buy in fossil fuels from elsewhere, we fill our shops with products made elsewhere, and now we even look for services (call centres and computer programming, for example) from elsewhere. We even holiday elsewhere.

We spend, but we don't make. Mr Micawber would be having nightmares.

(Reply to this)


(1 comment) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…