I have concluded that only one word sums up for me the extent of our problems; inequality!

Inequality invokes passion and commentary that conjures up debate on for example, the inequality between rich and poor, black and white, men and women and whilst those definitions offer up clear examples of inequality, I feel that its deficit can be seen in every aspect of our lives; in every transaction we make.

As our world hurtles headlong into turmoil and uncertainty, Citizens and indeed their alter ego, Consumers, could be forgiven for disengaging from the sea of political spat; I think that they are wrong - I do not think we are powerless as individuals! It is more important now for Citizens/Consumers to not just engage, but reshape our politics and destinies. 

I apply a very broad definition to the word Consumer, simply because as we consume both tangible and intangible products, the decisions or commentary made by those that shape the conditions and consumption of our domestic lives, have become important not just for the here and now, but for our very futures.

The disconnect between the Citizen/Consumer is evident when politicians appear on our screens proving the instinct to switch off is strong; it is unfortunate that this same reaction is no doubt applied to the Governor of The Bank of England, Mark Carney!

He recently gave what I think was one of the most important speeches in 2016, in which he addressed the issue of inequality, albeit from a fiscal point of view.

He began by talking about a lost decade, acknowledging our own lost opportunities over the last 10 years, but focussing on a similar lost decade in the 19th Century. History it seemed had a lesson for us all; the fall in income, financial crises and the advance of a technological revolution contributed to the ills of our forefathers.

Northern Rock, Uber and the rise of intelligent machines had now taken the place of similar challenges in found in the 1860’s.

He offered to his audience the fact that the last 25 years had created the greatest explosion in human activity, through what he describes as ‘a series of profound disruptions’, such as the fall of the Berlin Wall, the liberalisation of the Chinese economy (leading to a staggering one third of humanity being added to the global workforce), the growth of global supply chains in all aspects of our lives and three and a half billion people who now have virtually full access to the ‘sum of human knowledge’, so enriching our lives.

He cites other advantages from our interconnected world such as the lifting of one billion people out of poverty, convergence between average incomes and the increase in life expectancy by ‘two decades’.

Cannily he acknowledged that these great global advances were not reflected within the negative belief amongst citizens, that globalisation is ‘associated with low wages, insecure employment, stateless corporations and striking inequalities’.

In recognition of this divide and on behalf of the banking industry, he delivered their collective ‘mea culpa’ moment, in which he defined the financial crisis of 2008 as delivering deficits in ‘solvency’ and ‘integrity’, along with a lack of moral fibre from those who controlled the flow of money; pretty strong stuff!

In response to this lack of faith, and in my view a lack of courage and moral fibre from many global politicians, Mr Carney believes that it is just possible that Citizens/Consumers are turning their backs against open markets; he describes this potential as a ‘tragedy’ and can only be avoided by confronting the ‘underlying’ reasons.

Our principle problems stem from a recognised fact that recovery from a shock to the financial system is always sluggish; post-crisis activity is generally 13% below what it was before a crisis - in the UK, our activity is 16% below!

The disparity between rich and poor has grown substantially since the 1980’s with the world’s top 1% now controlling 50% of global wealth (in the UK by 2009 the 1% controlled 15% to 20% of wealth). In the UK, he astutely observes that the disparity of the 1% is complicated further by what he refers to as ‘entrenched intergenerational inequity’ measured by the rise of over 60’s wealth at a rate of 5 times of the overall population, accentuated and offering a stark contrast between those owning homes and those caught in the rental trap! Carney is particularly concerned by the lack of equal opportunity in the UK, ‘potentially reinforcing cultural and economic divides’.

His vision of a potential dystopian future was demonstrated by comments made by his colleague Andy Haldane, that up to 15,000,000 of the ‘current jobs in Britain could be automated over time’ through the arrival of smart technology!

So whilst his speech focusses on an analysis of the inequality of the past, present and the threat of the future and how monetary policy has to a greater extent saved the day, it was somewhat interesting to discover through his words, how inequality, through lack of law or regulation can be entrenched in our societies; for example, he states:

“Boosting the determinants of long-run prosperity is the job of government’s structural, or supply-side policies. These government policies influence the economy’s investment in education and skills; its capacity for research and development; the quality of its core institutions, such as the rule of law; the effectiveness of its regulatory environment; the flexibility of its labour market; the intensity of competition; and its openness to trade and investment”.

I have no problem with the construction of his statement except the theory is not developed to round the circle of how inequality invades all aspects of our lives particularly how we access and consume what is produced.

As the world experiences the fragmentation that Carney fears, up steps some of our own politicians now railing against the high standards and regulation in Consumers products that we take for granted. William Rees-Mogg MP opined recently that the UK could ‘slash’ environmental and regulations on imported products because if Regulations were ‘good enough for India’ then it would be likely good enough for the UK. His view was that the UK could go ‘a very long way’ to rolling back high EU Standards and perhaps Regulation.

Lord Flight recently commented on the implementation of new EU Regulation on Pensions would simply fall away because of ‘brexit’ which in turn would be good for the City of London; the very same elites that the Governor of the Bank of England is so critical of!

Citizens/Consumers need to feel that Justice exists when something goes radically wrong with their purchases, because whilst Mark Carney cites many reasons for the sense of isolation and inequality, the parting of hard-earned cash for a product or service, which does not deliver on its promise, feeds into a sense that the Consumer has been cheated! If a company then fails to acknowledge, let alone provide rights or deliver obligations in Regulation, that sense of inequality is then confirmed; the circle is complete!

We are told that the Great Repeal Bill, incorporating EU Law fully into UK Domestic Law will provide the reassurance we all need. However, the sting is in the tail; there are promises to review every single piece of newly transplanted legislation and to remove that which is not required. Deciding what is not required strongly suggests that many years of hard work and compromise will be lost, all for the benefit of an anti-regulation dogma. The mere fact that the importation of EU Regulation will discount the opportunities for resolution via EU Enforcement will immediately create a loss of rights; who will then listen to those who advocate the need to employ solid Regulation to guarantee quality of product and imbue a sense of right amongst Consumers?

When you study Law you are told that contract is an agreement between two equal parties. Analysis of the 1980’s revealed a roll-back of the State to the preferred Victorian model of State & Personal Management through the creation of contractual relations; the theory is that contracts will set you free, it will provide self-regulation and true choice! The reality is that a contractual society creates inequality between those who hold most of the cards and those who hold nothing but some cash in their pockets; is this our new uncontrolled liberalised future?

Mark Carney’s intervention created some brief comment in the mainstream press, but little of the flavour that he was actually speaking truth to power; the question surely is - ‘whilst we seem to be consumed by the politics of absolutism over principle, will anyone heed his words and solutions for rebalancing our fractured society?’

Copyright & All Rights Reserved 2016 - Frank Brehany (First Published on 22/12/16)