Tonight is the night when the programme is broadcast in which I put the argument 'The welfare state was a mistake' on Radio 4. The programme is called 'Hecklers' because four people, including two LSE professors, interrupt and object to my arguments. It goes out at 8pm.
Some supporters have been concerned that I have four 'lefties' against me and that the odds are stacked in their favour. But I have to say, in defence of the BBC, that this is the formula used for this series and was used in the programme the previous week in which someone argued that specific anti-terrorism laws were unnecessary and unhelpful.
Yes, it is possible to object that, in this format, my point of view is implicitly treated as 'way out' or, at the least, 'controversial'. But I think it is fair to suggest that the idea is, indeed, still controversial in British society. In fact it is a mark of a significant change in the thinking of the British governing class elite (in which I include the BBC) that the status of the idea has moved from being 'mad' a decade ago, to only 'controversial' today. That is progress. Slow progress, yes. But still progress.
It will - or would - be a further mammoth step if we get to the point that it becomes commonplace to think that the state is generally not good at running things.
Posted by James Bartholomew • Indexed in General • Media, including BBC bias
Comments (4)
TrackBack (44)
Comments
Excellent performance - well done. Mind you, I thought the panel were pathetic. Their arguments seemed incredibly flimsy.
Posted by: Bishop Hill at December 28, 2005 08:48 PM
I don't think that James Bartholomew knows nearly as much about the past as he believes he does. He referred this evening to the voluntary hospitals of the past but he overlooked the essential provision of hospitals - long before the 'welfare state' - by local government: fever hospitals first, then maternity hospitals. He ignored the provision of mental hospitals by the County Magistrates. All these were 'on the rates' and were a form of state provision. Then, of course, there was the poor law, first of all with the Overseers of the poor, then the poor-law guardians. The NHS was not made up initially of hospitals taken over from the voluntary/charitable sectors: it was made up also of the county and municipal hospitals and also of hospitals established at the beginning of the war for wounded servicemen.... As for his knowledge of education - God help us that someone should be in a position to influence others and really not have a clue!!!
Posted by: Kate Taylor at December 28, 2005 09:03 PM
..... his view of education seems to be fairly accurate to me, and one that is shared by many teachers when they have the freedom to comment openly.
The standards are laughably low these days, and are gerrymandered endlessly to show that standards have allegedly risen.
Which part of his views on education did you think was wrong ?
I don't think (I may be wrong) that Mr B. is a believer in absolutely zero welfare state provision, that absolutely nothing should be state provided ; I think this is an easy-target straw man argument.
The panel at the start appeared to think that his argument reduced to 'state provision is not perfect, therefore it shouldn't happen at all' ; they also seemed to think he believes that state provision can't get any better, or do anything competently.
I *think* the argument is more along the lines of we grotesquely overrate the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of the centralised welfare state and underrate the provision that was there before, provided both privately and locally.
"The Welfare State" means different things to different people. I do not care for the "expectation" mentality which I think is the cause of a lot of the problems.
It may well be the case that municipal boroughs and counties built hospitals. These were still not built by a nationalised centralised health service, which now seems to buy its new provision on hidden overpriced credit.
Posted by: Paul at December 28, 2005 11:07 PM
Warning: file(http://63.247.138.2/~bartholo/randomquotes.dump) [function.file]: failed to open stream: No route to host in /home/bartholo/public_html/archives/2005/12/its_tonight.php on line 306
Warning: implode() [function.implode]: Invalid arguments passed in /home/bartholo/public_html/archives/2005/12/its_tonight.php on line 306
.... and if you can't listen to it it will be available on line later at : http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/
Posted by: Paul at December 28, 2005 11:34 AM