Natan Doron makes the case for Gordon Brown to lead the IMF.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn stepped down today from his position as head of the IMF to focus on clearing his name after being charged with sexual offences in a US Court. The Telegraph have already put the boot into any suggestion that Gordon Brown should be the man to replace him.
Jeremy Warner, the economics editor of the Telegraph, led calls last night to oppose Brown’s candidacy. Warner previously admitted to having not read Gordon Brown’s book about the future of global macroeconomic policy, published at the tail end of last year. This is not a crime in itself but undermines his ability to contribute to the debate about the future of global markets. This is Warner’s main argument against Brown:
“A man who has spent his life pursuing “big government” is scarcely likely to rub along well with an administration committed to cutting the state back.”
To suggest firstly that Brown spent his political career pursuing ‘big government’ is a gross over-simplification of his achievements as chancellor; New Labour abandoned many of the traditional Labour economic orthodoxies and displayed flexibility and pragmatism to deliver GDP growth consistently above the Eurozone average between 1997 and 2006 and maintained UK unemployent at a simliar level of consistently below the Eurozone average too.
Furthermore, for Warner to argue that the IMF exists simply to cut back the state shows just how far removed he is from debates about global markets.
The arguments surrounding conditionality and the role of the IMF in structural adjustment loans which decimated many developing economies are at the heart of why the IMF needs to reform. It is fast becoming the new orthodoxy that the problems facing the world today call for greater global economic cooperation, something Brown has made the main argument of his narrative on the next steps for globalisation.
Brown has always seen eradicating poverty, creating jobs and solving the public health and environmental problems facing the world as a major priority. The 10 Downing Street website lists the 2005 Gleneagles agreement to deliver global cooperation on eradicating poverty and climate change as one of Brown’s greatest achievements.
While other New Labour big hitters have used their post-government publications to ditch the dirt on eachother, Brown devoted his book to arguing that only increased global cooperation can deliver increased welfare for the world’s poorest and avoid a decade of low growth and high unemployment. He has argued this case with increasing passion and eloquence in recent months.
Brown’s credentials for the job aside, Cameron and Osborne are displaying vindictiveness in their opposition to his candidacy. Alistair Campbell is right to point out that during the Blair years Labour did much to advocate on the behalf of British politicians for international jobs, whatever their party background. Their posturing on Brown and the IMF job, on the back of the royal wedding invite snub which extended also to Blair, shows the Tories top men to be extremely unstatesman-like. It is perhaps particularly grating that Gordon Brown is infinitely more respected than George Osborne in the field of economics.
We on the left should be leading the defence of Gordon Brown today because to undermine Brown is to undermine Labour’s record in government too. Those in the Labour tribe have called upon the current leadership to do more to stand up for our record in government and not lay the blame for the deficit at the door of increased public spending but at the door of bailing out the banks (necessarily).
Here is our chance to do just that and in the process remind people of Brown’s leadership and vision on the global stage that saw the kind of global economic cooperation the world now needs going forward into the 21st century.
47 Responses to “The case for Gordon Brown at the IMF”
Abominominable
My favourite Capability Brown statistic is:
In 13 years of Labour Government, unemployment was below 7% every year but one; In 18 years of Thatcher-Major, there was only one year when it was ever that low. So, just think how terrible the job market is now, then multiply that out for each year, every year, for two decades.
I hope this statistic is true because I’ve certainly been repeating it a lot.
William
Is Natan Doron on planet earth?Brown was the worst PM since Lord North,destroyed both the UK economy and New Labour which,under Blair, won 3 times.Anybody can pump up the economy with a false property boom, but Brown’s knowledge of history excluded Anthony Barber.Anyway,he is bonkers, suffers from chronic depression,takes too many pills,and all of this is well documented on The Slog website.The Tories once had a leader with problems(Edward Heath), they ditched him,had a quick rethink under a leader unassociated with the previous regime,and were back in office for 18 years.Put Brown in charge of Scottish Labour and see if he can dislodge Salmond!
Terry White
Gordon Brown to take over the IMF? You’ve got to be stark, staring mad.
You say ‘We on the left should be leading the defence of Gordon Brown today because to undermine Brown is to undermine Labour’s record in government too’. Well that is precisely Labour’s problem isn’t it, that yet again, as has always happened before, Labour have been turfed out of office having left Britain’s finances in a mess, only this time it is utterly catastrophic. Labour’s problem. On no account must it be allowed to become Britain’s problem.
I say again, Gordon Brown to take over the helm at the IMF? Never!
David
Well argued article. Surely this is just about who would do the job well. Brown genuinely does know is stuff. He’s pretty clear on the economics he believes in – it’s about public investment stimulating private growth. It’s also about absolute support for the development of Africa. If that’s what the IMF want they should go for him. It shouldn’t be about personalities.
ElaineS
You one of Salmond’s bullying henchmen that lurk around the internet ready to put the boot in at any point where talk about Gordon Brown or Labour is going on William? Its the SNP henchmen that will ruin Scotland, talk about sectarianism,a lot of SNP followers remind me of Scottish Defence League in their over the top Scottishness.
Totally agree with you Ash, the Tories in my opinion fear the thought of Gordon putting himself forward for the post. So many people seem to forget that world reknowned Economists such as Blanchflower and Krugman think highly of Gordon yet non economists like the Joe bloggs of the world seem to have opinions that are completely redundant because they haven’t a clue what is required for this post in the IMF. They just don’t like Gordon so shout their mouth of! One thing for sure Cameron,Osborne and Salmond cannot walk in the same economical shoes as Gordon.