Daniel Finkelstein
Star musicians and your favourite Times writers at the Albert Hall
The results were pretty frightening. The social researcher picked up the phone and, using the most commanding tone he was capable of, announced himself to be a doctor. The nurse who answered the phone was given an instruction - go and give a certain dosage of a particular drug to a named patient.
They did. One nurse after another. A full 95 per cent of those who were called went to the medicine cupboard, collected the drug and set off towards the patient's bed. This despite the fact that the researcher wasn't actually a doctor or anyone known to the nurse, that the drug wasn't cleared for use and that the “prescribed” dose was dangerously excessive.
The authority of office is a pretty strong convincer. It doesn't even need to be real office. Dress up in a uniform and you can get perfect strangers to pick up litter in the street for you. The Labour Party used to get a man called Leonard Fenton to speak for it on NHS policy because he played Dr Legg in EastEnders.
And this, as I'll explain, is one of the reasons - just one - that I am not convinced that the conventional wisdom is right. I am not sure that an economic downturn is all bad news for Gordon Brown. At least not politically. I actually think it might help him.
The first cause to doubt the conventional wisom can be found in the headlines themselves. “World Markets Plunge”. Over the past quarter of a century voters have gradually come to understand that governments do not determine the state of the economy by themselves. They realise, to some extent at least, that powerful forces are at play, out of the control of politicians.
In times of prosperity this can be frustrating for politicians. I recall focus group research informing ministers in John Major's Government that voters hated him attempting to take credit for prosperity. We developed careful phrases to try to get round the problem. I smile when I hear Gordon Brown praising his own policies and then hastily name-checking the British people for their hard work. That was one of our formulas too. And much good it did us.
However, when the economy is doing less well, this all works out rather differently. The understanding that global forces are at work helps the government rather than hinders it. The refusal to credit politicians turns into a reluctance to blame them. Most polls seem to suggest that voters will not regard this Government as responsible for the downturn.
A global downturn also brings into a play one of the strongest forces in human affairs - risk aversion. A fashionable area of economic research is the exploration of the way that people make decisions under uncertainty. Repeated experiments demonstrate our reluctance to accept a bargain with an uncertain payoff rather than another bargain with a more certain, but possibly lower, expected payoff. When faced with a choice between the devil they know - Gordon Brown - and the devil they don't - David Cameron - voters may prefer to stick with Mr Brown.
Part of this research, employing experiments with gambling and such like, shows the much greater impact of losses on human beings, and the prospect of losses compared with gains. In an ordinary election two parties might fight over which has the best offer, which provides the bigger gain. The risk involved in making the wrong choice - sacrificing a gain you haven't yet made - doesn't loom all that large. Losses, according to many of these new school economists, are a different matter. If you make a mistake and lose more than you bargained that you would, it is much more painful. Voters in elections where economic losses are in prospect are likely to be more risk averse.
This is where the authority of office comes into it. Mr Brown is able to rely on his cloak of office and his title as surely as those fake doctors on the telephone. Flying off to world summits, calling sombre meetings of the Cabinet, making speeches in Davos or wherever about the World Trade Organisation, Mr Brown can use the downturn to strengthen his authority, and his authority to help him to deal with the downturn. Over the next two years it may be difficult being Prime Minister, but it will still be preferable to being Leader of the Opposition. For the Prime Minister can use his authority to make himself appear by far the less risky option.
And this will have its own impact on the Tories. Mr Cameron may be tempted into pessimistic rhetoric, abandoning his more successful sunshine strategy. Some in his team may feel the downturn justifies him employing tougher rhetoric, stepping up the attack on the Government, making the Conservatives once more look harsh, and making Mr Cameron look less prime ministerial.
There will also be a temptation to produce a more radical policy programme: desperate times, after all, call for desperate measures. There is already pressure on the Shadow Chancellor, George Osborne, not to repeat his commitment to match Labour's spending totals. This sort of pressure will intensify. And if the Tories give in to it, they will then be making themselves appear as an even bigger risk.
There has been a great deal of comment about John Major and Black Wednesday. Perhaps this will prove to be justified. The Government is certainly in a mess. But there is another Major parallel worth remembering too. In 1992 the fear of a further downturn helped the Tories back into office.
daniel.finkelstein@thetimes.co.uk
Daniel Finkelstein is a weekly columnist and Comment Editor of The Times. His blog, Comment Central, is a personal round up of the best political opinion on the web. Before joining the paper in 2001, he was adviser to both Prime Minister John Major and Conservative leader William Hague
Follow our three athletes' progress in their preparations for the London Triathlon, and pick up training tips and more
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
We explore leisure activities that are safe and suitable for all of the family
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles


Why good girls pay good money for bad-girl baubles

Search The Times Births, Marriages & Deaths
£129,500
Bentley Edinburgh
£79,850
Mercedes-Benz of Northampton
£26,995
Unit 1, Woodfield Business Unit, Kidderminster Road, Ombersley, Worcester.
Great car insurance deals online
90k + Bonus + Options
Confidential
London
£23,716 +
Highways Agency
National
£
£43,405 - £48,228 pa
Notting Hill Housing
London
£30,000 base, £100,000 OTE
Riches Consulting
London/South
with annexe accommodation and 5.25 acres
£1,100,000
Beautiful Gardens w/ stunning Thames Views
Studios £33K, 1 Beds £60K, 2 beds £79K
Mortgages, bank acc & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Explore mystical Jordan
From £1030 for 7nts 4*
to USA's Most Cosmopolitan City; San Francisco!
£POA
Book Now for Winter 08/09 and Get 10% off!
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Ha! Gordon Brown was Chancellor for 10 years and presided over easy money policies which have directly caused the boom and now the bust. Of course people will hold him responsible.
Now he's giving billions of dollars of taxpayer to try to paper over the cracks. And the bust hasn't even arrived yet in the wider economy.
It's happened many many times in the past in many countries and its happening again now.
Adam, London, UK
Oh yes - John Major is remembered for Black Wednesday, when the Bank of England lost 1 billion pounds attempting to meet exchange rate commitments for the UK....
....but Gordon is now on the hook for 55 billion pounds propping up ONE bank. I know he's caused a lot of inflation but...! What will he do if more banks start feeling the strain?
Adam, London, UK
"No more boom and bust"
Well we have certainly had a boom in house prices and government expenditure/waste. Now it looks like its time for the bust. I suspect Labour knew all along that their policies would eventually cause a bust, they just never expected to be in power for so long.
"Economic prudence"
Record public borrowing. Record personal borrowing. Disastrous balance of payments. Nothing in the locker at all to allow a Keynesian-style public spending recovery. Quite the reverse with many predicting spending cuts or tax increases to cope with lower tax revenue.
Combined with the surveillance society Labour is endanger of becoming unelectable for 20 years.
Steve, London, England
But as a conservative, if you are going to be consistent, you must understand the government is not responsible for the downturn.
John Chuckman, toronto, Canada
I think you are correct, it be good for Brown and New Labour as Cameron and Osbourne have no answers of how to handle the crisis at Northern Rock or the World financial crisis.All they offer is Flip Flops and U turns when they make a statement.In times of a serious financial crisis the World has at the moment trying to score populist political points does not solve the problem.The irony of the Northern Rock crisis is it was created by Camerons greedy banking friends in the City of London.
Bill Rees, Truro, Cornwall
Surely this is a case of âsame oldâ âsame oldâ â spot the difference between now and the last time this lot were in power:
âThe 1976 IMF crisis was a seminal event in modern British political and economic history. The seeds of the crisis were sown by the huge OPEC oil price shocks of 1972-3 leading to the potential meltdown of Britain's already weakened economy and seemingly confirming Britain's headlong decline as a major political and economic power. The government was seen as going 'cap in hand' to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to head off disaster - an image which became a long-lasting political icon.â
The 2007 Credit crisis was a seminal event in New Labour history and economic history. The seeds of the crisis were sown by the huge US sub-prime shocks of 2007 leading to the meltdown of Northern Rock and potential meltdown of Britain's already over burdened and weakened economy and confirming New Labourâs headlong decline as a safe pair of hands with the economy.
Mike, Wokingham,
Daniel Finkelstein's posit would work if people bothered to read the news. The great unwashed prefer to read about Britney's latest hit (the pavement?) and when their pockets get hit they'll blame the government, whatever is happening in the rest of the world.
Keith Daniels, Alicante,
You could summarise this article as "Crisis, what crisis?"
jon livesey, Sunnyvale, CA/USA
With respect don't you mean our black Wednesday?
Mike, plymouth, UK
I do wish Mr. Cameron would paste labour with Black Gold Day, Black Pensions Day Grab, Black Northern Rock Day, in total making Black Wednesday look no more than q typical EU blunder that is repeated each year when accountants refuse to sign the books, to which this government with is so in love.
G Whitehouse, Dudley, West Midlands
Well its good that voters are grasping economics, and are showing sophisticated understanding of globalisation, markets and the like.
But perhaps that same savvy will come into play when they see how incompetent it was of the Government to lend all our taxes to a bank we don't own. And if they then sell it off to one of their cronies the savvy public might well see through the ruse.
Many of the people I converse with on the matter know that inflation is held down by dodgy statistics and cheap Chinese goods. Many people know we have become a phony economy based on ridiculous housing market bubbles. So perhaps the economy wont be the big determinant of the next prime minister after all.
Personally I suspect its the prospective level of sleaze that is determining who people will vote for. More than anything in my experience, people detest corruption in this country. Can you buy a used car off the leader of the party?
David B, Larkhall, UK
Bruce, I think in electoral terms Daivd Cameron may be very close to Neil Kinnock. A party reformer whom the public may not be able to imagine as PM, too much uncertainty, too much risk. In any general election campaign DC would be one screw up away from oblivion.
Richard, London,
"Sometimes hard times can benefit governments as the public do not hold them responsible". I think we the public pretty much know wo is responsible for an economic downturn in the UK. Brown proved he had no idea when he sold gold at an all time low.
Wen, Oxford, England
I disagree with your last sentence. In 1992 the electorate decided they would have no truck with Neil Kinnock and old labour.
roger sykes, christchurch,
David Cameron is not Neil Kinnock.
Bruce Robertson, Brighton, UK
Well Mr Finkelstein I am Joe Public and while i do not blame the Government for Market Turns {Upwards or Downwards} I do hold them firmly responsible for.
(1) Almost complete Lack of Manufacturing Jobs in the UK.
(2) Criminal Waste of Taxpayers Funds
(3) Incompetent or Ineffective Regulatory Bodies & Agencies
(4) Increasing Erosion of Privacy & Personal Responsibility.
(5) Above the Law Attitudes of the Political Elites
(6) The Complete Gobbledygook we have on our hands with Nothern Rock
Now there is little doubt that if the politicians will just spend a little time thinking things through instead of just swallowing everything the consultants tell them hook line & sinker, they might not make so many Hugely Costly Mistakes {Costly to Us Taxpayers}
Economies have cycles and will always have slow periods but with complete buffons at the Helm the citizens will have a very uncomfortable ride whereas with Sound Long Term Fiscal Policy the ride would have been less uncomfortable
Obi, London, UK
The public is getting wise to Governments who claim responsibility for the good times and deny liability for the bad, the same as those Chief Executives who want a huge pay rise because the value of their shares has gone up (what they did) and want a huge pay rise when the value of their shares goes down (what somebody else did). Gordon Browns years of prudence have been demonstrated to have been built on sand, with borrowing hidden within a maze. The chickens are now coming home to roost!
David Leslie, Perth, Scotland
"No more boom and bust" was all I heard. Endlessly. Rings rather hollow now.
And despite the fact that GB is clearly not good in a crisis (Northern Rock?), is there not every likelihood that he will cling onto office long enough for a recovery to begin? If the bear market has then ended, is there not every chance that your argument is moot?
Matt, London,
Well everyone I talk to blames Gordon and a lot of these are on minimum wage and would be typical labour voters.
mitch, wolverhampton, England
Possibly, but I don't think so.
Remember specifically Gordon Brown's famous "no return to boom or bust" speach. If we do have a recession, any shred of credibility he may have left is gone.
Colin, Edinburgh,
Dream on.
Jon Leigh, Southern, France
Just go, Gordon Brown.
For God's sake, GO!
S Williams, London,
Yes but we do hold him responsible and IS responsible.
How can a Giovernment have a borrowing requirement of £50Bn at the TOP of the economic cycle. Madness!!!
Darrin, Egham, UK
Most voters may not blame the government for the downturn, but maybe they should blame the government if the UK's downturn turns out to be more severe than in other European countries. UK banks have weaker balance sheets, on average, than European banks whilst they tend to have a higher exposure to property through mortgages and financing of real estate development. In addition, the UK's budget deficit started to grow before the slowdown has taken hold (even worse: tax rates have gone up before the deficit started to mushroom). The UK government is resposible for these two negative factors. And the monetary poliy committee is quite dovish, although not as deep in the pockets of bankers as the FED. Hence inflation for the man in the street is now running at between 4% to 8% rather than the 2%-ish CPI which understates inflation. Real interest rates are now very low and this will cause substantial economic damage in the long term: too much borrowing and high inflation.
Richard Schreuder, London,
Gordon's a genius.
Clearly none of this is fault.
The lax fiscal regime.
Selling gold at an historic low.
Gvnt borrowing at £1.5 trillion.
Consumer debt £1.5 trillion.
Northern Rock
etc etc
As for Alistair Darling, what a stateman!
fnusnuank, Gen, Switz