The limitations on the power of a government in a liberal democracy (cont) as illustrated by differences between France and Britain.

Astonishingly, given I’ve blogged about it before, there are still some people who don’t appreciate how difficult it can be for a government to do what it wants in an advanced liberal capitalist mixed economy democracy such as ours.

‘The government should do something’ is a frequent cry from, for examples, single-issue groups, naïve political dabblers or the sad powerless folk who lurk behind lace-curtains terrified by what they’ve read in ‘the papers’.

But there are many and varied forces which can prevent, or at least slow-down, government action. Powerful groups such as financiers, lawyers, doctors, the press and, to a lesser extent than in the ‘good old days’ trades unionists can do all sorts of things to box in our leaders. And then there’s the will of ‘the people’. Remember the Poll Tax ‘riots’ or the fuel protesters’ blockade?

France has a nominally right of centre government and yet has been unable to introduce a new contract of employment for young workers which would be laughably lax if proposed in Britain. Britain has a nominally left of centre government yet is unable to increase the price of petrol (it’s now cheaper here than in France) in order to invest the money raised in improving public transport. It had to rely on an independent mayor to push through London’s congestion charge.

France gives this casual observer the impression of being far closer to a socialist paradise that Britain does. They have wonderful railway networks, their towns are cleaner and brighter than ours, there seems more sense of communal responsibility than in England. And yet their unemployment levels are far higher than ours, racial tensions much worse and many in their government (including the Prime Minister) are unelected appointees.

It’s a funny old world, eh?