December 10, 2005
An article in the Australian Financial Review by Geoffrey Barker entitled, 'Ideas that rule the world' addresses neo-liberalism in Australia along with neo-conservatism (the use of US power to promote the values of liberal democracy and US imperial interests). I'm only interested in neo-liberalism in this post.
On that idea Baker says:
"...the political philosophy of neo-liberalism, or, perhaps more prejoratively, market fundamentalism...stresses the importance of individualism, personal freedom, limited government, the pursuit of self-interest, and the operation fo unimpeded markets for human economic and even moral progess."
He turns to Greg Lindsay, executive Director for Sydney's Centre for Independent Studies, to voice the policy agenda of neo-liberalism. Lindsay defined this as the free trade idea, by which is meant the deregulation of the Hawke/Keating years and subsequently of Howard. So where to now? Lindsay says:
We live in a competitive world....we have to compete...we have to integrate health, education and welfare provisions into economic reforms. That's where the CIS is taking the reform debate now: trying to foster a culture of self-reliance in economic and social affairs.
Presumably a culture of self-reliance in health and education refers to the transformational power of markets.
Self-reliance in terms of welfare means breaking welfare dependency and getting people back into the work force as cheap labour.
What does that mean in relation to health care? More user pays? Reducing public subsidies to the private health insurance industry? Reducing the population's dependency on public health care? Rolling back Medicare to create more of a health market?
The problem with Baker's approach is that he talks in terms of neo-liberalism as the 'big idea' and does not see it as a mode of governance.
|
and what did Lindsey say?