Academy of Ideas

#BattleFest2015: Can we manufacture a new economy?

Recorded at the Battle of ideas 2015.






While the UK economy has
recovered from the economic crisis, few would argue that the recovery
is built on strong foundations. Wages are only just starting to rise in
real terms after a number of years of decline. Economic output remains
weak compared to previous recoveries, and the state is still spending
almost £90 billion a year more than it receives in tax. A particular
concern for economists is low productivity – the amount of wealth
produced by each worker – which is well below that of other countries
and 15 per cent below where it would have been if pre-crisis trends had
continued.
Yet across the main political parties there seems little vision of
how the UK economy could look different in five, 10 or 20 years’ time.
The chancellor of the exchequer, George Osborne, has made much play
about the creation of a ‘northern powerhouse’. The HS2 railway has
cross-party support, but many are sceptical about its economic
potential. Beyond this, there seems little sense of how the economy
could be transformed. Indeed, many new industries with the potential to
revolutionise the UK economy – like fracking, nuclear power and biotech –
have faced considerable resistance.
In 2014, the Wright Report, an independent report commissioned by the
Labour Party, called for ‘a modern, active industrial policy’ that was
not about ‘government “picking winners”, investing in large companies,
or trying to plan the economy’ but focused on ‘improving the environment
in which companies operate, recognising the positive influence that
government can have, and working together to tackle the challenges’.
These included barriers to investment, the overall load of taxation and
the lack of skilled workers, all still serious problems. That said,
there are causes for optimism. In certain sectors, productivity has
risen sharply in recent years. Productivity in car manufacturing is
high, while in aircraft engine manufacturing and financial services, the
UK is a world leader. Moreover, the UK’s universities offer excellent
capacity for research and development.
If UK businesses can be excellent in some arenas, why is the UK
apparently so unproductive overall? What are the barriers to a new and
innovative economy? Why is new business investment so low? Do we need a
bout of creative destruction, making painful choices about leaving some
areas of economic activity behind, in order to allow new sources of
wealth creation to flourish?

SPEAKERS




Frances Coppola

associate editor, Pieria; contributor to Nesta’s Our Work Here is Done, exploring the frontiers of robot technology




Katie Evans

economist, Social Market Foundation




Phil Mullan

economist; director, Epping Consulting business advice; author, The Imaginary Time Bomb




Bauke Schram

business reporter, International Business Times UK




Mike Wright

executive director, Jaguar Land Rover



CHAIR



Rob Lyons

science and technology director, Institute of Ideas

#PodcastOfIdeas: monarchy, Brexit, German free speech under attack

Claire Fox, David Bowden and Rob Lyons discuss the week's news

In this week’s edition of the Podcast of Ideas the team discuss
whether, on the Queen’s 90th birthday, the monarchy has any place today.
There’s analysis of the latest in the Brexit referendum, what’s behind
the prosecution of a German comedian for composing an insulting poem
about Turkish President Erdoğan and why Dolmio has made the strange move
of encouraging the public to eat less of its pasta sauce.

#BattleFest2015: Is the NHS still worth defending?

Podcast: listen to this debate from our Battle of Ideas archive.

Recorded at the Battle of Ideas 2015
We all love the NHS, don’t we? Despite the ubiquity of platitudes
about defending ‘our’ NHS, though, exactly what we are defending and
why?
The NHS has undergone significant changes since its inception in
1948. Shifts within patient demographics, combined with increased
patient demands and advances in technology and medical care, have
resulted in a system at breaking point. One million patients are seen
every 24 hours, at a cost of £2 billion each week. The kind of care
available and sums of money involved would surely astonish the
institution’s founders. Indeed, although often perceived as one
homogeneous care provider, high-profile scandals, such as those at Mid
Staffordshire and at the Morecambe Bay Maternity Unit, have illustrated
the variability in care across different hospitals – even within the
same trust. And on many important measures – for example, cancer
survival rates – the NHS seems to perform badly compared to health
services in comparable countries.
Nevertheless, the NHS is one of the few manifestations of the British
state that elicits strong and often positive feelings from significant
numbers of people. Politicians and parties often define themselves in
relation to the NHS and compete to be seen to be supporting it – even
when this can be difficult to reconcile with their policies and track
record. No major party seems willing to have a more fundamental
discussion about whether a taxpayer-funded health service, governed by
national and local government, is the best way to take care of the
nation’s health.
Yet, at the same time, the reality is that more and more publicly
funded healthcare is provided by profit-making or third-sector
organisations. The introduction of the Health and Social Care Act 2012,
particularly in relation to the commissioning of services from ‘any
willing provider’, has opened the doors to private and volunteer input,
often with variable results. Following the Conservatives’ victory in the
2015 general election, many supporters of the NHS fear that these
reforms will be pursued further.
Yet is the NHS everyone queues up to defend more national myth than
effective health care? Can it survive in its current form, and more
importantly, should it?

#PodcastofIdeas: British steel, the Panama papers and Brexit

Claire Fox, David Bowden and Rob Lyons discuss the week's news

In this edition of the Podcast of Ideas the team ask whether,
with Tata Steel’s operations in Britain haemorrhaging £1million a day,
renationalisation is really the answer. Instead, should we be demanding
investment in new and dynamic industries rather than propping up zombie
sectors of the economy? With the release of the Panama Papers making the
not-so-startling revelation that the super rich sometimes avoid paying
tax, the team ask why the rich feel the need to sit on their capital in
the first place rather than using it productively. And finally, there’s
analysis of the latest in the Brexit referendum campaign including the
government’s latest controversial move: using public money to peddle the
Remain line.     

#BattleFest2013: Chewing the facts - what’s the truth of the obesity crisis?

Podcast: listen to this debate from our Battle of Ideas archive.

With the chancellor of the exchequer, George Osborne, having recently announced a sugary drinks tax and the Lancet
publishing new figures claiming that 38 per cent of UK adults will be
obese by 2025, what is the truth about obesity? This archive debate was
recorded at the Battle of Ideas 2013.
According to ‘Reducing Obesity and Improving Diet’, a policy document
produced by the Department of Health in March 2013, most people in
England are overweight or obese - 61.3% of adults and 30% of children
aged between 2 and 15. The associated health problems are costing the
NHS, it is claimed, more than £5 billion every year. The reasons given
for people ‘going large’ are not always clear, and numerous reasons have
been suggested: that the modern Western diet is too high in
carbohydrates / fat / sugar [delete as appropriate], that we no longer
sit down together for a home-cooked family meal, but graze all day or
eat ready-meals in front of the TV, that we don’t cook anymore so our
understanding of nutrition and seasonality is lacking, that we drink too
many fizzy drinks, that processed food is as addictive and we have
become food junkies. To tackle the problem, there have been numerous
government health initiatives, and doctors and health organisations have
called for a wide array of health interventions, including sugar and
fat taxes. While these make headlines, it seems they’ve failed to affect
our waistlines, with some predicting that obesity will continue to rise
and place further strain on the NHS.
On the other hand, studies show the number of people who are
overweight or obese has not risen for over a decade, and there are
concerns that school health campaigns are making our children
unhealthily weight-obsessed. Some studies even suggest those labelled
‘category 1 obese’ are likely to be just as healthy as those deemed
‘normal’. So what’s the truth behind the obesity epidemic - are we right
to be worried about becoming a nation of fatties? Is being fat
necessarily a harbinger of ill health and early death? Just what is
making us more obese? And do we all need a nudge to make sure we fill up
our plates with carrots and stick with the gym?
SPEAKERS
Henry Dimbleby
co-founder, Leon Restaurants; co-author, School Food Plan
Rob Lyons
science and technology director, Institute of Ideas
Dr Angelica Michelis
senior lecturer, Department of English, Manchester Metropolitan
University; author, Eating Theory: the theory of eating (forthcoming)
Jane Ogden
professor in health psychology, University of Surrey; author, The Good Parenting Food Guide’ (forthcoming)
CHAIR
Jason Smith
associate fellow, Institute of Ideas

#PodcastofIdeas: Must Rhodes Fall?

Claire Fox and Ian Dunt discuss the Rhodes Must Fall movement

In this edition of the Podcast of Ideas, David Bowden talks to
Claire Fox and journalist Ian Dunt about the Rhodes Must Fall movement,
which has swept campuses from Cape Town to Oxford demanding that
vestiges of colonialism be removed from colleges, notably statues of
Cecil Rhodes.
Does the movement represent young people boldly trying to shape the
world around them? Or, is it a misguided attempt by privileged students
to rewrite the past by shutting down debate and making anachronistic
claims to be victims of historical wrongs?

#PodcastofIdeas: the Brexit debate and public-health campaigns

Claire Fox and David Bowden join Rob Lyons to discuss the debate about Brexit so far. What does it reveal about attitudes to democracy today and the snobbery of many calling for the UK to stay in the EU? Is the media too obsessed with Westminster politics rather than the serious issues involved? What will really change if Britain votes to leave? 
The team also discussed the new public health campaign, 'One You' - why are government lecturing people to change their bad habits?

#BattleFest: Reassessing paternalism: is autonomy a myth?

A keynote from the Battle of Ideas 2016
‘If I have a book to serve as my
understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to
determine my diet for me, and so on, I need not exert myself at all.’ Immanuel Kant, What is Enlightenment? (1784)
When One Direction announced they were splitting up, child psychologists
offered parents of grieving tweenies advice on how to console their
offspring. In the same month, parents were also told by researchers how
long they should read to their children each day. Business Secretary
Sajid Javid has ordered university heads to establish a taskforce to
take on sexist ‘lad culture’ and guide students to conduct their
interpersonal relations in line with enlightened mores. Of course, not
everyone follows expert advice on any of the above. Policy advisers and
academic experts frequently complain about those who refuse to
acknowledge their wisdom and carry on smoking, drinking sugary pop,
being laddish. Cutting-edge techniques of behavioural psychology are
being marshalled to deal with this problem. The UK’s Behavioural
Insights Team, now a private company, has quadrupled in size since it
was spun out of government in 2014. It is now working for the World Bank
and the UN, while ‘nudge’ teams are being established in Australia,
Singapore, Germany and the US.
The ubiquity of nudge heralds a new renaissance for unapologetic
paternalism. But where does that leave the great Enlightenment
breakthrough, the idea that individuals should be self-determining and
capable of making their own choices? Kant’s description of ‘mankind’s
exit from his self-incurred immaturity’ seems strangely at odds with
today’s enthusiasm for paternalistic intervention. For Kant, the outcome
of any particular choice was less important than the cultivation of
moral autonomy. The Enlightenment idea was that we should stop
‘outsourcing’ decisions about how to live to external agencies, whether
the church, the monarchy, or some natural order. Today, though, new
forms of authority have taken their place, leaving us just as childlike
in relation to the new experts.
Sceptics about the idea of autonomy suggest breakthroughs in
neuroscience have revealed we are less rational than Enlightenment
thinkers suggested. They argue it is wrong for strong-willed individuals
to run rough-shod over vulnerable groups with less power. In a complex
world of multiple choices, what is wrong with people seeking help to
make informed decisions? Is autonomy really undermined if students themselves
demand university authorities provide safe spaces, issue trigger
warnings on course materials, make lessons in consent compulsory? If we
are nudged into the good life, what harm is done? Should we grow up and
accept new paternalism or does this mean sacrificing self-dominion and
consigning ourselves to a life of permanent dependence? Is individual
autonomy an outdated myth?








Speakers




Dr Tim Black

books and essays editor, spiked




Dr Katerina Deligiorgi

reader in philosophy, University of Sussex; author, The Scope of Autonomy




Dr Daniel Glaser

director, Science Gallery London, King's College London




Professor Mike Kelly

senior visiting fellow, Behaviour and Health Research Unit,
Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge; researcher in nudge
theory and choice architecture




Georgios Varouxakis

professor of the history of political thought, Queen Mary University of London; author, Mill on Nationality



Chair



Claire Fox

director, Institute of Ideas; panellist, BBC Radio 4's Moral Maze