Friday, February 08, 2008

Should Right Wing British Think Tanks Combine?

I'm just off to the Heritage Foundation, which is a huge right of centre think tank. It employs several hundred people and has a huge influence on political life in Washington DC. I often think it would be a good idea if several of the right of centre British think tanks were to combine to form a much bigger entity, which could equal the influence of Heritage. They could each still retain their own specialisations, but there's little doubt that few right of centre British think tanks really do affect the political weather. I shan't name names, but I think the one big disappointment about David Cameron's first two years is how little agenda shaping has been achieved in the world of policy wonkery. This may be because Policy Exchange is perceived as the only think tank with full access to the Cameron circle. I have no idea how true that is, but it's time their competitors upped their game a bit.

Or am I being unfair? Discuss.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your not kidding anyone Dale.

The Tax Payers Alliance, I Want a Referendum, Policy Exchange, Migrant Watch and many many more so call independent think tanks are directly linked to the Tories.

They do your dirty work for you, as you haven’t the guts to be up front about issues.

It even has a name, its called “Think Tank Trickery”

Anonymous said...

Policy Exchange are history. Blame Godson, a loaded agenda and some false receipts for that.

Anonymous said...

Oh come on Dale you are insulting your readers again.

You said

“”Policy Exchange is perceived as the only think tank with full access to the Cameron circle. I have no idea how true that is””

Instigators of Policy Exchange are Michael Gove, shadow Education, and Tory MP Nicholas Boles, is another of the think tank’s founders.

Dale if PE doesn’t have Camerons ear then you are in trouble, since the founders and staff at PE are either in his front bench, Tory MPs, Tory advisors or writers from the Torygraph.

We are not stupid, your post was a veiled attempt to portray Policy Exchange as Independent.. It isn’t !!!!!

asquith said...

qwerty, add the Countryside Alliance to the list. They don't give a damn about rural people, they're just a front for the Tory Party.

Anonymous said...

A Realist - you are so right !! The Newsnight team have vanquished them, and they have as bright a future as a 'think tank' as the one that funded Hain's deputy leadership contest - and Dean Godson is toast !!

tory boys never grow up said...

"but I think the one big disappointment about David Cameron's first two years is how little agenda shaping has been achieved in the world of policy wonkery"

You just don't get it - that would mean Dave stepping out of his being all things to all men marketing stance. Much better a little liberalism for the floating voter and then the odd dog whistle to the true believers - but the last thing that is needed is some detailed policy development that can be pulled apart by the nasty intellectual in Number 10.

I know I'm not a creature of the right - but I suspect more than a few Tories agree with the gist of this analysis.

Tristan said...

Can you imaging Migration Watch getting together with ASI? They are inextricably opposed to each other on immigration.

'Right of centre' is too diffuse a term. Yes the Heritage Foundation can work with Cato on some things, but on others they have very different views, the same is true of think tanks in the UK.

Anonymous said...

"Mr / Mrs / Miss ? Ms Qwerty"

I have always thought that referring to someone by their surname alone denoted that either:

(a) you went to a public school, or

(b) you are trying to use the lack of the title "Mr" as a way of showing the contempt you have for our host.

Almost all of us even call Iain by his first name (whether we agree with him on a particular point or not.) It's just another way of being civil.

By referring to Iain as "Dale", you remind me of Trade Union leaders who referred to two of our Prime Ministers as "Heath" and "Thatcher."

Therefore, I know that any point you will be trying to make will not be worth reading.

So - thank you for making it so easy to ignore you, you ignorant little troll. Why don't you go somewhere, where your lack of basic manners will be appreciated?

Andrew Ian Dodge said...

If anything the UK does not have enough think-tanks not too few. In DC you have a variety from all parts of the right/left spectrum. There is a far better exchange of ideas and more chance for radical ideas.

Anonymous said...

Yup, Qwerty, we need fully independent think tanks like the Smith Institute and the IPPR, who have absolutely no links to Brown and Blair. No, never, absolutely not.

And wow, the Countryside Alliance is mainly Tory! No, next you'll be telling me the Trades Unions usually support the Labour Party!

Anonymous said...

I agree with what Andrew Dodge says, more not fewer think tanks are needed.

Although American ones are larger that's not because they've merged but because they are better funded by private donations, the Heritage foundation coexists with other groups of a similar size like the AEI, the Cato Institute and the Hoover Institute.

Luke Akehurst said...

Of course right-of-centre think tanks should merge. Policy Exchange should merge with the Labour Party. After all, we have pretty similar ideas. Looking forward to sharing the podium with you at The International eParticipation and Local Democracy Symposium on the 28th. Maybe some good collaboration ideas will emerge from that.

Anonymous said...

thinktank, or think-tank

Anonymous said...

Ross mentioned the American Enterprise Institute. May I suggest, if you can, you get an appointment there as it is mega on free enterprise and freedom. Aayan Hirsi Ali has found a home there after being kicked out of the Dutch Parliament.

Tapestry said...

Small is beautiful - especially to begin with.

The Think Tank which launched Thatcher was very small - The Institute Of Economic Affairs - if I remember - based on only three people - and funded by one.

It changed not only Britain, but the world.

Iain, you're getting a bit Americanised, old chap. Do come home. we need you.

Anonymous said...

Red Baiter and qwerty

You should note that the KGB also used to call their victims by the surname rather than the more polite Russian form of Christian name and patronym.

That said I don't think that I could ever call Thatcher Margaret or the devil Nicholas for that matter.

Vienna Woods said...

Think-Tanks are exactly what is not needed, hard nosed common sense is! If it was the Think-Tanks that thought up some of the more bizarre green Tory policies and the Hug-a-Hoodie debacle, then we can quite happily do without it. The electorate as a whole, do not need a rash of ideas foisted on them every couple of weeks, they only need to know that the Conservatives are competent and trustworthy to govern. The current leadership have not achieved this status yet and I, and many others, are nervously waiting for signs of an awakening!

asquith said...

judith, I think you're missing the point. We object not so much to the positions of these thinktanks, as to the fact that they're more interested in certain ideologies than in the people they allegedly represent, and are accordingly false. A similar criticism can be made of 70s and 80s trade unions.

AndyR said...

It's usually a good idea for profit-making organisations to merge, to generate bigger profits from their larger scale and range. But when an organisation gets larger, it gets more bureaucratic and less innovative. Which is exactly the opposite of what you want from ideas-making organisations. So I'd say no, let's have lots of them, and keep them small.

Anonymous said...

qwerty - where are your manners? Also, where is the evidence for what you are bleeting on about?

If you relax a bit, maybe you can then find a girlfriend?

Interesting point - why does the Brown Broadcasting Corporation refer to left wing think tanks as 'think tanks' and right wing think tanks as 'right wing think tanks'.

Anonymous said...

I will save you all of the agony and act as one man think tank.

What the voter needs is an honest and competent government. It is 18 years since we saw that.

Cameron and his MPs need to be scrupulously honest and focus on issues that really affect the voter, providing believable solutions. Particular concentration and firm policy making needs to be developed on the protection of our borders, the realities of education, on spending taxes more wisely [nobody believes that taxes will be reduced].

Anonymous said...

The second disappointment about David Cameron's first two years is that he's still there! Where's the vision? What does he stand for? He comes over as being rich and out of touch - which is presumably exactly what he is .. Any normal blokes (male or female that is) able to lead this party?

Anonymous said...

The difference between the heritage foundation and most right think tanks is that the heritage foundation often criticises the republicans for not upholding conservative principles, and acts as an advocate for conservatism on the airwaves and in policy circles - here most centre right think tanks are subordinate to the political process, and afraid to criticise. Some of their publications are little more than the equivalent of US '527 groups.'

It's not easy being wrong... said...

Surely the only legitimate and objective think tanks are left-wing or liberal ones; obviously the right-wing think tanks are all clearly fronts for the Tories.

After all, every schoolboy knows that "liberal-left" is a synonym for good; and "right-wing" is a synonym for evil.

---
It's not easy being wrong