Cameron calls for 'capitalism with a conscience'

David Cameron, leader of the Conservative Party, today called for “capitalism with a conscience” and said it was time for wealth to be distributed “more equally”. The Tory leader said that while he would stand up for business, he would also “stand up to business when the things that people value are at risk”. Speaking in front of world leaders, financiers and corporate directors at the World Economic Forum at Davos, Mr Cameron said: “…it is time to place the market within a moral framework - even if that means standing up to companies who make life harder for parents and families. It is time to help create vibrant, local economies - even if that means standing in the way of the global corporate juggernauts. And it’s time to decentralise economic power, to spread opportunity and wealth and ownership more equally through society, and that will mean recapitalising the poor rather than just the banks.” Mr Cameron spoke to the audience of the halcyon days of the 1950s where “there was a sense that everyone could have a slice of the pie”.

Link to Times Online

There is an interesting 'email' debate between Will Hutton and David Cameron in today's Observer where Cameron is challenged to explain how he would bring about 'capitalism with a conscience'. In one exchange he is aksed whether he embraces Keynesianism to which he responds ..."As a Conservative, I'm naturally sceptical of embracing anyone's theory or ideology, although I agree that Keynes had many good ideas, in particular his emphasis on the dangers of the contraction of credit. Here in Davos you see this clearly right now: for example, a representative from the African Development Bank told me how the lack of credit is holding up the construction of roads, bridges and other infrastructure. So I think our plan for a National Loan Guarantee Scheme would actually achieve many of the long-term outcomes people associate with "Keynesianism". But if by Keynesianism you mean a big fiscal stimulus regardless of the level of government borrowing, I don't agree. The reason is simple: because the government is already planning to borrow so much, if we borrowed a lot more now we'd actually make the recession worse. Why? Because we'd have to show how the extra borrowing was going to be paid back through tax rises. That would damage business and consumer confidence, which is in the end what will get the recovery going.

Link to Observer article