The State-Corporate nexus

Why politicians become pro-business
Parties want to win. This requires policies that can raise money, win media support and avoid capital flight. The differences between parties shrink as the more populist party bends backward to convince business that that their populism is not for real and they are really pro-business. Politicians who have campaigned for ‘people first’ programmes promptly abandon such programmes on taking office. Problems are mostly resolved in favour of capital, not the people. Blair’s first act was to turn control of monetary policy to the Bank of England, thus assuring business that populist ends will not be served. Within two months of the May 1997 Elections, Blair rushed to pay homage to Wall Street (the citadel of neo-liberalism) to assure them that he was all for deregulation of the market and flexible labour, conditions for raising the profits of the capitalists.

Blair inherited a society that had suffered a huge upward redistribution of income & wealth under Thatcher. Instead of rectifying the disparities, the first Blair budget brazenly offered major tax incentives to business and welfare cutbacks to the people. Social democracy has been abandoned in favour of neoliberalism & service to the business community. Political leaders will lecture workers, the poor & the vulnerable periodically but rarely business. They will not challenge corporate power nor demand corporate responsibility to the community. The survival of politicians is determined by a number of structural factors:
- the power of money in election campaigns,
- pro-business bias of the media,
- resurgent strength of capital & finance in a globalising economy,
- the weakened position of labour globally.

Fawning over the popular press (tabloids)

The government of the day takes care not to antagonise the high circulation tabloids - especially the Sun and the Daily Mail. These rightwing papers feed the people on patriotism and xenophobia and can stir their passions on issues of their choice. They have no time for minorities, resent non-white immigration and never tire vilifying asylum seekers. They will not hesitate to use lies to witch-hunt anyone standing against the interests of the rich. When the Home Office has some controversial plans afoot, a leak is typically planted in one of these two tabloids which can be relied upon to prepare the public for what is to come.

The editors of these papers are among the few invited regularly to dine with the PM at 10 Downing Street. When David Yelland, editor of the Sun, left the paper in March 2003, PM Blair, Chancellor Gordon Brown and the Home Secretary David Blunkett were present at the farewell party - which sends a clear message to the owner, Rupert Murdoch. The same three rang her in succession on the same day to establish good relations. Said Tim Burt of the Financial Times (18Jan 03): ‘The speedy reaction of the PM, Chancellor and Home Sec reflects how much the Labour Party has come to depend on the mass-market tabloid.’

At the Media Society awards in London's plush Savoy Hotel in early March 2003, a special award was presented to Paul Dacre, super-rich editor of the Daily Mail for 'liketime achievement'. Among the achievements: backing Margaret Thatcher & the Tories in the last 2 elections, attacking the welfare system, whipping up anti-refugee feeling, supporting the Countryside Alliance. Gordon Brown was not physically present but popped up on a giant video screen, heaping praise on the Mail's 'great campaigning' journalism and on the 'amazing' Dacre. Blunkett appeared in person to 'honour the Daily Mail' which he said 'provides the best in journalism'.