I came across the following nuggets of information recently:
Why is it, then, that France finds it so difficult to go down the same path? A small but significant part of the answer, I feel, is that the French instinctively believe that, regardless of the measures taken by the government, the country as a whole is going to be worse off in the years to come. They are almost certainly right. The country has got itself into such a mess over the past 30 years as a result of inaction by successive governments that things can only get worse before (if ever) they get better. Difficult to run for election on a platform guaranteeing misery, but less misery than the alternatives!
- “The French labour code has 3,650 pages and 200 pages are added every year. “The Swiss labour code has 70 pages and I do not think Switzerland is a less efficient economy or labour market.”
"Sweden has gone further than any other European country in embracing the purchaser-provider split--that is, in using government money to buy public services from whichever providers, public or private, offer the best combination of price and quality. Private firms provide 20% of public hospital care in Sweden and 30% of public primary care. Both the public and private sectors are obsessed with lean management; they realise that a high-cost country such as Sweden must make the best use of its resources."
Neither Switzerland nor Sweden is considered to be a bastion of excessive capitalism, yet neither of them finds it difficult to introduce private companies into the public sector. (I think I am right in saying that the only public service allowed to run at a loss in Switzerland is Swiss Rail.)Why is it, then, that France finds it so difficult to go down the same path? A small but significant part of the answer, I feel, is that the French instinctively believe that, regardless of the measures taken by the government, the country as a whole is going to be worse off in the years to come. They are almost certainly right. The country has got itself into such a mess over the past 30 years as a result of inaction by successive governments that things can only get worse before (if ever) they get better. Difficult to run for election on a platform guaranteeing misery, but less misery than the alternatives!
But that is precisely what Ed Milliband is attempting to say in his pre-election electioneering. I will be very interested to see if we are now, as a country, prepared to face up to hard truths. And work out which party might manage to be less cruel to the poor while lining the cabin trunks of the rich.
ReplyDeleteThe answer seems quite clear to me, while escaping many others. And - was it such a bad thing to bail out the banks from their gross folly, even if this meant the country would have to pay very heavily for the forseeable future?
More and more I find myself thinking that a hearty dose of tatt-a-tatt-tatt aimed well would make me, at least, very happy.
We keep coming back to the same problem, i.e. how can a government - ANY government - introduce the necessary reforms if it has not previously run on a platform spelling out at least part of what it intends to do if returned to power? Would we, the electorate, vote for such a government?
DeleteVery interesting article in one of todays newspapers - may even be the Evening Standard - Barnaby. The gist is that because of the negative attitude of France to the English language hardly any of its universities teach in English. This apparently means that students from countries like Brazil where English is apparently common attend university in places like Sweden and I think Germany where English is commonly used in higher education. The students tend to grow very attracted to the country of their higher education and return home friends of say Sweden in a way they would not normally be.
ReplyDeleteFrance the author says has a decreasing number of foreign students at its universities so loses out.
The suggestion is that if the French were brave enough to have more English at its universities the number of foreign students would increase. They would grow to love France and the French more and would then learn French out of choice thus increasing the overall use of the langauge and the love of France.
Takes courage though and maybe not to the current government's taste.
Very interesting, Jerry. I think that in most of the élite institutions of higher education in France many courses have long been taught in English. The same holds true for numerous large companies where English is compulsory in meetings, etc. But at lower levels the situation is as you describe it, and here the French are very ambivalent.
DeleteIf it's any consolation to the French, there are many people who believe that the prevalence of English as THE international language may turn out to be a poisoned chalice. The language will become so debased over time, so the argument runs, that it will end up by disappearing altogether. Meanwhile the protected French language will continue to exist!