The Spectator

Privatisation has been a hugely successful policy over the past 30 years. Unfortunately, though, the government seems to have learned the wrong lesson from it. The proposal to sell the Courts Service’s buildings, and transfer some of its staff to the private sector, promises to bring out the worst aspects of the policy: it gives a desperate government a chance to raise cash in a hurry, relieving the taxpayer of assets at a knockdown price. Meanwhile, it does nothing to replicate what has been good about privatisation: that it has opened up lazy state monopolies to competition. Claims that the measure will save the public purse £1 billion a year should be taken with a pinch of salt. Similar claims were made when the NHS handed over hospitals to private finance consortia.

With further reports today that Bashar Assad is deploying chemical weapons in Syria, the prospect of intervention looms larger than ever. The EU is talking about lifting its arms embargo (at Britain's insistence) and France's foreign minister talks about "stronger and better substantiated indications of the local use of chemical arms". Barack Obama has indicated that the use of chemical weapons would trigger American military action - but he'll be aware that intervention in Syria is deeply unpopular in America. He'd have not much to gain, and rather a lot to lose. But should the West go ahead anyway? On Monday 24 June, The Spectator will hold a debate at Savoy Place in London to discuss.