I mean, for gods sake, if the two sides involved spent more time clarifying the differences in their value judgments and less time scoring points in the media (or delivering “smack downs” as Dr Crampton eloquently describes it), then we might have a clearer idea of what the policy relevant issues are.But I would point out that BERL has stated that their report is not a policy relevant report! After all it is a cost report, not a benefit-cost report, which would be required for policy work. Which leaves us, again, with the question, What is the purpose of the report? Clarifying this issue would be a start in understand the policy issues.
Friday, 24 July 2009
BERL on Crampton-Burgess on BERL
Over at The Visible Hand in Economics, the invisible (or at least unknown) Hand writes on From the Hand: BERL on Crampton-Burgess on BERL. The basic point of the post: