What to make of Mandy's spat?

Business secretary Peter Mandelson's remarks in response to Starbucks founder and CEO Howard Schultz's comments regarding the UK economy would, prima facie, seem a massively impolitic error from the progenitor of New Labour's spin culture.

But, from one perspective, Mandy's remarks would seem entirely understandable while also betraying the economic fears gripping the government.

Anyone who has read Naomi Klein's excellent book The Shock Doctrine will be fully aware that a key driver in the collapse of several Asian economies in 1997 were unsubstantiated rumours about the health of the economies of the region, leading to a market panic which saw the sudden outflow of so-called 'hot money' that had previously been poured into these countries.

Viewed in this light, Mandelson's and, latterly, Trade Minister Mervyn Davies' remarks, would seem to be a desperate attempt to reassure twitchy City traders that the UK is still relatively economically healthy (even if other reports suggest otherwise). Further, Mandelson must surely be aware that other US business commentators have recently been attacking the British economy, in moves which smack of little more than attempt to ensure Britain comes out of this crisis worse than the US, so that we can be pointed to as if to say "Well, it's bad here, but it could be worse; we could be the Limeys."

All this undignified war of words serves to underline is the sheer lunacy of entrusting national and global economic health to the 'invisible hand' of laissez- faire market capitalism; an invisible hand that seems attached to the body of a petulant highly-strung toddler who flies into a panic at imagined dangers.