Last week was Homeless Persons Week. It also seemed to be the week of regulation.
The Prime Minister demanded the states regulate the price of electricity, News Limited continued its campaign against further regulation of newspapers, and fresh evidence of systematic rorting by British banks sparked calls for further financial regulation.
Regulation is always a controversial issue because it brings into play two values that stand in tension with one another: individual freedom and solidarity. Opponents and proponents of regulation usually ignore the claims of the value that presses against their case.
The argument against regulation is that it always infringes on personal freedom — in this case the freedom to say and write what you think, to engage in profitable transactions, and to run a sustainably profitable business. These freedoms are important both for personal flourishing and for a prosperous society.
It is common ground that personal freedom may need to be limited when it infringes on other people's freedom. For example, my freedom to stand in order to get a better view of the football may be curtailed if, by standing, I will prevent the person sitting behind me from getting any view at all.
But regulation can be justified on broader grounds than the need to resolve conflict involved in the exercise of individual freedoms. We depend on others for our capacity to exercise our freedom, and society works in human ways only if we attend to the good of the whole society, including its weakest members. The state is responsible for regulating society in a way that ensures that personal freedom is enhanced in serving the common good.
In a word, personal freedom needs to take account of solidarity.
The hacking and other media scandals in the United Kingdom showed how by exercising freedom of speech in the interests of making profits, newspapers could destroy people's reputation and lives. The claims of solidarity would argue that regulation is needed to protect the weak against the power of large corporations.
Similarly the unrestricted freedom of electricity companies, particularly of state monopolies, to increase the cost of a service so vital for daily living, could cause great harm to the weakest in society who could not afford to pay their bills. Again solidarity makes an argument for regulation.
Arguments for financial deregulation usually place great weight on the right of individuals to exercise their freedom to trade. They emphasise the benefit conferred