Rescuing
Democracy in the United Kingdom from our current Elected
Dictatorship
|
Spin, not
face-to-face confrontations with the voters, is the Government's
chosen method of communication. Ordinary
people are dangerous. Ordinary people might ask a question
which throws a politician 'off message'; the Cabinet member
might reveal himself or herself to be a human being like
us, and not a programmed android. Worse still, he or she
might tell the truth.
Ann Leslie - Daily Mail, September
16, 2004
|
|
Letter from P.Cove, Aylesbury, BUCKS.-
Daily Mail, January 31, 2005
After a clear
vote against them, we still got eight non-elected Regional
Assemblies. When we vote against the EU Constitution,
we'll get them anyway.
|
Prescription
for disaster
You
should cut drinking hours, not extend them, doctors tell Blair
By
Steve Doughty, Social Affairs Correspondent, Daily Mail, January
27, 2005
The
medical profession accused Tony Blair of ignoring the truth about
24-hour drinking yesterday. Doctors
and surgeons also said Downing Street was hiding the facts about
alcohol abuse. A
conference called by the Royal College of Physicians was told
Labour's new licensing laws are a recipe for disaster and that
pub opening hours should be cut, not extended.
Dr
Michael Hellier, an expert on stomach and liver disease, said
the Government was playing down the dangers in the run-up to a
General Election. "I feel Mr Blair is either misinformed
or has failed to grasp the gravity of the problem," Dr Hellier
told the conference.
His
attack came a day after senior Labour MPs, including former Health
Secretary Frank Dobson, criticised the licensing shake-up in the
Commons. The Daily Mail's campaign against 24-hour drinking has
thrown Ministers into disarray over the past fortnight. Police
chiefs, health experts and local authorities who must supervise
the new rules have all voiced deep concerns.
Yesterday
Dr Hellier, president of the British Society of Gastroenterology,
said the aim of the medical profession was to 'maintain pressure
on the Government and hammer home crucial messages on alcohol
and health'. He told the Royal College's conference in London
that health experts had bombarded Downing Street with evidence
but were disappointed with the result.
"The
Government's policy is strong on crime but weak on health,"
he said. "Is that surprising for a Government that is approaching
a General Election?"
Professor
Chris Day, a liver specialist at Newcastle University, said he
believed information on dangers of alcohol was being concealed
from drinkers. "Government's strategy is all about collecting
evidence and piloting things," he said. "But the evidence
has already been presented to them." He said an interim document
published by Downing Street in 2003 had listed most sources of
evidence. But when the Government published its final 'harm reduction'
policy last year, it had disappeared.
"Something
happened in between those two papers," he claimed.
Professor
Sir Michael Marmot, of University College London, launched a savage
attack on the Prime Minister's belief that drink is a problem
only among a small minority.
He
also delivered a stinging rebuke to Andrew Cunningham, the Department
of Culture civil servant who called opponents of extended drinking
hours 'nanny-staters'. He told the conference: "Some say
only a minority are affected by alcohol abuse." But he pointed
out: "It is only 28% of girls of 16 who have been drunk three
times in the last 30 days. This is obviously a major issue."
Sir
Michael added: "What would we predict would be the effect
of prolonging opening hours? The evidence we have reviewed suggests
that in general making alcohol more available is likely to increase
consumption. Making alcohol cheaper and more easily available
are not steps I would take if I were going to tackle binge drinking."
He
added: "The idea that we will all be sitting under Cinzano
umbrellas sipping wine in Italian fashion at two in the morning
seems to me to be fanciful." He said drink prices should
go up and availability should be limited. "You don't need
to be a brain dead knee-jerk individual to say 'nanny-state',
although some people who say it are brain dead."
Professor
Ian Gilmore, head of the Royal College's alcohol committee, said:
"It is not just that 24-hour drinking is coming in. It is
the switch of licensing control from magistrates to local councils.
"That will mean that if some one wants a a license, by and
large they can have it. Availability is a major issue."
For
the health of our democracy, we, the people of the United Kingdom,
must find a way to force Mr Blair to resign
Such
defiance of the democratic process and the will of the majority
of we people of the UK, must be exposed by voters as a matter
or urgency, and not just in the two by-elections we have had this
July and the European elections in June 2004. But how can this
be done?
The
most effective way of getting our deceitful PM to resign would
be to mobilise the army of Labour MPs currently in the House of
Commons and get them to demand it, the loss of their seat to be
a penalty if they did not. All voters in Labour-held constituencies
need to write a letter along these lines to their local Labour
MPs:
|
Dear
Despite
his absolute and unequivocal assurances over the past year
of the serious risk to our security of Saddam Hussein's
'weapons of mass destruction', Prime Minister Blair
has admitted, that the threat was non-existent. For that
critical error of judgement and for his gross incompetence
in handling this very important issue, I ask you to take
immediate steps to ensure that Tony Blair does the honourable
thing and resign without delay..
I
would therefore be much obliged if you would propose and
help mobilise a Parliamentary vote of 'No Confidence' in
Mr Blair which, despite Labour's huge majority, would leave
the PM with no option but to resign.
If
I get no reply to this letter, I shall assume you will continue
to support Mr Blair as our Prime Minister. In such circumstances
I shall not vote for you in the forthcoming General Election.
Signed:
|
Simple,
non-violent, protest letters along these lines on a variety of
issues could be the basis for re-vitalising our democracy and
increasing voters' interest and participation in politics. Download
a printable copy of the above letter here.
There
is another way for the voice of the silent majority to be heard,
a voice that made sure broken promises would not only be revealed,
but punished in subsequent elections.
In
the year available before the General Election expected in 2005,
many topics are available as ammunition, each one asking questions.
A weapon for our purpose will be the results of Opinion Polls
in individual constituencies using ICM, NOP, Gallop, Mori
or YouGov.
Questions
suggested for this purpose are listed here.
CAST
YOUR VOTE ON A VARIETY OF OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES HERE.
Current
and prospective Parliamentary candidates of all Parties running
for election could share a platform at public forums in every
constituency. They would be presented with the results of
polls on this issue expressed by the majority of voters in that
constituency.
The candidates could be asked if their own views and that of their
Party manifesto corresponded with the polls, and if not, how they
intended to represent the will of the majority of local voters.
Local and National Press, Radio and TV coverage would be arranged
and the results published on this web site.
Here
is another powerful strategy for using your vote effectively in
the forthcoming General Election. Send your sitting and prospective
MPs a letter defining your requirements if they want your vote.
This example deals with the proposed
EU Constitutional Treaty.
Your
letters would end: "If you do not answer
this letter, I shall take it that you intend to follow the Government
line. I shall act accordingly in the forthcoming General Election.
Or
why not create a questionnaire that you send to all the candidates
in your constituency, getting them to give yes/no answers to questions
of your choice, and ending it with the same paragraph(above).
Download
a printable example of the questionnaire.
It
is high time for the people of this United Kingdom to stop allowing
themselves to be manipulated by politicians. We need our representatives
in Parliament to genuinely reflect the view of the majority in
their own constituency, even if this means going against their
personal and/or their party's policy. While they may argue their
case, hoping to change the minds of the majority in their constituency,
they should ultimately be obliged to reflect the majority view
of those who elect them.
It
will be argued by politicians of all parties that most voters
don't have the knowledge necessary to express an opinion on important
subjects at issue, and that our vote is a form of delegated democracy.
We should argue that it is their duty to ensure that we voters
do have ready access to such information as is necessary to form
an intelligent opinion. That, after all, is one main purpose of
Opposition Parties in our Parliamentary Democracy.
Most
important of all, such proceedings would rekindle in voters their
latent interest and obligation to cast their vote, knowing that
the candidate of their choice would be more likely to act in accordance
with their wishes. A much higher turnout in elections would be
the result.
Contact
your local Party Chairman. Gain his support for setting up public
forums in your constituency on these, as well as any other relevant
topics, well before the next General Election expected in 2005.
You should then, depending on the integrity of the candidate of
your choice, feel fairly certain that your view on any subject
being debated in Parliament will more accurately be reflected
by your representative in that assembly.
