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
Power
cut, please
Labour's
pollsters have Tony Blair running scared, because they have
informed him that if turnout at the next election is below
50%, the result will be a hung parliament. This would be
good news for those of us who, viewing the damage inflicted
by recent governments, would like nothing better than a
Parliament powerless to do anything. Letter from Ron
Phillips, London W14 - Daily Mail 17/2/05
|
|
"More
people are dying each year from infections they pick up
in dirty hospitals than the number who die on our roads.
..... During the first parliament we will increase the amount
spent on the NHS by £34 billion - from £1,450/
head to £2,000 / head. This will be investment for
reform, not the failed 'spend and waste' approach of the
last eight years", writes Michael Howard in the Conservative
Manifesto on Health. Download
the whole manifesto here.
|
1,000
under-age abortions. 1,000 damaged lives. And 1,000 reasons why
Labour should be ashamed
The
Melanie Phillips Column - Daily Mail, February 21, 2005
The
full extent of the disaster caused by Government's teenage pregnancy
strategy is only now becoming apparent. Figures released under
the Freedom of Information Act have revealed that more than 1,000
girls aged 14 had abortions last year.
In
addition, 148 abortions were performed on girls aged between 11
and 13. About 3,500 girls aged under 16 have pregnancies terminated
every year. And among the youngest age group, the number of abortions
jumped last year by 9%.
Small
wonder that, until a week ago, the Government was refusing to
disclose these statistics on the spurious grounds that they were
so small that disclosure risked identifying individual cases.
Now we see the real reason - these horrifying figures expose the
utter bankruptcy of government policy.
Not
only did Britain's abortion rate reach a record level in 2003,
but also the highest increase occurred among teenagers, the most
vulnerable of all. The toll of damaged lives and compromised emotional
and physical health among young people is hard to overestimate.
Yet
those who are responsible still don't get it. The chief executive
of the Pregnancy Advisory Service, Ann Furedi, has said that 'pregnant
teenage girls face a real problem and abortion can be the solution.
Tragedy
But
abortion is not a 'solution' for teenage pregnancy. It is an admission
f failure. For a child to conceive and bear a child is a tragedy.
For a child to conceive and then have her child destroyed is no
less of a tragedy.
The
essence of the problem is not girls being trapped in early motherhood,
grave though that it. It is that teenage girls - including a shocking
number under the age of legal consent - are becoming pregnant
in the first place.
What
this reveals once again is the utter failure of the Government's
strategy which aimed to halve pregnancies among 15 to 17-year-olds
in England by 2010. Right from the start, it was clear that this
policy was fundamentally flawed.
Behaviour
is influenced above all by signals and incentives that society
provides. The most powerful signal is the law, which through the
age of consent was designed to protect under-age girls. Yet instead
of enforcing this law,the government chose to send a different
message - that there was nothing wrong with under-age or teenage
sex as long as suitable precautions were taken.
Sex
education thus became a synonym for sex promotion. Children were
given advice more appropriate for sexually promiscuous adults.
Worst of all, parental responsibility was undermined by children
being offered abortions without their parents even knowing, let
alone giving their consent. The result has been as appalling as
it has been inevitable; an inexorable rise not just in the rate
of teenage pregnancy but also abortions and sexually transmitted
diseases among the very young.
This
has been nothing less than a complete abdication of responsibility
by the adult world, which has taken the view that children and
teenagers are quasi-adults able to make responsible choices about
behaviour. All they need, according to this thinking, is information
to enable them to select from a menu of lifestyle choices.
But
children and teenagers are not adults. They are immature, and
the choices they make can therefore be catastrophic. What they
actually need are firm boundaries that tell them certain behaviour
is wrong, and that it inevitably carries unpleasant consequences
for them.
But
instead, when it comes to alcohol, drugs and sex, the adult world
has ripped up those boundaries and effectively told children to
go ahead and indulge, provided they are careful - and then expresses
mortification when they are not.
Some
influential people actively want to promote a breakdown in conventional
norms of behaviour. Others in official circles believe, wrongly,
that government is helpless to resist the great cultural movement
towards a behavioural free-for-all.
Fiasco
Until
very recently, Conservative politicians - many of whom certainly
share this latter view - were additionally paralysed by terror
of any repetition of the 'back-to-bas0cs' fiasco under John Major's
government, in which expressed determination to halt social damage
being done by the rise of fatherless families imploded in ridicule
over the irregular private lives of Tory ministers.
The
trauma inflicted upon the party was so great, and its resulting
resolve to avoid the charge of hypocrisy so absolute, that until
last week Tory politicians refused to dip so much as a toe into
the moral agenda. In
addition, a number of Tory MPs believe that the only way back
to power lies in going along with changing social mores on drugs
and sexual behaviour.
As
a result, the Conservative Party simply abandoned the moral battlefield.
In doing so, it effectivey disenfranchised millions of decent
people who are aghast at the increasingly self-destructive behaviour
among the young and its promotion by government agencies.
Embattled
parents in particular watch in horror as their authority is undermined,
leaving them powerless to insulate their children against the
lure of alcohol, drugs and premature sexual activity, and desperate
for someone to speak up for them.
The
infuriating thing is that if political leadership adopts a 'zero
tolerance' approach to social disorder, it CAN stop this kind
of cultural slide. Experience in America has shown that shrewdly
presented messages promoting sexual abstinence have helped defy
cultural gravity and brought down the rate of teenage pregnancy.
Now,
at long last, Michael Howard appears to have realised this. Last
week, the Conservatives added a moral dimension to their health
strategy by declaring that 'responsible behaviour' was the cornerstone
of good health and pledged to help young people avoid the pitfalls
of permissiveness.
Distress
Their
sexual health strategy, they said, would target young people with
a clear message of the risks of early or unprotected sex, and
would help them resist peer pressure to engage in irresponsible
sex, drug abuse or binge-drinking.
Of
course, much depends on what this would mean in practice. And
there is still a long way to go before the Tories fully re-engage
with the moral crisis that lies under so many of our social ills.
Nevertheless,
it is a courageous stab at the doctrine of non-judgementalism,
which has such a stranglehold over intellectual and political
life and has resulted in so many thousands of young casualties
to binge-drinking, drug-taking and sexual promiscuity.
And
politically, it is a shrewd way back into this crucial but treacherous
territory. For however irregular the behaviour of adults may be,
the one thing that unites them is concern for their children's
welfare. The growing disorder and distress among children touches
a powerful general nerve. Indeed, Tony Blair's own rise to power
was fuelled in no small measure by his adroit manipulation of
this more neuralgic issue.
But
as binge-drinking rises, drug abuse soars and under-age abortions
hit record levels, Mr Blair's most cherished ambition to transform
society for the better lies in ruins. This is an area where he
is intensely vulnerable.
If
Mr Howard holds his nerve and makes more of this moral collapse
under this most moralising of politicians, he could find that
territory shunned by Tories as a minefield is actually paved with
gold.
|
Perhaps
Ann Widdecombe was right about Michael Howard, but it
should have been KNIGHT with a K, and he could have saved
us from the monsters Blair and Campbell - Letter to
the Dail Mayil from Les Fletcher, Rhos-on-Sea, Colwyn
Bay, Wales - February 18, 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. Letter from P.Cove, Aylesbury,
BUCKS.- Daily Mail, January 31, 2005
THE
TIMES slavish support for the Government worries some
members of the paper's staff, not to mention any perspicacious
readers who are left. Political editor Philip Webster
was questioned about this when he addressed colleagues
as part of an in-house 'masterclass' exercise. Small wonder.
One of his Blair-worshipping subordinates wrote a news
story yesterday poo-pooing the row over Labours anti-semitic
poster mocking Michael Howard, saying it was merely £5million
worth of 'free publicity' for the party. Ephraim Hardcastle
- Daily Mail, Febrauary 2, 2005
Hold
the front page
Further
to BBC bias (Mail), very often on BBC Breakfast and Breakfast
With Frost, coverage of the morning papers is censored.
If the front page of the Daily Mail is critical of Tony
Blair and his Soviet-style Government, it is not shown,
although the front pages of all the other newspapers are
shown. A supposedly independent broadcasting body is acting
as censor for this Government - an absolute disgrace.
Letter from Peter Fish, Chippenham, Wilts. .- Daily Mail,
February 17, 2005
|
The
REAL NASTY PARTY- How
Labour is the true home of spite, bigotry and contempt for the
public
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.
