Rescuing
Democracy in the United Kingdom from our current Elected
Dictatorship
|
Come
back Gilligan, all is forgiven. Penny Young, Diss, Norfolk,
to The Guardian, February 24, 2005
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
|
Tony
Blair's pledge cards made no mention of pensioners. Perhaps
they're the jokers.
Letter
to the Daily Mail from Brian Green, Daventry, Northants
- February 22, 2005
The
Guardian's Polly Toynbee says 'a profoundly nasty streak'
among voters worried about poverty, crime and immigration
might cause them to vote against the Government. Isn't
it time we replaced the present electorate with one more
to Polly's liking? Ephraim Hardcastle, Daily Mail,
February 24, 2005
|
Beholden
The BBC is once again disgracefully anti-
Biased,
& Tory, says this Labour supporter. So its
no
Cowering
wonder Alastair Campbell is smirking.
by
Stephen Pollard - Daily Mail, February 15, 2005
Until
yesterday, I had no idea that Liam Fox, Conservative Party co-chairman,
plans to slaughter thousands of babies over the next few months.
I was also unaware that David Milliband, the Cabinet Office Minister,
is a veritable living saint, whose every word should be treated
as the revealed truth.
That,
at least, seems to be the message from the two men's most recent
interviews on the BBC. Perhaps I exaggerate. But on Radio 4's
Today programme yesterday, Dr Fox was dismissed as if he were
a habitual liar who by dint of being a Coservative politician,
was peddling ideas which could only appeal to lunatics.
The
day before, on the station's The World This Weekend, Mr Milliband
was given kid-glove treatement and an opportunity to share his
great thoughts with the nation, free of critique. His assertions
that our schools are a triumph were - despite a litany of evidence
to the contrary - allowed to pass unquestioned by his interviewer,
James Cox.
He
could have asked about the recent OECD report which shows UK maths
standards among teenagers slumped in international ratings from
eigth to 18th place in the first three years of Labour's second
term. Or about the number of schools suffering from classroom
indiscipline, which has doubled since 2002/3.
Taken
on their own, such interviews mean little. The tragedy is that
it was not a one-off. Anyone who watches or listens to the BBC
has the organisation's bias thrust in front of them almost 24
hours a day. It is clear that the corporation has a distinct agenda
in its coverage of politics: anything emanating from the Conservatives
is treated as irrelevant or ludicrous: anything from Labour granted
abject obeisance.
I
hold no brief for the Tories. I have only ever voted Labour and
will do so again this time. But I am appalled by what we are witnessing:
the emasculation of the BBC by a(Labour) Government determined
to shape it to its own requirements. A BBC, furthermore, that
has a proud history of unbiased reporting and whose charter requires
it to be impartial.
Grovelling
Across
the world, its label has for decaders been viewed as a guarantee
of honsty and objectivity. Would that we could still say the same
today. Something has clearly affected the BBC - and that something
goes by the name of Alastair Campbell.
James
Naughtie's characteristically supine interciew with Ed
Balls on Radio 4's Today show included the Freud8ian slip
question: "If we win the election, does Gordon Brown
weant to remain Chancellor?"
WE?
Labour pussy cat Jim quickly corrected himself to
'if YOU win the election', but it was too late.
My
Naughtie monitoring hotline shrilled. Ephraim Hardcastle
- Daily Mail 3/3/05
|
He
is back on the warpath, revitalised by his months away from Downing
Street. Last week we learned that Mr Campbell, back on Labaour's
election campaign team, had fired off his first salvo to the BBC
since his return.
The
e-mail was a response to Newsnight's probing of his involvement
in the notorious 'flying pigs' poster advertisement which was
branded anti-semitic. It read: "F*** off and cover something
important, you t**ts". Mr Campbell said he sent it by mistake.
Be
that as it may, the message made clear that Mr Campbell's agenda
remains as ever it was, to cow the BBC into submission and to
make sure that it gives Labour an easy ride.
That
is his job. But what is reprehensible is that the BBC, far from
telling him where he an put his e-mails, is simply grovelling
before him. The corporation has never recovered from its roasting
by the Hutton inquiry last January, and the victory this handed
Mr Campbell over the David Kelly affair.
Briefly,
this was the official inquiry set up by Labour to look into allegations
made by BBc reporter Andrew Gilligan that Campbell had 'sexed
up' its dossier onweapons of mass destruction to strengthen the
case for war with Iraq.
The
Minister of Defence scientist David Kelly had committed suicide
six months earlier after being revealed as the source for the
allegation. Lord Hutton's report effectively - and in many people's
views outrageously - cleared Mr Campbell, while savaging the BBC
for irresponsible reporting. The corporation imploded, with its
chairman and director general resigning along with Gilligan.
Menacing
With
sinister and repeated threats ever since, using the licence fee
as its sword of Damocles, Labour has had the BBC dancing to its
tune. Shortly after the Hutton report, Culture Secretary Tessa
Jowell warned that the licence fee could be axed as a result of
its findings.
The
following summer, her department produced a survey which found
two-thirds of viewers thought the license fee should be scrapped.
Only last week, Peter Mandelson warned Radio 4's Today programme
to lay off Alastair Dampbell with a menacing allusion to the Hutton
inquiry: "I think we all know where that led before."
The ploy has worked.
The
BBC, deep in its psyche, is now cowed and timid, unwilling to
lay a glove on the Government. Take Labour's Spring Conference
this weekend.
Tony
Blair's speech on Sunday to the conference was nothing more than
a piece of election campaigning, and the conference itself no
more than a staged piece of political advertising. The whole affair
should - especially in the run-up to an eleectin - have been treated
with a judicious sceptical balance.
Yet
it was reported as if the event was as important as the second
coming, VE-Day and the Coronation all rolled into one. Wall to
wall coverage on radio and TV news, constant reports on the BBC's
News 24 TV channel, and for what?
For
a speech by Tony Blair (which followed one on Saturday by Gordon
Brown) designed to win support in the forthcoming General Election.
Where was the equivalent coverage of Michael Howard's campaigning
inthe same week, or Charles Kennedy's? Left on the cutting room
floor.
Not
that Mr Howard was ignored by the BBC this weekend. On Saturday
night, BBC2 broadcast a profile of the Leader of the Opposition,
titiled NO More Mr Nasty. Purporting to be a balanced portrait
whifdh would show the 'real man', it was an object lesson in the
now entrenched BBC bias against the Conservatives. The fil employed
as its main commentator on Mr Howard's political views one Lord
Dykes.
He
was billed as a Lib-Dem peer who was a Cambridge University contemporary
of the Conservative leader. We were given no context in which
to judge his comment that Mr Howard had always been unprincipled.
Sloppy
We
were meant to take it as objective analysis from a contemporary.
The film-makers did not consider it worthwhile to point out that
Mr Dykes had been a Conservative MP for 27 years and had defected
to the Lib-Dems after losing his seat.
And
as a fanatical Euro-federalist, he had long despised Mr Howard's
Euro-scepticism. BBC bias or sloppy journalism? Whichever, neither
should be permissable from a publicly funded, and supposedly objective
broadcaster.
The
situation is now grotesque. Within a matter of weeks we will be
in the middle of an election campaign. It is deeply undemocratic
when an organisation which many people still treat as their most
trusted source of news is so biased in its treatment of the two
main parties.
The
BBC thinks that by doffing its cap to Labour, it will protect
itself. How deluded. It is not Labour which the BBC should fear,
but the British people, the licence payers. We pay its salaries.
We have a right to demand objectivity.
And
before long we will.
|
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.
