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, February 17, 2005
|
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
Back
to the future
'Forward
not Back' is quite wrong: we must go back - back to clean
hospitals with more medical staff and fewer managers;
back to education with proven standards.
Back
to police on the street and solving crime; back to increased
employment in industry, back to ministers who stand up
for this country and back to democratic government. Then,
perhaps, we can move forward. Letter from S, M. Butler,
Shoreham-by-Sea, Sussex - Daily Mail, March 23, 2005
Virtues
of a secret ballot
Sir
- Concerning postal votes (report Mar 23) what is the
first principle of a democratic political vote? Answer:
THE SECRET BALLOT.
It
is obvious that a postal ballot is only as secret as the
moral strength of the voter. With the infinite propaganda
powers of today's electronic media, it is frighteningly
easy for devious politicians to promote politically correct
or "cool" or, most wickedly, "honest and
transparent" voting patterns, where someone failing
to vote "with his/her group" must "have
something to hide".
Postal
voting should, at best, be allowable only to persons who
are required to be stationed away from their constituency
on government business. A few temporary disfranchisements
may result, but nothing is perfect.
Letter from J. B. Lewis, Bognor Regis, West Sussex - The
Daily Telegraph, March 25, 2005
SIR
- Why on earth are people still insisting on voting for
the Labour Party this May 2005. It has lied and cheated
the public again and again during the Iraq war, immigration,
violent crime and hospital waiting list figures. It has
introduced stealth taxes and even been caught rigging
the postal voting system. To the Editor, Daily Telegraph,
from Philip Priestley, High Wycombe, Bucks. April 19,
2005
|
Blair's
costly legacy
Tony
Blair has lost his credibility. He was remined in the
terrorism debate, when using the police as a prop, that
he had said the same about weapons of mass destruction
in Iraq, using the intelligence service as an authoritative
witness. He is setting himself up as a martyr and defender
of Britain, but has conveniently forgotten that it was
his deception in leading us into war with Iraq that has
made us a target for terrorism.
Bair's
premiership has done nothing for our Parliamentary democracy
and has cost untold innocent people's lives. This will
be his legacy. Letter from Douglas Wathen, Salford
Priors, Worcs.- Daily Mail, November 14, 2005
|
Blair
told a year ago how Iraq war fuelled fanaticism in Britain
BLAIR
- King of Duplicity
Blair:
Stomach-turning liar
No,
that's not the view of the Mail, but of a defecting Labour MP.
Rarely has a political defector packed a more lethal punch. Brian
Sedgemore rocked Labour's election campaign with his decision
to quit in disgust the party he's belonged to for 37 years and
join the Liberal Democrats. Writing with barely-suppressed fury
in yesterday's Independent, he forensically exposed the lies and
the manipulation, the ruthlessness and the sheer lack of principle
of Tony Blair and the Government he leads. This is what he wrote:
Shameless
Blair's lust for power
The
idea and practice of Britain as a liberal country has always been
under threat but it has taken a Labour Prime Minister to secure
its demise. For Tony Blair, principles and ideas have become impediments
to the continuance of his lust for power.
Blair
cannot ignore our outrage over Iraq
From
Fiona MacDonald Turner - Warninglid, W. Sussex to the
Daily Mail, May 11, 2005
Tony
Blair's speech after the election appeared contrite. His
admission that he had lacked experience was impressive.
But it turned my blood cold when our Prime Minister said
that in the case of Iraq, it was time to 'move on'.
Can
any phrae so callously and insidiously wipe the slate
clean? 'Moving on' is now part of the lexicon of British
life and I think it's dangerous.
Blair's
contrite speech reminded us that if you want to stand
up against the status quo in this country, you won'tk
be merely disagreed with - a welcome and natural part
of democratic life - you'll be made to fell you're speaking
from some weird place called 'The Past', not the right-on
Labour concoction known as 'The Future'. You haven't 'mlved
on'.
How
can any society that seeks to challenge its Prime Minister
on the legality of a war that killed thousands, sit there
while its leader sweeps it aside, telling it, in that
grubby little phrase, to 'move on'. A large secgion of
British society has embraced the vaacuity oif the words
'moving on' without examining the destructive power of
the message.
Our
lives, in private and public, are littered with examples
of people casually rationalising a my8riad selfish and
destructive actions with the nauseating observation: "Yeah,
it was wrong, but it's time to move on ... "
'Moving
on' is a linguistic short-cut to a guilt-free zone. Guilt
is regarded like cellulite or yellowing teeth, inherently
bad and in need of banishment.
But
guilt has a vital function because it reminds us all that
our actions may be wrong. How does Labour plan to enforce
anti-social behaviour laws and discipline in schools if
the prevailing message is 'I don't want to look at my
guilt. Let's move on'.
This
Government's obsession with ditching the past and pursuing
the future is creating a sordid ideology of relative moralities.
So let's all stop using the horrible little phrase 'moving
on'. Our actions, good and bad, aren't erased by it. In
domestic trivialities, it's cheap. In war, it's obscene.
|
His
scorn for liberal Britain is surprising for one with an expensive
liberal education and who entered politics as an aspirant liberal
lawyer, an ardent member of CND and a standard-bearer for the
Left.
The
problem with Tony Blair is that he tells big porkies as easily
as he tells little porkies, whether it is watching Jackie Milburn
play football or being certain of the existence of weapons of
mass destruction in Iraq.
He
drags in the hapless Attorney General to back him on the legality
of the war. Lord Goldsmith says he was not leant on. The Attorney
General can protest his innocence until the end of time, people
won't believe him, and neither do I.
Blair
is shameless. He used to act at school and he uses that talent
now; every time he speaks, for example, at the death of Diana,
Princess of Wales, you can hear someone saying: 'Cue broken voice,
quivering lips, dropped shoulder, tear in left eye.'
Blair
used to be a constituent of mine and run around saying, 'We have
got to get Tony Benn elected'. He stood for secretary for the
local party. He got old ladies in the cars to vote for him, and
he lost. It was only later when he used Mandelson that he began
to learn the organisational skills he used to take over the party
and surrounded himself with second-raters or cronies.
Enough
is enough
People
such as myself should have realised the writing was on the wall
when a Labour government twice tried to abolish trial by jury.
From there, it was a short step for Blair (but a huge step for
the rest of us) to get suppliant backbench Labour MPs to vote
for an unlawful war, the setting up of a gulag at Belmarsh for
foreigners and deprivation of liberty through 'control orders'
and 'pass laws' for British citizens.
I
voted against the war in Iraq and it becomes clearer every day
that Blair decided to go to war after meeting Bush on his Texas
ranch in 2002. after that he lied to persuade the country to support
him.
The
stomach-churning lies on Iraq were followed by the attempt to
use politics of fear to drive through Parliament a deeply authoritarian
set of law and order measures that reminded me of the Star Chamber.
The Star Chamber used torture but at least allowed a proper trial
before throwing someone into prison. That's when I decided enough
was enough. I've been a Labour MP for more than a quarter of a
century. In my last speech in Parliament, I described new Labour's
descent into Hell and added that Hell was not a place where I
wanted to be.
Some
MPs thought it was just rhetoric. It wasn't. I meant it.
150
Labour MPs loathe him
I'm
renouncing Tony Blair, the Devil, New Labour and all their works.
I don't do this lightly. I know that some of my friends will be
angry and I will be rubbished by the new Labour spin machine.
Mad Dog Reid will be set on me. John Prescott will say, 'Brian?
Brian who?'
But
I can let them into a secret. I am not alone. A small group of
us - all MPs who are standing down - decided we would leave the
Labour Party immediately after the election. Among MPs, there
are 150 who loathe Mr Blair, 50 more who have grave doubts about
him and a further 200 who love him. They are sometimes called
the Clones or the Stepford Wives.
For
some of us, it's not just about the war, it's about top-up fees
and privatising the health service. We were going to issue a joint
statement. That would have been the easiest thing for me to do
but I believe I owe it to the voters to speak out now.
Tony
Blair's lies over the war on Iraq, and his careless destruction
of liberty have left me disgusted with the party I joined in 1968.
The
public are nauseated
The
public are clearly nauseated by what they see at Westminster and
the number of abstentions will be colossal in the election, but
nobody should blame the electorate for that. The public are surely
right to hold modern politics and politicians in ill-repute. They've
realised that Jonathan Swift was close to the truth when he said
that 'all politicians ultimately die of swallowing their own lies'.
Those
who listen to the Today programme know that most modern politicians
would rather plead the fifth amendment than directly answer even
the simplest of questions. And why should people vote when they
see increasing evidence of fraud in the postal ballot system created
by the Government which, said a judge, was a 'disgrace to a banana
republic'.
Charlie
Clarke? Useless
Blair
showed his contempt for the law by appointing an unholy trinity
of Home Secretaries who have been deeply flawed. Jack Straw was
simply not up to the job. David Blunkett saw himself a sort of
deified demigod, issuing new commandments on a daily basis for
the six o'clock news.
And
then there's poor Charlie Clarke, a bit of a chump preaching the
politics of fear who was dealt a cruel hand by Blunkett over the
Terrorism Act. He is keeping very quiet during this election campaign
for some reason. Charles was the housing chairman in Hackney when
I was the MP and to describe him as bloody useless would be to
heap high praise on him.
Prezza
deal with the devil
John
Prescott - the defender of the left - has done a Faustian deal
the the Devil for the price of a cup of tea and a pat on the back
from Tony. Some say I should have stayed for things to change
under Gordon Brown.
The
'Iron Chancellor' has a massive intellect but no backbone. He
stayed carefully away from difficult issues, the nature of parliamentary
democracy, the illegal war, the denial of trial by jury, Belmarsh,
the control orders and pass laws.
Give
Blair a bloody nose
It
is against this background that I finally decided I could no longer
support the Labour Government and would join the Liberal Democrats
to work for a nobler vision of Britain. Look at Blair standing
in the shadow of Gordon Brown and you can see the power ebbing
away from him. He is now an empty husk who should be thrown on
the scrapheap of history.
Norman
Lamont delivered the coup de grace to John Major with the words:
"He is in office, but not in power'. Tony Blair is in power
but is pursuing it without a shred of principle. Is it any wonder
I urge everyone from the centre and left in British politics to
vote Liberal Democrat to ensure the tawdry New Labour project
is dead?
|
Tactical
Voting
As
UKIP member for several years, I believe the greatest
threat facing the British is the potential loss of our
independence to govern ourselves. Once Brussels gains
complete control, everything else we are voting for in
the coming election is academic. The real decisions will
be made in Brussels by people we can't vote out.
Much
as I support UKIP's aims, I now believe the single most
important goal for British voters is to remove Blair and
his rotten Government before they complete the process
of removing our sovereignty. Only a vote for Michael Howard
will do this - Letter to the Daily Mail from Tony Beverley,
London SW10 - April 7, 2005
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
SIR
- Why on earth are people still insisting on voting for
the Labour Party this May 2005. It has lied and cheated
the public again and again during the Iraq war, immigration,
violent crime and hospital waiting list figures. It has
introduced stealth taxes and even been caught rigging
the postal voting system. To the Editor, Daily Telegraph,
from Philip Priestley, High Wycombe, Bucks. April 19,
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.
