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
|
'I
won't rest until Blair is punished,' says Reg Keys
Labour's majority slashed, Howard to quit
and Blair is back in Downing Street for a historic third term
...
But
how long can he go on, this lame-duck Premier?
By
David Hughes - Political Editor, Daily Mail, May 7, 2005
Tony
Blair is facing a lingering political death after his heavy general
election losses.
The
scale of the Prime Minister's rejection by voters will leave him
struggling in the Commons to deliver his manifesto pledges. Labour
insiders predicted last night that he will stand down next year
and hand power to Gordon Brown.
The
Premier was looking increasingly like a lame duck leader as he
sought to freshen his Cabinet with a reshuffle that saw Ruth Kelly
facing demotion from education after a disastrous five months
and a return for David Bunkett. Before the election, Mr Blair
has insisted he would serve virtually a full term. No one at Westminster
now believes he can last anywhere near that long.
former
foreign secretary Robin Cook spoke for many when he said the prime
Minister could not 'keep the party of the nation in the dark about
when exactly he might go'.
Leadership
will also be an issue for the Tories, after Michael Howard's surprise
announcement that he would resign 'sooner rather than later'.
In a dignified concession speech, he said he would stay at the
helm only until the party puts in place new leadership rules that
will once again give MPs a strong say in the final choice.
Mr
Howard said he would be 67 or 68 at the next election - 'simply
too old' to fight as leader - and he wanted to give his successor
as long as possible to prepare. The decision, which dismayed many
top Tories, opens the way to months of infighting by a large field
of leadership contenders which could blunt the impact of Thursday's
Tory gains. Some critical insiders said Mr Howard had 'taken the
heat off' Mr Blair.
The
Premier looked shell-shocked yesterday as he counted the cost
of Labour's heavy losses. A dramatic voter backlash over Iraq
and the Premier's personal trustworthiness saw labour returned
with the lowest share of the vote of any government in British
history - just 36%. Its Commons majority was slashed by almost
100 to a predicted 66 ( 67 at the final
count)
With
turnout on 61%, it meant barely one in five of the electorate
backed Labour. In what was branded a 'travesty of democracy',
the Tories won 50,000 more votes in England yet ended up with
92 fewer seats. The Electoral Reform Society said Tories had 8,086,306
votes to Labour's 8,028,242 but just 193 MPs against 285. The
LibDem share of the vote jumped from 18% to 23% yet they gained
only 9 extra seats.
As
the scale of the Labour collapse emerged, campaign 'mastermind'
Alan Milburn announced he was once again leaving the political
front line to spend more time with his family - bringing his ministerial
career to a close. Mr Blair now faces a massive headache as he
embarks on his historic third administration.
With
a 60-strong 'awkward squad' of Left-wingers holding a pivotal
position in the new Parliament, he knows his plans for radical
reform of the public services are doomed. So are controversial
plans to introduce ID cards or impose tougher anti-terrorism laws.
The Prime Minister will be increasingly beholden to Gordon Brown,
whose campaigning with him is thought to have saved labour from
even bigger losses.
Mr
Blair looked sombre as he returned to Downing Street after a formal
meeting with the Queen, an official requirement before forming
a new administration. He promised he had 'listened' and 'learned'
from the electorate and said he understood the Iraq war had been
a 'divisive' issue for the country. But he insisted people now
wanted to 'move on'.
Mr
Blair highlighted one particular issue which he said had concerned
voters - a 'disrespect' prevalent in society from schoolchildren
in classrooms to revellers in town centres on a Friday night.
Critics said it was another meaningless soundbite, hardly a 'big
idea' to galvanise a restive party. They pointed out that the
Prime Minister himself had showed little respect for the dignity
of his office only this week, swopping smutty banter over his
'five-times-a-night' sex life in an interview with a tabloid newspaper.
The
Cabinet reshuffle was expected to leave the 'big beasts' - Gordon
Brown, Jack Straw and Charles Clarke - where they were. But Miss
Kelly, who has incurred the fury of parents and teachers, was
tipped for a move to chief secretary to the Treasury - though
she was said to be resisting. John Reid was expected to move from
health to succeed Geoff Hoon at Defence.
Former
schools minister David Miliband was on the way into the Cabinet,
as was Douglas Alexander, an ally of the Chancellor. Number 10
backroom boy Andrew Adonis was being lined up for a peerage and
the job of schools minister, though the idea was raising hackles
across Whitehall.
Mr
Howard took all but his closes aides by surprise with his intention
to quit. With his wife, Sandra, beside him, he said he had warned
during the campaign that if any of his team did not deliver, they
would have to go - and he was holding himself to the same rules.
"For
me, delivering meant winning the election," he said. "I
didn't do that, despite my best efforts and I want to do now what
is best for my party and, above all, for my country."
|
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.
