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
|
So
do it , Sedgefield. Do it for Tom Keys (by voting for his father
Reg). Do it for David Kelly. Do it, as the man said, for a government
that will restore trust in politics in this country.
Liar
taunts haunt Blair
PM
blusters over the crucial question: Can he be trusted?
By
David Hughes, Political Editor, Daily Mail, April 26, 2005
A
blustering Tony Blair pleaded yesterday for an end to attacks
on his character and integrity. But as his personal trustworthiness
became the key issue of the election campaign, his words fell
on deaf ears.
The
Tories repeated their claims that he lied over the legality of
the Iraq invasion. And opponents recalled the words of Mr Blair's
own Chancellor, when Gordon Brown reportedly told him: "There
is nothing that you could say to me now that I could ever believe."
In
an uncomfortable and occasionally petulant performance at Labour's
morning press conference, the Prime Minister was visibly flustered
by Tory claims that he did not tell the truth over Iraq. He was
speechless for several seconds when he was asked how he reacted
to the devastating charge - before saying 'they can call me whatever
they like but I think the British people will make their minds
up."
And
on the campaign trail later in the day he blenched as a woman
shouted at him when he was mingling with a crowd that she 'would
not shake the hands of a killer'.
The
leaking of Attorney General Lord Goldsmith's original 13-page
legal advice, showing six counts on which he though the war could
be illegal, has shattered Labour's attempts to keep Iraq off the
General Election agenda. It confirms that the government's senior
law officer changed his advice - something the Prime Minister
has repeatedly denied.
Mr
Blair looked ill at ease as he faced a barrage of questions about
the Goldsmith volte face and what it said about his personal integrity
- in the process wiping out Labour's attempts to focus on the
economy. "Let's stop having this argument about whether it's
my character or my integrity that's at issue here and understand
the decision had to be taken," he said. "I have to disrespect
for people who disagreed with me over Iraq. I simply ask them
to conduct the debate on the terms of whether the judgment was
right or not, rather than attacks on my conduct and integrity."
Undaunted,
however, Michael Howard repeated his description of the Prime
Minister as a liar. "This election is about whether the people
of our country can continue to trust Mr Blair," he said.
"This is a man who has taken a stand on just one thing in
the eight years he's been Prime Minister - on the war in Iraq,
and he hasn't told the truth about that."
Charles
Kennedy stepped up the pressure by demanding a public inquiry
into the Iraq conflict and the publication of Lord Goldsmith's
advice. The Liberal Democrat leader said that if Mr Blair could
lead the country to war in Iraq, he could do it in Iran - the
next on Washington's hit-list because of its nuclear weapons programme.
"Iraq deserves to be a central issue in this election, not
only because of what has happened, but of what may yet come to
pass," Mr Kennedy said.
"The
problem the Prime Minister has is that we don't have sufficient
reason to trust his word when it comes to this issue."
Mr
Blair said opposition parties were mounting 'a full scale assault
on my character because they had nothing else to offer. "They
can call me what they like," said Mr Blair, insisting he
had no regrets about the war. "I can't say I am sorry about
it. I am not sorry about it. I think I did the right thing."
He added: "I don't regret the decision I took. People have
to make their own minds up about it."
Gordon
Brown's own doubts about the Prime Minister's trustworthiness
emerged this year in an authoritative biography of the Chancellor.
It was claimed that Mr Blair had repeatedly reneged on a pledge
to stand aside so Mr Brown could take over - and that their relationship
reached a lever of 'mutual animosity and contempt'.
As
a result, Mr Brown had told his rival: "There is nothing
that you could say to me now that I could ever believe."
Doubts
were raised about the Prime Minister's appetite for the fight
last night after it emerged that he has avoided or cancelled a
string of media interviews, some at a few hours notice.
His
reticence over one-to-one confrontations has prompted speculation
that he is under orders to preserve his energy. The mysterious
presence of an ambulance in his motorcade in the West Midlands
last week inevitably raised questions about Mr Blair's fitness.
Seven
months ago the Prime Minister had a two-hour operation to correct
a heart flutter. He has concentrated his campaign appearances
on carefully stage-managed events with Labour supporters. He has
also held a handful of morning press conferences in London, usually
with Gordon Brown at his side.
Broadcasting
sources say he is deliberately avoiding the kind of one-to-one
sparring which was a feature of his last two election campaigns.
But given the drubbing he took from Newsnight's Jeremy Paxman
last week, when he was asked 2o times about illegal asylum and
side-stepped every time, he could simply be beating a tactical
retreat to avoid punishment.
The
only other big one-to-one interview he has carried out is with
ITV News political editor Nick Robinson. In contrast, his list
of cancelled interview committments is growing. The Prime Minister
pulled out of a set of interviews with BBC local radio stations
which were due to be done 'down the line' from London.
He cancelled at 9 pm the evening before interviews, according
to BBC sources.
LibDem
leader Charles Kennedy filled the vacant slot, doing four interviews
in 50 minutes with local radio presenters. Tory leader Michael
Howard has done one batch f these local radio interviews and is
scheduled to do another.
Mr
Blair has also twice cancelled an appearance on BBC Radio One's
Newsbeat with young voters, though he remains committed to doing
the programme. But he has not committed himself to doing Radio
4's Election Call with members of the public which has been a
fixture in recent general election campaigns. Again, Mr Howard
has done this programme.
The
prime Minister also became the only party leader to pull out of
Radio 4's the World this Weekend, sending his deputy John Prescott
in his place. Mr Blair also agreed to do an interview with the
BBC's Ten O'clock News on the day the election was announced but
pulled out a few hours before the programme went on air. Mr Howard
and Charles Kennedy had both recorded interviews for the bulletin
but they had to be scrapped with the Prime Minister refused to
appear.
Sources
at Channel 4 say the Prime Minister is also proving elusive as
they try to organise an interview with their news presenter Jon
Snow. ITV's 'ballot box jury', where 12 questioners question the
party leaders, is expected to feature Mr Blair tomorrow, but the
Prime Minister is insisting on doing just 15 minutes - which works
out at about 75 seconds per juror. The other party leaders have
signed up to an hour.
And
at Radio 4's today programme, insiders say no date has been agreed
for a Blair interview.
So
do it , Sedgefield. Do it for Tom Keys (by voting for his father
Reg). Do it for David Kelly. Do it, as the man said, for a government
that will restore trust in politics in this 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.
