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
|
|
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
|
Clarke:
We want MORE refugees
Home Secretary breaks ranks to reveal his true
views on immigration to Labour activists
By
Jane Merrick, Political Reporter, Daily Mail, February 15, 2005
Charles
Clarke has insisted he wants more people to seek refuge in Britain.
The Home secretary said it was a 'moral and legal duty' to encourage
asylum seekers and economic migrants.
His
remarks, to Labour activists, were seized on by opponents as wrecking
one of Blair's key General Election pledges - 'Your country's
borders protected.' Unveiling it only last Friday, the Prime Minister
said his party should no longer be seen as soft on migration.
But Tory home affairs spokesman David Davis said last night that
the promise had been 'completely undermined' by Mr Clarke. There
were also fears that the Home Secretary's remarks will encourage
millions to think Britain's borders are wide open
Mr
Clarke's approval of higher immigration came in response to party
activists who complained about the election pledge. He told a
meeting in Gateshead that the economy of London, in particular,
'utterly depends' on migration and that he wanted Britain to be
a place which offered refuge for those fleeing tyranny. He added:
"That's not only a moral duty and a legal duty but something
which is part of the essence of this country.
"We
want more migration, more people coming to study and to work.
We want more people coming to look for refuge."
Mr
Clarke lets slip the truth - Comment,
Daily Mail, February 15, 2005.
So
now we know New Labour's real feelings about asylum and
immigration. The moment Michael Howard struck a chord
with voters with a package of tough controls, Tony Blair,
who has presided over the biggest immigration shambles
in our history, responded with rhetoric, vacuous pledges
and half-hearted measures designed to show that he should
no longer be seen as soft on the issue.
Enter
Charles Clarke, the new Home Secretary (and a politician
who seems impervious to subtlety), who told party activists
'we want more migration, more people coming to study and
work. We want more people coming to look for refuge'.
And sneeringly he attacked the Tories for their 'saloon
bar' response to immigration.
Mr
Clarke (Highgate and Cambridge) is one of those metropolitan
New Labourites who hasn't got a clue about what real people
in Britain - whether they drink in saloon bars or not
- think. Real Britons, while tolerant about genuine asylum
seekers and sympathetic to honest economic migrants, are
exasperated at the way this government has lost control
of Britain's borders.
They
are equally exasperated by countless bogus asylum seekers
who abuse an honourable system and by the even greater
number of illegal migrants who slip into Britain in the
back of lorries, pay no taxes and, even more worryingly,
are probably exploited by gangmasters.
And,
yes, these same 'saloon bar' Britons also worry that or
hard-pressed hospitals, schools and hosing stock cannot
cope with this unprecedented influx.
M
Clarke has shown his party's true colours. Under New Labour,
Britain's immigration scandal will only get worse.
|
The
Home Secretary also admitted that millions of people had no confidence
in the immigration system. His attitude to migrants is completely
out of step with that of most voters, according to an opinion
poll earlier this month. The YouGov survey for MigrationWatch
found that three out of four believe Mr Blair has lost control
of immigration and that newcomers put an unacceptable strain on
pubic services.
MigrationWatch
chairman Sir Andrew Green said last night: "The Home Secretary
has let the cat out of the bag. The Government's real policy is
to encourage et more immigration on top of the extra 5 million
people they now expect by 2031. This is extraordinary given that
75% of the public feel immigration is already too high. What does
their new election slogan mean if, in practice, there is to be
unlimited immigration?"
Mr
Clarke's remarks will anger Labour's
election supremo Alan Milburn, who has already complained in private
that the Home Secretary is not sounding sufficiently tough on
crime and immigration. He is said to be concerned that Mr Clarke,
who comes from a liberal, privileged background in North London,
cannot emulate the populist appeal of his predecessor David Blunkett.
Downing
St., under pressure to explain Mr Clarke's weekend remarks, stressed
that the Government was proposing an Australian-style points system
for would-be economic migrants. Mr Blair's spokesman said: "Where
there are economic migrants that this country needs, these people
should be able to come in here. That's why we are putting forward
the points system as a way of providing what the economy needs.
The estimate is that there are some 650,-000 vacancies. There
are many parts of the economy where we need skilled workers.
He
added: "Where there are genuine cases of asylum, the Government
believes international rules should be applied. If people are
genuine asylum seekers, the Prime Minister has made it clear that,
within the rules, they will have the traditional right of entry."
Mr
Blair told the Commons last week that net immigration would probably
fall as a result of Labour's policies. But Mr Davis said
last night: "The Home Secretary has highlighted the clear
choice at the next (General) Election - uncontrolled unlimited
immigration under Labour or controlled immigration with the conservatives."
Roger
Kilroy-Silk, leader of the newly-formed Veritas party, called
Mr Clarke's remarks 'absolutely scandalous'. He said: "He's
not speaking for my family. He's not speaking for my constituents.
He's not speaking for the British people. He's speaking only for
himself, a member of the privileged, metropolitan political class."
Mr
Clarke had moved closer to the party line by last night, saying:
"We will continue to welcome genuine economic migration within
a strict points-based system. Migrant workers do key jobs which
are not filled by our domestic workers. Overseas students earn
hundreds of millions of pounds for our universities. It is essential
to have clear and enforceable rules to ensure we admit only asylum
seekers who are genuinely fleeing from death or persecution. Under
our plans we expect unfounded applications to continue to fall."
The
Home Secretary accused the Tories of deliberately confusing asylum
and immigration and described as a 'saloon bar response' their
pledge to keep asylum seekers on an island until they were processed.
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.
