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
|
The
head-in-the-sand election
(or
how virtually all today's vital issues have been avoided)
Stephen
Glover - Daily Mail, May 3, 2005
When
the history books come to be written, I wonder how this election
campaign will be remembered. Probably as one of the dullest on
record. Insults have been traded back and forward, and lies have
been told on an epic scale, but really there has been a lot of
sound and fury about very little.
Voters
suspect that on many issues there is not much to distinguish the
two main parties notwithstanding all the brouhaha. Tories and
New Labour have almost identical plans over tax and spending.
They shout a great deal at each other in an attempt to make us
believe that a gulf separates them but in the end we know they
dance on a pinhead.
There
is a more profound explanation for the ennui many feel. A couple
of weeks ago, I wrote about Iraq as the dog that hadn't barked.
Well, it has not so much barked as howled since then, which is
all very well and good. But there are a host of other matters
that have remained unexplored. If this election has often seemed
dull, it is because many of the most important issues facing this
country have not been raised.
Take
Europe. Is it not important? I'd say so. But apart from Tony Blair's
throwaway comment that as things stand entry to the euro 'doesn't
look very likely', Europe has been largely avoided. Next year
we're likely to vote on the European constitution, unless the
French should reject it in a referendum on May 29 and bring the
whole process to a halt. Yet the issue that touches most deeply
on the future of this country has scarcely been mentioned.
Defence
is another dog that hasn't even whimpered. Our Armed Forces are
over-stretched and underfunded; after the setback of Iraq the
Army is finding recruitment increasingly difficult and is under
strength. The Government has caused much ill-will by insisting
on the merger of several English and Scottish regiments. Yet those
problems are not even referred to in Labour's manifesto.
One
can see, of course, why it suits Tony Blair not to discuss Europe,
where Labour policies are unpopular, or to refer to the difficulties
of our Armed Forces. There are many other issues in the same unmentionable
category. Mr Blair is said to have decided to spend £10billion
on upgrading our independent nuclear deterrent if his party is
re-elected. I would be in favour of such a move, but not a world
of this appears in Labour's manifesto because Mr Blair is frightened
of upsetting his core voters, many of whom do not wish us to have
a nuclear deterrent.
There
are some other issues about which new Labour has avoided discussion:
energy policy, where Mr Blair favours nuclear power as the best
way of dealing with a looming crisis, but dare not mention it;
constitutional reform, where Labour has eviscerated the House
of Lords without producing new proposals for a second chamber,
and devolution, which has created the growing grievance of Scottish
MPs at Westminster voting on purely English measures.
Education,
where Labour is vulnerable despite enormous new investment, has
barely figured in the campaign. Our third-rate public transport
system, very little improved after eight years of new Labour,
has amazingly been a non-issue. Nor has the alarming decline since
1997 in the state of private pensions been much discussed.
I
could go on. There are lots of important issues, many of which
are close to people's hearts, which New Labour either played down
or suppressed. That is what one would expect of such a manipulative
party. The mystery is why the Tories should have to such a large
extent accepted Labour's abbreviated agenda on a whole array of
issues where Tony Blair is weak and vulnerable.
Why
have they not made more of Europe, about which their policies
are so much more popular than New Labour's?k The issue may be
on the back burner at the moment and may never rank at the very
top of the list of people's concerns, but with a vote on the European
constitution looming, it is surely worth a mention. I quite understand
that the Tories do not want to appear monomaniac about euro, but
measured argument would not give that impression.
And
why not more from the Tories on defence? Or pensions? Or transport,
where the bungling of their privatisation of the railways before
1997 has been more than trumped by successive New Labour failures?
Why don't the Tories dare say that spending billions of pounds
on new schools is not going to improve educational standards if
the system itself is defective.
Of
course, in an ideal world I would like to see them questioning
that vast, bloated and inefficient monster that is the NHS, while
defending to the death the principle of free healthcare for everyone,
but I can understand why they should be afraid of challenging
one of this country's sacred cows. So I don't ask that. But I
do wish the Tories had widened the debate beyond immigration,
Iraq, the economy and crime - important though these issues are
- to embrace Labour's many other failings.
Probably
they would say that to a large extent they have tried to, and
that a media averse to serious political debate, as well as largely
biased towards new Labour, have consistently followed their own
priorities. Perhaps, I certainly would not defend the media,but
in the end a confident political party should be able to drive
its own agenda. In search of a simple message that could be reduce
to 11 words, the Tories have passed up the opportunity of exposing
many of New Labour's weaknesses. This is been a parish pump sort
of campaign, not the General Election of a great nation.
]Everyone
says that New Labour will win on Thursday, though I suspect (and
hope) that many of the opinion polls will prove to be way off,
as they were in 2001 and 1997, and that we will not have another
Labour landslide. But whatever the outcome, this country is heading
for uncertain waters.
*What
is our place in Europe and the world?
*By
how much will tax have to rise?
*How
will the pension hole be filled?
*How
will we meet our future energy needs?
*Will
we ever have proper transport, education and health systems?
*Should
we remain a nuclear power?
*When
will we give or Armed forces adequate resources?
*Will
there ever be a proper democratic second chamber that is not simply
stacked with Tony's cronies?
*How
can we resolve the constitutional outrage whereby Scottish MPs
can vote on uniquely English measures, but not the other way around?
Big
questions, all of them, and yet none has been addressed during
the past few weeks. This has been a dull campaign, hut it is politicians,
with a little help from the media, who have made it so. Politics
are not dull. In the end they concern matters of life and death,
and our role in an increasingly unstable and problematic world.
Alas for us, we have a Government that strives to conceal its
many failings, and a main Opposition still unable to expose them.
|
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.
