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 17/2/05
|
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
|
VINDICATED
The
Mail has led the campaign against GM foods. Now, the Government's
own tests have proved us right (but don't expect the biotech giants
to go away)
By
Geoffrey Lean, Daily Mail, March 23, 2005
Finally,
the long and popular struggle to stop the growing of GM crops
in Britain appears to be over. A new study has shown - yet again
- that cultivating the modified crops devastates wildlife.
No
sooner were the results of the latest trial - into GM winter-sown
oilseed rape - published this week than Bayer, the multinational
that owned the variety being tested, abandoned plans to grow it
anywhere in Europe.
This
completed a stunning surrender by GM manufacturers. Just six years
ago, biotech companies were confidently awaiting Government approval
to grow 53 different varieties of GM crops in Britain. Now not
a single application remains. And yesterday the Conservatives
hammered yet another nail into the genetically modified coffin
by pledging to ban any commercial planting of GM crops until they
are proved to be safe - an eventuality looking ever more improbable
as increasing evidence of their damage to the environment comes
in.
The
results could not have been much starker. Researchers split 65
fields across the country into two halves, planting one half with
the GM crop, the other with a conventional counterpart. Only half
as many bees were found living in the GM part of the field as
in the ordinary section, while the number of butterflies fell
by a third.
Devastation
The
GM section also contained a third as many broad-leaved weeds,
like chickweed, on which birds such as skylarks and tree sparrows
rely on for food. And the news was bad for farmers too, as reedy
grasses - which have little benefit for wildlife but bedevil cultivation
- flourished in their place.
The
only good news for the GM industry - if you can call it that -
was that the damage to wildlife from GM winter-sown oilseed rape,
though bad enough, was rather less than the devastation brought
by the spring-sown variety. Official trials in 2003 found that
this cut the amount of the seeds on which birds depend by an astonishing
80%.
The
news was no better for GM beef, which reduced the seeds by 66%.
Another Government study reported that growing it would drive
the skylark to extinction within 20 yeas. Only the last of the
three GM crops proposed for Britain, GM maize, came out of the
series of trials unscathed, but that was only because a particularly
vicious pesticide was used on the conventional crop - and this
has since been banned, invalidating the trials.
Yet
the trouble for the GM industry and the Government is that ministers
agreed to be bound by the results of the trials - the biggest
experiments of their kind ever conducted anywhere in the world
- in the confident belief that they would come out in favour of
the GM crops. That was way back in the days when the biotech juggernaut
seemed unstoppable. About 60% of processed foods on supermarket
shelves contained modified Soya and the widespread cultivation
of GM crops in Britain was assumed to be just a year away.
Tony
Blair - urged on by the U.S. Administration - was evangelically
committed to making Britain the 'European hub of biotechnology'.
The scientific establishment, led by the Royal Society, was united
behind the technology. And Monsanto, the most prominent biotech
giant, was poised to make a merger that would have turned it into
the world's largest company.
All
that stood between them and victory was a sense of public unease
and a few questioning voices - spearheaded by the Daily Mail,
which launched a vigorous and unflinching campaign against GM
crops and foods. The response of the Government, the industry
and the scientific establishment was contemptuous. Tony Blair
described opposition as 'a flash in the pan' and denounced those
daring to question the technology as Luddites.
Disquiet
But,
increasingly, the concerns raised by the Mail were vindicated.
Study after study showed that the genes from GM crops were spreading
to contaminate neighbouring conventional and organic produce,
and creating superweeds. Disquiet at the lack of proper safety
testing of modified foods grew. Claims by the industry that it
would end world hunger were discredited. Even Government's own
studies destroyed its case. An official panel under Sir David
King, Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser, concluded that it
would be impossible to prevent the contamination of nearby crops
with modified genes.
And
a report by the Prime Minister's own Cabinet Office found that
- despite Mr Blair's assertions - it could find no economic benefits
for the country or consumers from current GM crops. To cap it
all, only 8% of Britons taking part in another government survey
said they would be happy to eat GM foods. Supermarkets rushed
to take them off the shelves.
But
the trials which ended this week have been the biggest blow of
all. They were specifically designed to give modified crops the
best chance of success, ignoring, for example, the whole issue
of their spreading genes. Everyone - from the ministers who designed
them to the protesters who tried to frustrate them by pulling
up the crops - expected the tests to give genetic modification
the green light. Their overwhelming condemnation of the technology
is truly a devastating blow to the GM juggernaut.
So
expect no modified crops to be grown in Britain for the foreseeable
future. But I feel compelled to issue a warning; don't expect
the indutry, or its supporters, to give up.
Thrashing
The
modified monster may have hit the deck, but its tail is still
thrashing around and we must be wary. Even as late as last weekend,
the Government and the GM lobby were trying to play down the new
study. The results of the research were 'ambiguous' and 'unclear',
they whispered privately. The official announcement from Margaret
Beckett's Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
was dismissive of its significance.
Advocates
such as the Liberal Democrat peer, Lord Taverne, who has just
published a pro-GM book, still promote its supposed benefits as
if nothing had happened over the past year. Even the head of Monsanto,
during a rare public appearance in London ten days ago, was forecasting
a bright future.
More
seriously, the European commission is meeting today to consider
approving imported GM foods for sale throughout Europe, scandalously
supported by Britain's Food Standards Agency. The foods will have
to be labelled, so shoppers should be vigilant if they don't want
to eat them.
Biotech
companies are also trying to revive so-called 'terminator technology',
which would produce GM plants with sterile seeds ( which could
not cross-fertilise with non-GM crops and natural vegetation),
even though this was abandoned years ago when it was found that
it would bankrupt many third-world farmers who traditionally replant
seeds from their crops.
No
doubt before long, new GM crops and foods will be developed. It
is not impossible that some of them might benefit humanity and
the environment. But they will need just as sceptical and thorough
a scrutiny as the current ones have received. Let's make sure
they get it.
|
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
|
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.
