Silent Majority Speaks

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

 

WWW silentmajorityspeaks.com

MP cheats must face the music

By Peter McKay - Daily Mail November 6, 2004

This evening's ITV programme Tonight With Trevor McDonald focuses on incapacity benefit fraud. Although it's unlikely Sir Trevor will mention it, a woman who once worked on the show has admitted receiving a total of £42,106 in illegal benefits during a ten-year period.

Mrs F. Williams, from Colchester, Essex, writes in the Daily Mail - 15/11/2004 While he's building cheap housing for police, nurses and teachers, will Mr Prescott build cheap London accomodation for MPs to cut their expenses ?

Next week make-up artist Antonia Malyon, 47, is due to be sentenced at Warrington Crown Court. She might go to prison. Pensions Minister Chris Pond says: " Fraudsters who make up bogus benefit claims must now face the music."

Meanwhile, Liberal Democrat MP Paul Marsden faces an investigation into payments of £30,000 a year paid to his wife, Shelly, for 'secretarial services'. The total claimed far exceeds £100,000. His party chief whip is investigating the matter.

Why does Miss Malyon face prison, or a non-custodial sentence, when any MP or peer proved to hae been making false claims on their expenses would not face a criminal charge and, as a result, no criminal penalty? Technically, the parliamentary Standards Commissioner is supposed to monitor the expense claims of MPs and peers, but there's no provision for taking them to court if they're found guilty of cheating. The matter is handled in-house.

From the Prime Minister down, they all have their snouts in the expenses trough Mr Blair has claimed £44,000 expenses for a house in his constituency for which he paid only £20,000. Labour MP Shaun Woodward - husband of grocery heiress Camilla Sainsbury - has claimed more than £50,000 for his accommodation despite having five houses around the world.

When a secretary at the Commons raised the matter of Mr Marsden with the Fees Office she was told that all details of an MP's payroll were confidential. Nothing could be done unless there was a complaint to the Standards Commissioner - and all complainants have to identify themselves.

The Government encourages us, via advertising campaigns, to inform anonymously on social security cheats. That's likely to be the reason Miss Malyon was caught. But those who inform on MPs or peers are treated like pariahs. Why so? To discourage them from coming forward.

We're told by the Government that £19million a year is 'lost' to fraudulent incapacity benefit claims. Almost four times that figure - £78million - is lost to MP's expenses. Why not a purge on parliamentary fraudsters? Because they would have to bring in new laws making them liable to criminal prosecution. Would turkeys vote for Christmas?

Pensions Minister Chris Pond says overall benefit fraud costs the taxpayer £2billion a year - 'money which should be spent on schools and hospitals'. When we steal from HM Treasury it's called fraud and we're warned that we'll face the music; when MPs and peers do it, it's merely fiddling by honourable members. Since no party seems willing to put MPs and peers on the same level as those they allegedly serve, we need a new 'Taxpayers Party' dedicated to the simple proposition that public money is sacred, not a members-only gold mine.

Do you agree that MPs should be accountable to voters in their constituency for the expenses they claim? Agree strongly Agree Disagree Disagree strongly Don't know Don't care Please click one ot the links above to cast your vote Current results

 For the health of our democracy, we, the people of the United Kingdom, must find a way to force Mr Blair to resign

Mr Blair has lied and deceived us over Iraq. He must resign at once. Do you agree? Agree strongly Agree Disagree Disagree strongly Don't know Don't care Please click one of the links above to cast your vote Current results

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.