Rescuing Democracy in the United Kingdom from our current Elected Dictatorship

 

WWW silentmajorityspeaks.com

by Political Correspondent - Daily Mail - July 30, 2004

Sir Malcolm Rifkind has accused Tony Blair of causing more harm to Britain's intelligence agencies than infamous names such as Philby, Burgess and Maclean. In an extraordinary attack, the former Conservative Foreign Secretary accused the Prime Minister of being 'unconvincing, duplicitous and evasive' in his handling of the war in Iraq.

He said his approach had been marked by 'poor judgment, incompetence and arrogant indifference.'

Mr Blair, he said, had caused more havoc in Briatin's intelligence services than Kim Philby, Guey Burgess and Anthony Maclean - the Cambridge spies who passed secrets to the Societs in the 1950's. Writing in the Spectator magazine, Sir Malcolm, now the Tory candidate for Kensington and Chelsea, said the Prime Minister was guilty of three main charges. First, he had politicised MI6 and other intelligence services by forcing them to produce a dossier on Sadam Hussein's arsenal, he said. Sir Malcolm said this was a 'disgraceful error of judgment' which had seen spy chiefs effectively being 'ordered to give a character reference for the Prime Minister'.

Britain's intelligence services were there to advise, not to become part of the 'public debate' on the war in Iraq. Mr Blair should never have asked for the dossier. But equally, the Joint Intelligence Committee's Chairman, John scarlett, should have refused to cooperate - and should have offered his resignation if the Prime Minister had not backed down.

The second charge against Mr Blair wa ensuring that the 'health warnings and caveats' were removed from the dossier before it was published. In his time as Defence, then Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm received intelligence assessmnents almost every day for fivc years, he said. In almost every case, the agencies stressed they could not guarantee the accuracy of the assessments. However, non of these warnings were contained in the dossier. If Downing Street was responsible for removing these caveats, then Mr Blair 'must take the blame'. If it was Mr Scarlett, then 'he should fall on his sword'.

The final charge was the 'insufferably arrogant and unconstitutional way' in which Mr Blair responded to the furore over the dossier and the failure to find weapons of mass destruction. While Mr Blair said he was taking 'full responsibilty' for what has gone wrong, he still defended the war and had promoted Mr Scarlett. Sir Malcolm contrasted this position with the resignations of both the chairman and director general of the BBC. 'It is intolerable that the people who reported the Iraq war have had to go, but the Prime Minister who took us into that war through misjudgement and incompetence carries on regardless.'

Before you vote please read Michael Howard's challenge to Tony Blair in the House of Commons on the day the Butler report was published, and the latest news on John Scarlett. A devastating report by hugely respected BBC Panorama journalist, John Ware, raises new questions about No. 10 and the 'truth', which are even more disturbing. Also read Rifkind on Blair and a letter from one of the normally silent majority in the United Kingdom.

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."

Blair's defiance of the will of the majority of we, the people of the UK, over the invasion of Iraq 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:

Here's one to get Tony Blair to resign:

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.

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.

 

If you have suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include in the pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.