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
|
|
Sharing
out the pensions burden Comment, Daily
Mail, December 7, 2004
Compare
and contrast. Only a minority working for private companies
receive a pension based on their final salary - and that
number falls every year. The
rest either have nothing set aside or are in schemes whose
payouts depend on the vagaries of the markets.
How
different to the position of five million state employees
who can look forward to much more comfortable retirement.
At least 80% stop work at 60 and get a guaranteed pension
based on their final salary.
Now
to the fury of the unions, ministers are considering making
those under 50 work until 65 and basing their payments on
average salary. The anger is understandable. After all,
the decision will ultimately be taken by the very MPs who
voted themselves one of the best pension schemes in Europe.
And the Government plans to exempt judges from the £1.5million
cap on tax-free pension savings.
But the truth is that the present system
is neither fair nor sustainable. State employees claim their
higher pensions compensate for lower salaries. Yet the gap,
where it still exists, is closing - in the last economic
cycle, average earnings grew faster for public workers.
If this trend continues, private industry faces the threat
of losing talent to an ever more financially attractive
state sector.
But what makes the case for change irresistible
is the speed at which the public employees' pension bill
is rising. Payouts over the next 50 years will be an estimated
£580bn, 58% higher than forecast for 2002. Without
change, a diminishing number of private sector workers (
who, as a result of Gordon Brown's.£5bn/year tax grab
on pensions, are having to put more aside for their old
age) will be paying ever larger sums to finance the feather-bedded
retirements of an ever increasing number of state employees.
The country faces a pensions crisis - and
it would be iniquitous if an already privileged part of
the community refused to carry its share of the burden.
|
Pensions
tax break for civil servants
By
Graeme Wilson, Daily Mail, December 20, 2004
Senior
civil servants could escape Gordon Brown's cap on pensions under
plans being drawn up by Ministers. The proposals would allow them
to avoid punitive tax rates on savings above the £1.5million
limit imposed by the Chancellor.
The
cap caused an outcry when it was announced, with business leaders
claiming it would drive high-earners out of pension schemes. That
anger will be increased by the news that Ministers are offering
up to 1,000 Whitehall mandarins the chance to get around the cap.
Mr Brown's 'lifetime allowance' - to be introduced in April 2006
- sets a £1.5million limit on the amount of money people
can build up in their tax-free pension pot. Any savings above
the limit are subject to tax at 55%. But the Cabinet Office has
drawn up proposals which allow the best-paid civil servants to
reduce their pension contributions in order to stay below the
limit. Any pension they forego will be paid as extra salary.
A
Cabinet Office spokesman defended the proposals last night and
stressed such an option was available to private sector employers.
"We want to provide the bestservice for our members, just
as any private scheme would," he said.
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.
