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

Gone (nuclear?) with the wind

Power chief warns of blackout threat Britain faces major blackouts in the next decade, it was claimed yesterday. Andrew Duff, chief executive of RWE npower, told an energy conference that Government action was needed to avert a power crisis. Mr Duff said a combination of factors could hit supply. First, coal power stations will have to be overhauled before 'green' legislation from Brussels is introduced in 2008. Some will be closed because they are unworkable under the new laws. Mr Duff warned the conference organised by the union Amicus, that uncertainty about how the Government intends to implement the legislation could mean investment is not made in time. He said that in addition the Government has yet to spell out limits on the amount of carbon dioxide permitted under separate EU legislation. And third, many nuclear power stations are coming to the end of their life, further hitting the supply of electricity. Amicus also warned yesterday that Britain faces an energy 'catastrophe' as the nation becomes dependent on foreign imports from insecure places to supply most of its energy needs. Reported in the Daily Mail, March 2, 2005

Should we build new nuclear power stations?

Britain must go nuclear to help save the planet

by Angela Jameson - Industrial Correspondent, The Times - September 14, 2004

Nuclear power will have to provide half of Britain's electricity needs if the Government is to have any hope of meeting its Kyoto targets for reducing greenhouse gasses,, a top official of the Department of Trade and Industry has told reporters. The projection, which would mean a radical U-turn of the current government policy on nuclear energy, also undermines the promotion of wind power as the 'only clean' answer to Britain's energy needs, The Times has learnt.

The disclosure that the DTI's own energy experts believe that Britain will have to rely substantially on nuclear power by 2050, comes as Ian Fell, a leading figure in Britain's renewable energy industry, calls for an immediate resumption in building nuclear power stations. He said it was time to end the 'wishful thinking' over the potential for renewable energy.

The forecast by Adrian Gault, Director of Strategic Development at the DTI's Energy Strategy Unit, is likely to cast a cloud over a keynote speech that Tony Blair is making on climate change today. The Prime Minister is expected to say that climate change is the gravest challenge facing the planet and that he will put it at the top of the agenda when Britain takes over the Presidency of the G8 summit and the European Union next year.

Nuclear Power currently provides a fifth of Britain's electricity, but the nation's nuclear plants are aging and will be progressively closed down from 2008. At present there are no plans to replace the generators that are shut, despite the face that nuclear generators do not produce climate-changing carbon dioxide emissions.

The Energy White Paper which was published in February 2003, put in place a policy of 'not now but not never' towards new nuclear generators and made a commitment that no new nuclear building would be signed off without wide consultation. However, energy industry experts said that the revelation that the DTI was contemplating a 'Plan B' scenario, which relied heavily on nuclear power, would frighten of investors in renewable energy.

"One of the reasons for negativity towards nuclear was that you could never get investors to put money into renewables if they thought that nuclear was back on the agenda," an industry source said. A spokes-woman for the Department of Trade and Industry said that the proposal was one of several scenarios that officials were looking at.

"The report looks at differing scenarios for reaching the 60% carbon dioxide reduction target by 2050 - including both nuclear and non-nuclear possibilities. It is a research document to help inform government policy but in no way does it constitute government policy or indeed change it," she said. "We are not abandoning renewable energy."

Brian Wilson, the fourth of six energy ministers that Labour has had since 1997, expressed his surprise at the DTI paper. "The Government position that is set out in the Energy White Paper is not based on any substantial contribution from nuclear power past 2020. My own view is somewhat different and I think the debate is moving in the direction of recognising nuclear power as an essential part of a low carbon energy mix," he said.

Mr Wilson has urged the Government to resume its nuclear programme and has called opposition to nuclear power, in an age of global warming, a cop-out. Other countries have also recently decided to begin building new nuclear power stations, including France and Finland. Professor Fells, chairman of the New and Renewable Energy Centre in Blyth, Northumberland, which is developing renewable energy technology for commercial use, made the call for 'realism' towards nuclear power in a European Union journal yesterday. "Many politicians hope that green, renewable energy will save the day. This is wishful thinking," he said.

Michael Howard, the Conservative leader, who made a keynote speech on climate change yesterday, would not commit his party to building nuclear power stations. He said: "Nuclear power is expensive and there are questions on how we deal with the waste." There should be a comprehensive assessment of Britain's energy needs, possible alternative sources of supply and whether nuclear power was needed, 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

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.