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
|
Why politicians
should stay out of schools, by top head
by
Sarah Harris, Education Correspondent - Daily Mail, October 5,
2004
Education
policy should be decided by an independent body, a top teacher
said yesterday. this would stop further damage to schools from
'endless' Government reforms, said Dr Martin Stephen, headmaster
of £17,475 a year St Paul's School.
He
said the move would be like Gordon Brown's decision to let the
Bank of England fix interest rates without Government involvement.
Dr Stephen said a commission should be set up, consisting of employers,
universities, parents and teachers, to shape secondary policy
and the curriculum. It would provide long-term stability beyond
the span of a five year Government.
Dr
Stephen is chairman of the Headmasters' and Headmistresses' Conference,
which represents 241 leading independent schools. He told the
organisation's annual conference in St Andrews, Scotland, that
the move was crucial to protect education standards against ministerial
tampering. The education system has been redesigned so many times,
he said, that it now resembled a wound 'operated on so often that
all that is left is scar tissue'.
Dr
Stephen said: "In accepting that Government is responsible
for delivering the educational system, have we not too easily
assumed that it must also design it? How can Government design
our education system? Government of whatever party carries into
office a huge baggage of history and sometimes of dogma, sometimes
with the result that educational debate is no such thing, but
is rather the unpacking of endless old suitcases. And what more
tempting for a Government seeking to refresh its image than to
tamper yet again with our educational system?"
Dr
Stephen, whose boarding school for 800 boys is in Barnes, South-West
London, also called for the Government to recognise the huge contribution
public schools make to educational standards by 'buying' places
for poor pupils. He said the old direct grant system, introduced
by Tories to pay school fees for bright children from modest backgrounds,
had been a huge success in sending more disadvantaged children
to top universities. The system was abolished by Labour in the
1970's.
Dr
Stephen said: "If we are to take a proper pride in what we
are and what we do, it follows logically that every child in the
UK should have the chance to attend an independent school regardless
of the race, colour, creed, social or economic standing of their
parents."
He
also said a new breed of grammar schools should be established
which did not have entrance exams and provided free entry to all
at 14. Students would be examined at the end of the first year
and allowed to proceed only if they passed. Those who failed would
have to retake the year.
The
Department of Education and Skills said last night of Dr Stephen's
'tampering' attack: "We live in a democracy where the general
public elect people to reform and improve public services, including
education.
Dr
Stephen and other public school leaders angrily condemned the
new targets for top universities to admit more state school pupils
and cut the numbers from fee-paying schools. Dr Stephen condemned
them as 'blackmail'.
Jonathan
Shephard, general secretary of the Independent Schools Council
said: "We bend over backwards to get into our schools children
from disadvantaged backgrounds. If the door is slammed in their
faces because we have given them an education, I think that is
immoral. The UK has to compete in a world market and to do that
we need world-class universities. World-class universities do
not exist by fudging their intake."
David
Hempsall, head of Queen Elizabeth Grammar School in Blackburn,
said that a third of his sixth form qualified for education maintenance
allowances - Government grants to encourage poorer students to
stay on after 16.
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.
