The problem with democracy is that it's so bloody unpredictable. Give people the right to vote for whomsoever they fancy and, blow me down if that's not just precisely what the buggers will go and do.
Apart from being found wallowing up to their armpits in the exes trough, nothing exercises our Westminster political reperesentatives more than the idea of people wasting their votes on fringe candidates who refuse to behave like proper politicians: People who spend their own time and money getting their names on the ballot paper in order to pursue a cause or make a difference.
It's enough to get Politics a bad name.
That's why, in the wake of the Local and European elections we have had people like Harridan Harperson sliding in and out of radio and TV studios and claiming that the electorate had used the ballot box to deliver a sharp, wake up call to Labour and the other mainstream parties.
Let's get something straight. The main message the electorate sent Labour was that they didn't like its leader, its policies and, most of all, its arrogant disregard for the concerns of ordinary people. The expenses scandal was just the latest - and most blatant - manifestation of that arrogance. So what has been the party's response to this outpouring of dislike? An exhibition of collective guilt perhaps? A ceremonial donning of sack cloth and ashes? Even an admission that their policies might have, just possibly, been ill-conceived and ineptly executed?
Many things have occurred but none of them remotely like any of the above. A series of nonentities, nobodies and mediocrities has rapidly abandoned ship, each closely accompanied by a painfully thin list of their own accomplishments cunningly disguised as a letter of resignation. These missives contain many references to ME and The PARTY. What they signally fail to contain is any mention of country.
Gordon is still getting on with the job of running the country and saving the world yet still makes time to mutter about the need for Constitutional reform. The same old arguments about the superiority of Proportional Representation have surfaced, encouraged by ministers who hope that therein lies a magic formula for survival. (Strange how every administration that gets hammered at the ballot box touts PR as the most democratic voting system - until results improve or they get re-elected, when they suddenly decide that nothing can beat the dear old first past the post system after all. )
The main purpose of this activity is to distract the electorate from the real issues. What our political elites have chosen - and are still choosing - to ignore is the very simple message that we also don't like Europe. We are fed up with having 80% of our laws dictated to us from a bunker somewhere in Brussels. We are not convinced that allowing Spanish ships to hoover all the fish out of our territorial waters is a good idea; or that European judges from such noted democracies as Albania and Romania should be the final arbiters in our Justice system. Even now, most of us struggle with the proposition that decisions taken in Brussels that outweigh Laws made in Westminster really represent the apogee of democratic governance.
This is where your average politician of whatever stripe puts his or her fingers in their ears and makes nannannnanna sounds. Because, it's not what they want to hear.
Europe is good.
Outside the EU we would be just a small island with no influence and no voice in the world. (That's always been one of my favourites; as if, somehow, being part of Europe changed our geographical location and, once we leave, we'll be towed back into a little backwater where no one will ever take any notice of us again.)
If we leave Europe, major companies like Volkswagen, Renault, BMW and their ilk, will no longer want to do business with us. That's right, on the orders of Frau Merkel or Monsieur Zarkosy, their CEOs will close their UK operations and simply ignore a market where new car sales run at 2 million a year, . It would certainly be fun listening to them explaining that decision at their respective AGMs.
The simple fact of the matter is, politicians like the EU because it's like the UK - only much, much bigger. Hence, there is more money sloshing around; the decisions affect vastly more people and the ministers and apparatchiks making them acquire even more power. The fact that the whole bangshoot is riddled with incompetence, corruption and sheer bloody crookery doesn't lessen its attraction one iota. It's so like the Westminster they have come to know and love that they are all bound to feel perfectly at home.
So, when politicians interpret the EU election results, this is the prism through which they view them. The fact that number 2 in the ballot in many parts of the country was a we-want-out-of -Europe party (UKIP) is an inconvenience to be ignored. They rationalised the switch to UKIP ( or the BNP ) as a simple protest vote. The voters didn't really understand the issues because they hadn't been put simply enough and had placed their cross next to UKIP or BNP as a form of punishment. Ergo, the problem was not one of voter disenchantment, but simply one of failed communication. If only Gordon and Peter could simplify the core message the problems would all melt away as the electorate, once again, was regailed with visions of sunlit uplands, where there was never any boom-or-bust, and the skies are not cloudy or grey.
It never really seems to get through to any of them - Tory or LibDem as much as Labour- that it is precisely this kind of self-absorbed arrogance that really gets people's goat. Obviously, some people voted the way they did to send the big parties a message. But, many placed their crosses where they did having carefully evaluated the options available to them. Until the main parties, and especialliy Labour, take this simple fact on board they will never win back the people who have deserted them.
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
Martin flees the nest
If you pay close attention this afternoon, you might just spot something that hasn't been seen for close to 400 years; Mr Speaker, Michael Martin, being expelled from the House of Commons.
When he does, eventually and reluctantly, take his leave, his going will, no doubt, be marked by sober and heartfelt tributes to his worthiness, personal probity and dedication to Parliament and democracy.
As usual, the hypocricy and crocodile tears will serve only to highlight the Old Boy's club mentality of most MPs - even those of the female persuasion. Some of the names already thrown into the ring for consideration as his successor, doubtless by impartial friends and associates of the nominees, feature entrenched opponents of democratic government like Harriet Harman and serial expense fiddlers such as Ming Campbell. Who says that virtue has its own reward?
Anyway, back to Speaker Martin. Rarely can anyone have been less suited to a job. Martin was not merely ignorant of Parliament, its function or traditions ; he actually tried to make a virtue of his ignorance: As if being a product of the Gorbals, the trades union movement and Old Labour not only excused his ignorance but precluded him from acquiring any of the knowledge or understanding necessary to the role of Speaker of the House of Commons. The fact that George Thomas - Viscount Tonypandy - rose from an even more humble background to become universally acknowledged as one of the great modern Speakers was just one aspect of the history of his role that he, patently, failed to grasp.
Some old Labour apparatchiks wear their working class credentials like a shield. Martin used his as a bludgeon. Opposed by anyone capable of forming a coherent sentence, his instinctive reaction was to accuse them of snobbery. In this, he was enthusiastically aided and abbetted by other members of the Lowlands tartan mafia.
As soon as news of his imminent resignation leaked out, these Labour outriders were busying themselves on the political blogs on the Guardian and Independent websites. Their snide little posts stand out like dog turds on a snow-covered field. Predictably, they claim that Martin is a Skapegoat (sic) hunted down by a mob of howling cretins. Whether this refers to the Press or the public is not altogether clear.
The fact that he - along with Harriet Harman and one Gordon Brown - spent £2 million to try to prevent the expenses information being published is, apparently, neither here nor there. Poor old Michael is characterised as yet another good socialist crushed under the wheels of the right wing juggernaut.
Mind you, if Not So Flash Gordon and his friends start to use Martin's demise as an opportunity to draw one of their famous lines under events and "move on", then we all might just start to think of him as a convenient scapegoat. For, let none of us forget that the great Gordon has plenty to answer for on the expenses front; not the least why he needed to maintain a London home as well as a constituency home while living for 12 years in his grace and favour pad in Downing Street.
Now that Martin has had to fly from the House (couldn't resist that one) he might just feel inclined to reveal where some of Gordon's other bodies are buried. In which case, look out for an early promotion to the House of Lords and further and better opportunities for the lad from Glasgow East to feather his nest at the public's expense.
When he does, eventually and reluctantly, take his leave, his going will, no doubt, be marked by sober and heartfelt tributes to his worthiness, personal probity and dedication to Parliament and democracy.
As usual, the hypocricy and crocodile tears will serve only to highlight the Old Boy's club mentality of most MPs - even those of the female persuasion. Some of the names already thrown into the ring for consideration as his successor, doubtless by impartial friends and associates of the nominees, feature entrenched opponents of democratic government like Harriet Harman and serial expense fiddlers such as Ming Campbell. Who says that virtue has its own reward?
Anyway, back to Speaker Martin. Rarely can anyone have been less suited to a job. Martin was not merely ignorant of Parliament, its function or traditions ; he actually tried to make a virtue of his ignorance: As if being a product of the Gorbals, the trades union movement and Old Labour not only excused his ignorance but precluded him from acquiring any of the knowledge or understanding necessary to the role of Speaker of the House of Commons. The fact that George Thomas - Viscount Tonypandy - rose from an even more humble background to become universally acknowledged as one of the great modern Speakers was just one aspect of the history of his role that he, patently, failed to grasp.
Some old Labour apparatchiks wear their working class credentials like a shield. Martin used his as a bludgeon. Opposed by anyone capable of forming a coherent sentence, his instinctive reaction was to accuse them of snobbery. In this, he was enthusiastically aided and abbetted by other members of the Lowlands tartan mafia.
As soon as news of his imminent resignation leaked out, these Labour outriders were busying themselves on the political blogs on the Guardian and Independent websites. Their snide little posts stand out like dog turds on a snow-covered field. Predictably, they claim that Martin is a Skapegoat (sic) hunted down by a mob of howling cretins. Whether this refers to the Press or the public is not altogether clear.
The fact that he - along with Harriet Harman and one Gordon Brown - spent £2 million to try to prevent the expenses information being published is, apparently, neither here nor there. Poor old Michael is characterised as yet another good socialist crushed under the wheels of the right wing juggernaut.
Mind you, if Not So Flash Gordon and his friends start to use Martin's demise as an opportunity to draw one of their famous lines under events and "move on", then we all might just start to think of him as a convenient scapegoat. For, let none of us forget that the great Gordon has plenty to answer for on the expenses front; not the least why he needed to maintain a London home as well as a constituency home while living for 12 years in his grace and favour pad in Downing Street.
Now that Martin has had to fly from the House (couldn't resist that one) he might just feel inclined to reveal where some of Gordon's other bodies are buried. In which case, look out for an early promotion to the House of Lords and further and better opportunities for the lad from Glasgow East to feather his nest at the public's expense.
Tuesday, 12 May 2009
Shining examples
“I know this isn’t enough and people are angry and it will take time. My single most important thing in my life is my relationship with my constituents in Salford.” Of course it is, Miss Blears: especially when they are likely to take the first available opportunity to end the relationship; probably about this time next year when Gordon finally calls an election.
Suddenly, if the stream of contrite apologies spewing out of Westminster is anything to go by, the penny has, finally, dropped. MPs of all parties now seem to understand that the British electorate is absolutely appalled at the whole expenses scam. They will no longer be fobbed off with references to rules and entitlements. They will no longer shrug at the idea that someone living in a relative's bedroom actually, honestly, believes it to be her main residence. Tory grandees who use the system to pay gardeners and other domestic staff will now attract odium instead of indifference.
And, despite the best efforts of his sister-in-law, Gordon Brown is still going to find it difficult to explain not why he paid someone to clean his London flat, but why he needed a London flat as a second home at all when he has spent the last 12 years lording it up in Numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street at the taxpayer's expense.
The other Mrs Brown was just one of a number of extras wheeled out over the weekend to try to lighten the atmosphere surrounding the expenses scandal. Another was ex-MP Matthew Parrish whose brief was to introduce a little levity into the proceedings. This he tried - and failed - to do by making the whole thing sound like a, slightly farcical, storm in a tea-cup, with frequent references to claims for bath plugs and other inconsequential household items ; as if ramping the system to defraud taxpayers of thousands of pounds was no different to padding a claim for car mileage in the private sector. Compounding his obvious ignorance of how the private sector works, Mr Parrish then compared the relatively low pay - his words - that MPs had to endure with the fantastic salaries they would undoubtedly attract if they worked in the Private Sector; as if the City and the private sector were two interchangeable terms.
MPs earn a basic salary of £68,000 without allowances. Compared with the six and seven figure earnings of the average Investment banker, that doesn't sound like a great deal of very much at all. But, it is three times the average wage. And, take it from me, it is a great deal more than many middle managers in the productive sector of the economy enjoy. More to the point, very few of the mediocrities who populate Westminster would actually hold down a job in private industry. That is why they are all so keen to climb the political greasy pole. Because the contacts and experience they accrue during their time in power are about the only marketable attributes they have once they get tossed out of office.
The reason that this and other attempts to downplay the scandal failed was that the Telegraph released details of Tory piggery to set beside the earlier revelations of Labour snouts in the trough. At a stroke, strident Labour claims of political bias were shown to be groundless. More to the point, the latest revelations demonstrated the depth of the corruption inside our political system. It became obvious to every one but Speaker Martin -apparently- that no one was going be able to puncture this particular balloon.
If anything, the more strident the denials become, the more hot air is spouted, the larger the balloon grows. Personally, I believe that at least one major politician might receive a visit from the police in the not too distant future. My nomination is Jacqui Smith although I would be equally happy to see Darling, Michael Gove or Michael Ancram having their collar felt. We live in interesting times.
Suddenly, if the stream of contrite apologies spewing out of Westminster is anything to go by, the penny has, finally, dropped. MPs of all parties now seem to understand that the British electorate is absolutely appalled at the whole expenses scam. They will no longer be fobbed off with references to rules and entitlements. They will no longer shrug at the idea that someone living in a relative's bedroom actually, honestly, believes it to be her main residence. Tory grandees who use the system to pay gardeners and other domestic staff will now attract odium instead of indifference.
And, despite the best efforts of his sister-in-law, Gordon Brown is still going to find it difficult to explain not why he paid someone to clean his London flat, but why he needed a London flat as a second home at all when he has spent the last 12 years lording it up in Numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street at the taxpayer's expense.
The other Mrs Brown was just one of a number of extras wheeled out over the weekend to try to lighten the atmosphere surrounding the expenses scandal. Another was ex-MP Matthew Parrish whose brief was to introduce a little levity into the proceedings. This he tried - and failed - to do by making the whole thing sound like a, slightly farcical, storm in a tea-cup, with frequent references to claims for bath plugs and other inconsequential household items ; as if ramping the system to defraud taxpayers of thousands of pounds was no different to padding a claim for car mileage in the private sector. Compounding his obvious ignorance of how the private sector works, Mr Parrish then compared the relatively low pay - his words - that MPs had to endure with the fantastic salaries they would undoubtedly attract if they worked in the Private Sector; as if the City and the private sector were two interchangeable terms.
MPs earn a basic salary of £68,000 without allowances. Compared with the six and seven figure earnings of the average Investment banker, that doesn't sound like a great deal of very much at all. But, it is three times the average wage. And, take it from me, it is a great deal more than many middle managers in the productive sector of the economy enjoy. More to the point, very few of the mediocrities who populate Westminster would actually hold down a job in private industry. That is why they are all so keen to climb the political greasy pole. Because the contacts and experience they accrue during their time in power are about the only marketable attributes they have once they get tossed out of office.
The reason that this and other attempts to downplay the scandal failed was that the Telegraph released details of Tory piggery to set beside the earlier revelations of Labour snouts in the trough. At a stroke, strident Labour claims of political bias were shown to be groundless. More to the point, the latest revelations demonstrated the depth of the corruption inside our political system. It became obvious to every one but Speaker Martin -apparently- that no one was going be able to puncture this particular balloon.
If anything, the more strident the denials become, the more hot air is spouted, the larger the balloon grows. Personally, I believe that at least one major politician might receive a visit from the police in the not too distant future. My nomination is Jacqui Smith although I would be equally happy to see Darling, Michael Gove or Michael Ancram having their collar felt. We live in interesting times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
