The ThunderDragon

The new, “reformed”, House of Lords is “unacceptably dominated” by peers who live in London and the south-east of England, claims a report.

London has more peers than the east Midlands, West Midlands, Wales, Northern Ireland, north-east England and Yorkshire and the Humber put together…

A significant north-south divide is also apparent, with areas in the south enjoying far greater representation than those in the north.

The director of thinktank that wrote the report, the New Local Government Network, said:

It isn’t fair that our laws are being partly written without all corners of the country having a fair say. The Midlands and north of England are particularly poorly represented.

The problem with the state of our current political situation is that it isn’t equal:

• Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have their own legislative bodies, with varying powers. But England doesn’t.
• Scotland and Wales have larger representation in the Commons than their population warrants.
• The Cabinet is dominated by MPs with Northern and Scottish constituencies. Only two Cabinet ministers have constituencies south of Watford.

Frankly, that the House of Lords is biased towards London and the South East means little. Especially if you consider the role of the Lords. They’re not representatives, they’re a check on our representatives.

Under the partial reforms, the hereditary “representative” - according to this report - Lords were removed and appointed Lords instated. They were [presumably] selected because they have specialist knowledge or experience and can as such properly critique the bills passed to them from the Commons. Not because of where they live.

Representation is about more than geography. Representatives should be equal, yes, but it’s not the be-all and end-all. When it comes to electoral influence, it must be equal across the entire country. One person = one vote = the same level of influence. But if we are slecting the best people to perform the role, where the live or where they come from must mean bugger-all.

A 19th century electoral system for the 21st century. The damning statement of the Electoral Commission in their report (pdf). It also reveals that the “current fragmented arrangements for electoral administration” treats voters as an “afterthought”.

The Electoral Commission has identiified massive loopholds in the electoral system that could allow for fraud. Such as the ability for voters to rock up and vote just like that. They propose photo ID being required in order to vote. This I support. It is just common sense. At the moment, the electoral system is so open to fraud right at the point where we cast our votes, as nothing is required from us except to give a name - and in reality we could give anyones. And it’s not like we all don’t have at least one form of photo ID!

Alongside this is the way that we register our right to vote. Currently this is done by the head of the household for each address. The proposal made by the Electoral Commission is that we have a national electoral register, which each voter must sign up to on their own - providing a signature, date of birth and national insurance number. Like photo ID, This is a good proposal and makes common sense.

The current electoral system under which we run our democratic elections is under massive strain, and simply cannot continue as it is. It needs to be reformed. These reforms proposed by the Electroal Commission are absolutely correct. Unless they are made, the outcomes of our elections will soon be open to suspicion.

Alan Duncan is wrong when he claims that protesters camped outside Westminster have “no justifiable democratic purpose” and says that they should be moved on permanently. What they are doing has plenty of democratic purpose - they are making their opinions known to those who have been elected to represent them. That is their - and our - right.

There is absolutely no case for having the protestors moved on. Alan Duncan says that it is “nothing to do with freedom of speech or the right to protest.” Bollocks. It has everything to do with free speech and the right to protest. We must have the right to protest how we like and where we like, within obvious reasons.

When Duncan says that the camp is a “vulgar and pointless display”, he has half a point. It is vulgar and so very un-British to directly protest and demonstrate our elected representatives, rather than accepting whatever they decree as is our usual modus operandi. It is also a pretty damn ugly set-up.

Whilst this protest may not actually achieve anything, that doesn’t make it “pointless”. It has a huge - and hugely important - point, to make it clear that we the people do not always agree with what the politicians decide for us.

It is called “historic” by some, but really the opposite is true. Instead of being the “first tentative step towards searching for a solution to a country that is in crisis”, it is a blow to democracy.

Tsvangirai has made a massive mistake by agreeing to talk with Mugabe about a power-sharing agreement. There can be no real steps forward whilst Mugabe remains in power as unelected President.

The only way any steps forward can be amde for Zimbabwe is for Mugabe to no longer be in charge. He is a tyrant and a murderer, and must be removed so that Zimbabwe can move towards a brighter and more democratic future.

By agreeing to talk with Mugabe, and intending to sign a final deal in two weeks time, Tsvangirai is betraying his supporters - and everyone else in Zimbabwe. And Mbeki, by brokering such a deal, is implicit in ensuring that Mugabe remains as a tyrant.

The government has now formally ratified the EU Constitution Lisbon Treaty. In doing this, they have sidestepped the courts, and shoved two fingers in the direction of the British people.

We wanted to vote on it, and successfully stalled ratification. But the government have now gone on anyway, despite their being a hearing today on whether Stuart Wheeler may appeal the original decision. Hopefully the government’s action of ratification - which could be said to be holding the court of the UK in contempt - works in Wheeler’s [and our] favour.

Brown’s action is also dismissive of the people of Ireland - the only people in the EU to get a chance to vote on the treaty - who voted no. At the same time, Sarkozy, who currently holds the EU Presidency, is declaring that Ireland must vote again - because they gave the “wrong” answer - aka the one with whom he disagrees.

It is disgusting that such actions are taking place. By saying that the Irish should vote again, rather than accepting the will of the people, the EU destroys any and every claim that they have to being a democratic institution.

Voting: The chance for the people to vote for issues or politicians out of a desire to choose their own leaders and/or future.

Right?

Well, not under this government.

Instead, it has been reclassified as:

Voting: The opportunity to get into a prize draw to win a TV, iPod or supermarket voucher.

Voting is an essential part of the democratic process. Voting is about making a choice between several available options, and selecting the one who prefer [or at least dislike less] than the others.

Bribing people to turn up at the ballot box would not improve democracy. In fact, the very oppsoite - it will belittle it. Rather than a civic duty, it becomes another crass opportunity to get a prize.

Whilst taking part in the democratic process is not a rational choice - why bother when someone else will for you? - lowering it to the position of commercialism won’t help. Just like compulsory voting, it simply isn’t democratic.

It is a duty, right, and responsibility to vote. It shouldn’t be demeaned like this.

The only thing you should get for voting is the satisfaction of taking part in the process. Though we should get given stickers for it. That would be good.

According to Tory Bear [the Guido Fawkes of Conservative Future]:

[The CF Steering Committee] have discussed in depth the prospect of removing the entire elections process from CF. Elections are apparently a) messy and dirty, b) cost too much - the ERS charge a hell of a lot and of the thousands of ballot papers sent out, only a fraction of them are returned and c) at the end of the day the big people’s Party don’t get the candidate they want.

TB has now heard this from two trusted and well wired sources.

If that has even the slightest inkling of truth, it is utterly reprehensible. What is the point of having a separate “youth” organisation within the party if its leaders are not to be chosen by its members?

The country is a democracy and the party is a democracy [well, pretty much] so why shouldn’t CF be one as well? Especially since it is already democratic, to remove the democratic element would be a huge step backwards - and rightly garner negative publicity.

Whilst all of their points are relatively valid, (a) and (c) can’t be helped and are an inevitable outcome of elections. They are unavoidable, and this argument is an argument against all democracy. However, (b) can be minimised at least - move the CF elections online and/or extend the term. Then not only is it saving money, but making the party look “innovative” and “forward moving” and other such phrases.

Very simply, removing the elections from CF would make it into a laughing stock, and be a travesty for a party that claims to support democracy.

“We The People” is a column written for the Wardman Wire. This blog post can also be seen here.

The attitude of politicians today to democracy can so well be summed up by the cartoon below, by Peter Brookes in the Times.

All for democracy - except where it might adversely affect them and what they want. Screw the people! Democracy is for the politicians!

There are two main areas in which democracy is taking a battering at the moment - Zimbabwe and the European Union. Neither of which are exactly strangers to this.

The difference between the two is as much as anything all in the appearance: Mugabe deploys violence and force in order to ensure that he stays in power; the European Union bureaucracy deploys “diplomacy”. Both ignore what we the people - the ones from whom they are supposed to draw their power through the support of - want.

Zimbabwe

The people of Zimbabwe want the MDC to control the parliament and Morgan Tsvangirai as President. Yet Mugabe declares that he will “go to war” before he would let Tsvangirai take over as President.

So he simply doesn’t care what the result of the presidential run-off would have been, had their actually been an opposition candidate. He doesn’t care about democracy, just about having power. Even the UN have declared that any Zimbabwean poll cannot be free and fair.

In the end, there is nothing that we can do about Zimbabwean democracy. Only the other African leaders can stop Mugabe and free the people of Zimbabwe from tyranny. Just calling for the poll to be delayed is not good enough by a very very long shot. The very principles of democracy need to be re-established.

European Union

Then we come to the European Union. This body suffers a democratic deficit nigh on as large as Zimbabwes, with the elected element having so very little power indeed. They are going to continue ratifying the Lisbon Treaty, despite it having been rejected by the Irish people.

The only people who got to vote on the Lisbon Treaty voted against it. Whilst every other country decided to press ahead and not bother asking their electorate what they thought but ratify it by parliament instead, Ireland asked the people. And they said no. Yet the EU don’t and won’t accept “no” for an answer, and appear to expect the referendum to be held again, like they did with Nice. If they do, they will destroy any claim that they ever had to being democratic.

In the UK, ratification was successfully stalled through legal action by Stuart Wheller who said that we the people had a “legitimate expectation” to be able to vote on Lisbon. But that has been lost - but hope still rests on an appeal, however slim that chance may be.

The EU is no a democratic institution. As the famous statment goes, it would not meet it’s own democratic criteria to join itself. And that goes quite some way to demonstrate the doublethink that surrounds and permeates it.

Conclusion

Democracy today is not democracy as it should be. It doesn’t meet the ideological requirements of democracy or even the practical requirements in Zimbabwe and the EU. The cry of “democracy!” spills from the mouths of all politicians, yet few ever actually do anythign about the issues in their own backyards. It is always someone else who is lacking in it; never themselves.

I am the first to admit that democracy is unlikely to be perfect in every, or indeed any, case. But these two examples are some of the worst in the world today - dictatorship under the banner of democracy.

“We The People” is a column written for the Wardman Wire. This blog post can also be seen here.

Democracy really does seem to be taking a huge battering at the moment.

In Zimbabwe, Mugabe is proclaiming that Morgan Tsvangirai will never lead the country - and that he will take the country in to civil war to prevent it. The Opposition leader, who gained more votes than Mugabe in the April presidential elections, has been detained numerous times whilst on the campaign trail.

There can be no free and fair elections in Zimbabwe at the moment. Mugabe must be removed from his position. If he wins the presidential election, he would have done so by intimidation. He makes it impossible for a free and fair election to be held.

Secondly, in one place that we just expect democracy to be ignored - the EU. Who are going to continue ratifying the Lisbon Treaty, despite it having been rejected by the Irish people.

What are they going to do? Make the Irish people vote again like over Nice? They’re not ruling it out.

So I say this to the EU: No means no. Accept it. You have no choice. Or at least you would, if you actually believed in demcracy and the rule of the people. The people have told you to eff-off. Do so.

We finally have a chance to vote on Gordon Brown! As has been flying around the blogosphere recently, we can vote to decide whether or not Madame Tussauds makes a waxwork of Gordo:

When Gordon Brown took over from Tony Blair last year, for the first time in a 150 year history, Madame Tussauds took the decision not to immediately create a figure of the current Prime Minister.

Instead we chose to wait for a General Election to confirm Gordon Brown’s status. Ten months later there is still no sign that Mr Brown intends to go to the polls – so Madame Tussauds is holding its own election to let YOU decide the question: Gordon Brown – in or out?

The ballots will be counted and on Wednesday 14th May the results released. Work will either proceed on Mr Brown’s figure or be put on hold until a General Election is called, whenever that might be.

So, basically, because Gordo is a coward and chickened out, and as it becomes clear that Gordo continues to have no balls [despite having Balls], Madame Tussauds is offering us the chance to vote on him instead.

Voting closes 5pm on 13th May.

Go vote and let Gordo know that we don’t want him!