Constitutional Fumigation
This morning I received my copy of ‘Citizen’, the magazine of Unlock Democracy.
Let me have a confession here the first political organisation I joined at the age of seventeen,nearly thirty five years ago was ‘The Campaign For Electoral Reform. Even at those tender years I realised that the political system we lived under did not reflect the diversity of political thought in the United Kingdom.
First Past The Post (FPTP) favoured one Fabian Social Democratic Coalition (Labour), against another conservative centre right coalition (Conservatives).
Since then we have reached the stage that one soft left party (The Conservatives) are in bed with another soft left party (Liberal Democrats), opposing them is a increasingly hard left big State party (Labour). Not much of a choice if you are a Jeffersonian small state classical Liberal! Largely that choice has been denied me, I have successfully not managed to vote in one MP or Councillor in thirty five years that has reflected my views.
This is largely because I vote with my heart rather than voting for the least worst option.
So having been disenfranchised for thirty five years I am attracted to Proportional Representation, it was for this reason I joined the Liberal Party, unfortunately I found my local party was not very Liberal at all, I left when the Liberal Party was taken over by the Social Democratic Party, and became a fully fledged left of centre Social Democratic party, only paying lip service to Liberalism by retaining the word Liberal in the title.
We are now promised a Referendum on AV next May, as part of the price ticket for the Coalition. I do not think that Conservative and Labour Parties are going to vote for AV because they are quite happy with the current carve up.
Lets be clear AV is not proportional so it is not my first choice, but it is an improvement on FPTP. Therefore reluctantly I will support AV, as the status quo is simply not tenable any more.
AV does promise to-
- At least make my vote count for something
- Give smaller parties and Independents a fighting chance
I do not buy that it will make MP’s more accountable, or that elections will be fought on areas that are important to me, or that it is anti extremist.
For that we need to have a root and branch campaign that truly takes back Parliament, that of a new Constitutional Settlement. We have nothing fundamental since 1688, apart from ‘The Great Reform Bill of 1832′ which was largely an adjustment to new economic realities. The Swiss in the meantime have had three rewrites of their written Constitution in that time. Central to their Constitution is the premise that State is subordinate to the individual.
At last year’s Convention of Modern Liberty, the stage was packed with some notable thinkers and writers, and wannabees from the three major parties. I got the feeling that they felt it was something they felt that they should show up to.
The best and most impassioned speakers came from the floor, demanding a new Constitutional Settlement. This was some six months before the Expenses scandal broke. I now just wish that the Convention had been held last summer instead.
Alexandra Runswick in ‘The Citizen’ writes that that she wants to see fundamental reform, advocating a Bill of Rights and the Protection of Civil Liberties, you cannot get either of these until you have a Constitution that puts the Individual above the State, sadly I think that ‘Unlock Democracy’s aims are far to limited. More along the line of ‘we would like our masters to be nice to us, whilst we are being told how to live our lives’ that treating people as individuals, who have a broad spectrum of opinions and would actually like to have some say in where their expropriated money is being spent.
To this end I am proposing that at this years Libertarian Party conference we change our name to the ‘Libertarian and Constitutional Party’, every policy that the LPUK expounds comes from the basic premise that the State is Subordinate to the Individual, that needs to be enshrined in a written Constitution that comes from the bottom up, not is forced on us from above. Cantonal/Lander Federal United Kingdom is the only thing that is going to hold us together.
A centralised State creates torpor,corruption and malign influence and colossal waste. The Swiss Model is something I can recommend.
It is time we wrote our first contract with Government in nearly four hundred years.
Andrew P Withers
-
1
September 16, 2010 at 13:16 -
I really wonder if AV is going to offer the public any more than a more varied and interesting amount of horse-trading between minority parties and the big ones? All I can see is the prospect of further Fabian dominance (and that’s what all the established parties are, would they but admit it). Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
-
2
September 16, 2010 at 13:25 -
Monotonicity – the problem with AV is that in at least one general election in two it will produce (in at least one constitutency) a sub-optimal outcome where you voting for a given candidate will reduce that candidates chance of being elected. The same applies with STV but to a far smaller extent (1:8000 rather than 1:1000). This does not apply at all with FPTP.
The fairest system is sortition – but I think I’m its only advocate.
-
3
September 16, 2010 at 16:39 -
No, Simon, you are not alone; I think sortition is a very fair system. At the very least it would ensure that it was in the interest of all citizens for everyone to be well educated. I think ostracism would be a good idea as well.
-
4
September 16, 2010 at 21:17 -
Trouble is that one would need a truck-load of ostraka : there are just so many that deserve at least this sanction — a punishment likely too lenient for most of them, I might add.
We should really need to extend the Athenian model by having multiple ostracism in any one year. And may we do it in the summer, please, since presumably we shall all have to traipse down to Trafalgar Square or where ever the new agora is ?
ΠΞ
-
-
-
5
September 16, 2010 at 13:47 -
The great thing about first past the post, which encourages the growth of two main competing parties, is that it is the best way to ensure a truly terrible government can be disposed of, and that there is genuine competition for votes between differing points of view. Lawmakers really do have to try to get us to vote for them, on both a political and personal basis. Proportional representation encourages the growth of minor parties in the centre ground which it is impossible to get rid of, and will always be part of a ruling coalition. As well as priority lists, so that we have no say in who actually governs us – just the party they are from. Jackie Smith would still be in parliament, as she would have been well up the labour list. Great for established politicians, crap for voters, so thanks but no thanks.
-
6
September 16, 2010 at 14:39 -
Only recently has the possibility of true democracy emerged. It is now possible for the public to vote directly on any issue. I refer both to voting by internet, and by means of the coloured buttons on TV remotes. Unfortunately, both systems would be wide open to abuse; by politicians, telecoms technicians bribed by or acting for vested interests, and by the voting public themselves. Given the will to do so however, it should not be impossible for cleverer people than me to engineer secure systems based on these technologies. I’m not holding my breath though.
-
7
September 17, 2010 at 10:11 -
“Given the will to do so however, it should not be impossible for cleverer people than me to engineer secure systems based on these technologies. ”
There will always be a bigger pool of clever people available to hack it than design it.
“The great thing about first past the post, which encourages the growth of two main competing parties, is that it is the best way to ensure a truly terrible government can be disposed of”
I would argue that *most* goverments in the last 100 years where terrible, for every step they take forward, they take two back.
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }