The British Free State
All members of the Libertarian Party have received the following circular this morning
Why I believe that the Party needs to campaign for a Swiss style Constitution.
1. Power is concentrated in too few hands with no checks and balances
The office of Prime Minister is a relatively new one in our political History. However this office has virtually no constraints on it at all. It enjoys the Royal Prerogative.
This has lead to abuses of power which reached its apotheosis under Blair and the ‘Sofa Government’. 646 members of Parliament largely abrogated their power of holding the executive to account by trying to become part of the executive themselves or indulging in lining their own pockets, as the sinecure of being an MP relied on office holders being and acting like Edwardian gentlemen.
Under a Swiss style Constitution you would not have had Gordon Brown signing Lisbon in a broom cupboard away from the glare of the media. We would have been guaranteed a referendum because UKIP, the Libertarian Party and a host of other parties and pressure groups would have gained the required signatures to force a referendum.
There is no point whining about the EU when you cannot do anything about it, under a Swiss style Constitution you could do something about it. So the focus of the Libertarian Party will be two fold
A) Promoting and enshrining individual Liberty in Law
B) Fettering the State in chains so that it cannot make top down decisions that we have no say on.
2. The creation of a class of permanent rulers
A big State and big Government creates a class of self perpetuating oligarchs. We have seen the rise of ‘political families’, we have the creation of unaccountable private companies like ACPO -Association of Chief Police Officers- that are using public funds and are directing public policy on policing. They have created a new class of policeman that is heavily armed making dire warnings of a summer of middle class discontent, finally we have the permanent Civil Service which has become politicised. Damien McBride was a political attack dog paid as a treasury civil servant.
None of these people are elected, they are unaccountable and they have access to your taxes.
3. Other peoples money is easy to burn
Two years ago quangos, local and central government lost one billion pounds in the Icelandic banking collapse. Investing in Iceland was reckless and against Government guidelines. Yet name me one person that went to jail or lost their job over this.
Brown actually used anti-terrorism legislation to seize the assets of a friendly nation that required not the authority of a Judge, but that of a Treasury official.
4. Constitutional change is going to happen.
However it is going to be top down. As Libertarians we have a duty to put the individual at the top of the pyramid of power, not at the bottom of an inverted pyramid of power where the individual owes duties to the State. THAT is neo serfdom. The non debate on AV is a sop to the social democrats, the Tory Bill of Rights has already been shelved in a dark ante room.
5. Continuity and Change.
The British have a genius for being non confrontational and non revolutionary. As an ardent Republican, I will have to concede that a reduced role will have to be found for that of the Monarch. The Monarch can be a true constitutional Head of State, and swear allegiance to the Constitution as would the People, Courts and Defence forces.
As a Libertarian and a Constutionalist I put a huge amount of blame on our current national predicament being founded on having a Constitution that contains just three words ‘Parliament is Sovereign’.
On accepting a constitution that is founded in the words of-
In the name of the People and Commons of England,Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Cornwall here assembled
We can have a Constitution that is founded on the individual is sovereign unless he/she has actively assented in being ruled by way of repeated national referenda.
As nobody has chosen to stand against me as Leader of the Libertarian Party on November 27th, I will argue to forge alliances with any campaign and the devil, that I think will promote the twin aims of personal Liberty and Fettering the State by way of a campaign for a Constitution.
I am urging all members to accept the change of name of the Party to that of the Libertarian and Constitutional Party, not to diminish Libertarianism but to enhance it. The Party lives by a Constitution so should we as a nation.
A cantonal form of minimal goverment would allow within a Federal framework, Scotland and Wales to run its own affairs and finances, Cornwall to reassert its historic claim to be a Crown Dependency like the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, and for the historic regions of England and Ulster to reassert their political and financial independence.
The only role therefore for Whitehall would be for Defence and Foreign Affairs.
Constitutional change is coming, but under Labour it threatened to be a series of obligations to the State. Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights are all subbordinate to the vote of Parliament. Even Habeas Corpus is subbordinate to the vote of Parliament.
The right of every citizen to challenge Government in rendering any legislation ‘unconstitutional’ including the transfer of powers to Europe is surely that there can be little dispute about.
Andrew P Withers
-
November 5, 2010 at 09:22 -
This is a fantastic idea, and having lived in Switzerland for 5 years I can vouch for the excellence of its political system.
The best bit is, the few politicians are anonymous administrators, bound so much as they are by the will of the people for whom they work. I don’t even know who they are, and I was in the park the other day with the Mayoress of Geneva, people were pretty friendly to her but no BoJo or Red Ken grandstanding BS. Admittedly Geneva isn’t London, but it’s a pretty decent-sized and extremely wealthy city.
-
November 5, 2010 at 10:10 -
This is a terrible idea.
The reason why Switzerland works so well is that they have a homogenous population. In the UK, where the population is not homogenous, Swiss style democracy would be a death blow to Liberty.
As the population changes, so too will the way that people vote. That means that any majority that emerges will eventually take over, completely ‘legitimately’. In Switzerland, this is not going to happen because everyone is Swiss in their culture.
The only way a country with a diverse and changing population can ensure that Liberty persists in the long run is by the near eradication of the state and all of its powers to micro manage people’s lives. If that scenario is true; a super small impotent state, then there would be no threat of any single group taking the power of the state apparatus to control you and curtail your Liberty.
Switzerland is a nice place, and its people are very friendly and decent, but their system of government is not compatible with Libertarianism, and is not transferable to the UK, where the changing population threatens to completely – and legally – transform this country into a very unpleasant place.
-
November 5, 2010 at 10:21 -
The Swiss Federation has four official languages how is that a homogenous population, do you actually really mean ‘white’
-
November 5, 2010 at 10:26 -
Switzerland does not have a homogeneous population.
Each canton is ethnically, linguistically or religiously different from its neighbours. The newest canton, Jura, split from its parent canton because of the difference.
Each canton is more or less homogeneous but the country as a whole isn’t.
As for applying this to Britain it depends on how the British equivalent of cantons would be created. Splitting it on a county basis would have the same objections to it as Jason Cartwright outlined.
-
November 5, 2010 at 10:36 -
The part I object to is the fifth clause.
We need a final backstop – someone that can make the decision at the end of all the bickering. That is the role I see for the Monarch – a role that is enshrined in the constitution.
There would need to be a few changes to who could be Monarch. Things like having gone to university and gained a full degree in science and/or engineering, a knowledge of business and so on.
That being said, what you are proposing is embodied in a story I am writing which sees the transfer of power from the political class to the people.
-
November 5, 2010 at 14:03 -
“We need a final backstop – someone that can make the decision at the end of all the bickering. That is the role I see for the Monarch – a role that is enshrined in the constitution.”
I agree. This person’s power should be absolute and unquestionable but limited to saying “No” to any new legislation for case where the proposed law might be within the letter of the constitution but not within the spirit of it.
-
-
November 5, 2010 at 13:59 -
How are you minarchists going to prevent your constitution ending up with a tyrannical leviathan like the USA?
-
November 5, 2010 at 14:17 -
No, I mean from the same culture. That means people, no matter what they happen to look like, all sharing the same fundamental understanding about what Switzerland is, and why it works.
If you import a bunch of people, who settle and then grow exponentially in number, who do not share this understanding (and to completely demolish your fatuous point, lets say they are ‘white’ communists) and they all have the ability to change the constitution, based only on their numbers, then the Swiss system will eventually cease to exist.
This has nothing to do with ‘race’ its just logic.
Only a system where the number of people voting makes no difference is immune to this fundamental problem. That system is a Libertarian one, where the state is very small, and no amount of voting can affect your rights.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }