Hello all, I've just returned from a weeks sailing in Greece. Had a good time.
I've often heard it said that a good government majority is an excellent thing because it allows them to 'get things done'. More often than not though we detest a party acting in a manner that indicates they believe they are above Parliament, and worse, the real power in this country lies in 10 Downing Street and with unelected civil servants according to Paxman. The government does many things, Helena Kennedy (Labour Law Lord) estimates that around 700 revisions have been made to criminal law since 1997. Some of those revisions have clearly been a failure, like night courts, that ended up costing around 30-40x more money per prosecutee (?) than conventional courts and had to be scrapped.
We, both here and on your side of the water, often resent it when the government does get things done. New terrorism laws have proved to be controversial and yet new terrorism laws were needed. I'd like to think that reasonable, and clearly legal, measures would attract cross-party support so that even a 'hung parliament' would achieve that which is necessary. But on the whole party politics is all about scoring points off the government in the manner of a high school debating chamber, Paxman would have us believe. The party faithful are dwindling in number and disenchantment set in long ago. Party politics, which has long since shifted to scrapping over the centre, has alienated the public.
The question is - should the party be strong? Stalin commented to Churchill, upon hearing that Churchill had to fight an election soon, that it would be much simpler if there were only one party. The authoritarian streak runs strong in those who play the game the best, telling us what to do for four or five years appeals. A strong government can achieve much, and much of that we may find difficult to swallow.
This isn't another 'vote Libertarian' thread, it's a thread borne of the increasing belief that all party politics is, or has become, corrupt. I am considering writing to some MP's in this country, good public servants who have crossed their party on many occasions, and ask them to consider running as 'Independants' at the next election. Independant Conservative or Labour would be fine, the independance is the crucial issue. I almost dare not do it for fear of their reply intimating that they think they would lose if they did, and that this is unconscionable for them.
Tales of whipping abound. I'm not sure if you have a similar office over there, think 'party enforcer', the guy who calls you in to his office (and sometimes assaults you) if you fail to tow the party line. One tale Paxman relates (although aware that it may be stuff of legend) is of some photographs of a publicly extremely moral Conservative politician that were sent to Conservative Head Office. The photographs involved him, young women and an animal. When the MP concerned threatened to vote against his party he was called in and shown these photographs and then they were put back in the safe. The implications were clear.
I've often heard it said that a good government majority is an excellent thing because it allows them to 'get things done'. More often than not though we detest a party acting in a manner that indicates they believe they are above Parliament, and worse, the real power in this country lies in 10 Downing Street and with unelected civil servants according to Paxman. The government does many things, Helena Kennedy (Labour Law Lord) estimates that around 700 revisions have been made to criminal law since 1997. Some of those revisions have clearly been a failure, like night courts, that ended up costing around 30-40x more money per prosecutee (?) than conventional courts and had to be scrapped.
We, both here and on your side of the water, often resent it when the government does get things done. New terrorism laws have proved to be controversial and yet new terrorism laws were needed. I'd like to think that reasonable, and clearly legal, measures would attract cross-party support so that even a 'hung parliament' would achieve that which is necessary. But on the whole party politics is all about scoring points off the government in the manner of a high school debating chamber, Paxman would have us believe. The party faithful are dwindling in number and disenchantment set in long ago. Party politics, which has long since shifted to scrapping over the centre, has alienated the public.
The question is - should the party be strong? Stalin commented to Churchill, upon hearing that Churchill had to fight an election soon, that it would be much simpler if there were only one party. The authoritarian streak runs strong in those who play the game the best, telling us what to do for four or five years appeals. A strong government can achieve much, and much of that we may find difficult to swallow.
This isn't another 'vote Libertarian' thread, it's a thread borne of the increasing belief that all party politics is, or has become, corrupt. I am considering writing to some MP's in this country, good public servants who have crossed their party on many occasions, and ask them to consider running as 'Independants' at the next election. Independant Conservative or Labour would be fine, the independance is the crucial issue. I almost dare not do it for fear of their reply intimating that they think they would lose if they did, and that this is unconscionable for them.