Working Against Democracy...

There are several elements to this blog, so do please bear with me.

First off, lets state some political tenets that should be enshrined in UK democracy.

The first is that all political representatives (MPs) should be elected and not appointed. They should declare any and all items that could affect their impartiality so that electors can take a view as to whether they are fit to be voted for. Being a member of a party implies a certain partiality. Being a member or benefitting from certain lobby groups does the same. Being a member of a group that seeks to remain hiden should be made illegal. Whether it's the Masons or Common Purpose, the Scouts or Amateur Dramatic Society, it should be declared.

The second is that an unbiased house of Lords should scrutinise the Commons to guard against excesses of power and ensure democracy is fulfilled. The Lords, athough appointed should bear in mind the will of the people where indicated. Either by supporting the manifesto of a duly elected political party, or by respecting the democratic vote in a referendum of the people.

The third is that the population should be free to criticise their represenatives and as part of that process should be able to investingate what their MP is doing. The public should have the right to ask questions of their representative and there should be an assumption that questions must be answered honestly. Leading on from that, the press should be independent, free and unfettered and able to investigate politicians and publish any findings. The public have a right to know what their representative is up to at all times.

Finally, the courts, judicial system and Police Force should be completely independent of politicians and should work for the benefit of all, with impartiality. The courts should uphold the law without fear nor favour. The Police are the public, granted special powers by the good will of the people. They do not have special powers granted by any other means.

Given all of the above (and by no mans have I covered everything), you can understand that anything that work against them is anti-democratic.

For instance, The EU: give that none of the members of the EU commission, the body that has all the real power is comprised of appointed, not elected technocrats. This is exactly the reason I voted to leave. It's bad enough that they expect payment from us (effectively a tax), but when a body like the EU comissions starts to talk about taking all tax-raising powers away from democratically elected governments, then for me the alarm bells ring. How dare they impose those powers without some trade-off in the form of increased democracy?

Hopefully the EU becomes irrelevant in the UK thanks to Brexit, although there are those in government that are working against the democratic will of the people. Like in the house of Lords. The Lords are there to scrutinise government legislation, they are not there to thwart the will of the people. If they continue to vote against Brexit, there will be a reckoning.

The Leveson inquiry and the resultant limits on the press are worrying. Impress, the body that has been set up to regulate the press wants papers and other outlets to sign up to it's regulatory framework. I'm sure it won't be long before other bastions of free speech including blogs like this come under the remit of it's control.

Make no mistake Impress and any other attempt to control free speech is working against democracy. We need the freedom to take the piss out of politicians, or enlighten the public when they do something dodgy. We needs a press free from any form of control.

And before anyone whinges at me, I've been a whisker away from tabloid stories on a couple of occasions. One was put to bed after a quiet word by the MOD. Not involving me directly, but I was on the periphery. A second time involved a friend of mine in an er, "alternative" culture. I wasn't nice watching the things that happened to her and the fact her career and livelyhood were destroyed.

The fact the Police and Judiciery are straying from their remit to be impartial and especially the Police are moving into political territory are worrying. When the Police impose limits on speech and the judiciary back them up, there is a problem. The rules on speech are wolly at best and open to interpretation, interpretation that the Police should not be the arbiters of. I mean, a few crass comments on Social media should not become a hate crime. And as successive governments impose wooly legislation and the Police and Courts suffer from mission creep and use those laws for things they were never intended for, we have a biased and uncontrolled Police and an attack on free speech.

But take all of these together, there is a very real threat to democracy. Without the freedom of speech, without an independent and impartial upper house, without a free press to inform us, we are in danger of losing the freedoms and democratic accountability that out forefathers worked so hard  against the elite to win.

Democracy

It will be interesting to see in the next few days how the EU react to the speeches made this week by Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May.

Corbyn wants us to be members of "a" customs union, with no concessions. i.e. tied to EU legislation, ruled by the ECJ, unable to control immigration.

May wants to have a fairer system, but in essence we pay money to the EU in exchange for tariff-free access to certain service sectors and geographical areas. In essence free movement of money across borders for her chums in the City of London and we cough up to get the EU to turn a blind eye to the lack of border between Northern and Southern Ireland.

Both speeches were aimed at the audience at home, after all both are elected politicians and I'm sure they would like to be re-elected at some point, so they have to sound good at home.

However, the EU commission members are unencumbered by such petty things as an electorate. They do not have to answer to the thousands of European car workers that could lose jobs if we buy fewer European cars. They can and would quite easily allow the UK to crash out of the UK with no substantial trade deal in place. It's just tough for those European workers and after all, what are they going to do about it? It's not as if those workers can sack the commission members is it?

Nope, the commission will stick two fingers up to the European electorate and would quite happily allow them to lose their jobs. As an example just look at the youth unemployment in the Southern EU states. Do the commission care about that? Nope, not their problem, even if it is their rules and restrictions that have caused it.

Therin lies the problem with the EU: it is undemocratic at best and anti-democratic at worst. The response from Brussels I am convinced will prove that very fact.

The 48%

I would like to think that anyone that reads this blog on a regular basis (is there anyone out there?) kows that I voted for Brexit.

But I thought it was about time I looked at the 48% of voters who voted for remain and what is being done for them in the Brexit negotiations.

If the majority for leave was much higher, I'm sure we would have had a "hard" Brexit: article 50 would have been invoked immediately and we would have been out of everything and trading on WTO rules after the 2 year negotiation period. That period would have been used to confirm tarding relations between us and the EU block as a third country.

However, there wasn't that great a majority, so the pace of Brexit has to be slower and more cautious in order to gain some concessions for the 48%. For instance the security of our citizens in Europe, friction-free trade and all the other things that are making the negotiations as easy as travelling across the country's currently icy roads.

The 48% need to understand the negotiations on trade and everything else are for them.

Actually, it's not 48%.... polls show that most remain-voting people accepted the result of the referendum. they accept they lost and accept that Brexit in some form or another must happen. I thank those remain voters who graciously accepted the result of the referendum. It's a very adult view to take and I thank them for not rocking the boat, throwing their toys out of the pram or whatever metaphor descripes the petulant few that refuse to accept the democratic will of the people.

It's those die-hard remainers, something like 24% of those that voted that are sore losers and want us to stay in the customs union even though it is incompatible with the ending of free movement of people, as required by the 52% that voted for Brexit. 

The 24% want free and frictionless trade, even though the EU themselves have said that once out of the customs union it is impossible.

The 24% want no border between Southern and Northern Ireland, even though they are two different countries and the EU have already said it is impossible without a customs union.

The 24% seem to have a disproportionate representation in Parliament (certainly in the house of Lords) and in the media. So much for representative government.

The BBC seem to push the minority anti-Brexit 24% agenda at every turn, despite the majority of voters voting for Brexit and the majority of voters (including leave voters) accepting the result of the referendum. Not very representative of the BBC at all. In fact it's very biased of them, as has been reported many times. But thenn again, what do you expect from an organisation that receives a substantial contribution in monetary terms from the EU.

It's quite telling to look at anti-Brexit organisations (charities included) and see whether they receive direct funding from the EU. The vast majority do...

Anyway, I do feel for the 24%... I really do. What they are asking for is incompatible with the will of the majority and especially against the rules and regulations of the organisation they wish us to remain part of. One of the very reasons I voted against the EU is the inflexibility and unbending adherence to the rules, enforced by unelected officials.

Sorry 24%, you're getting a taste of your own medicine. It's not our fault. We are trying to negotiate on your behalf. I just wish you would appreciate it and understand that the very organisation you love refuses to accept your viewpoint. Ironically showing just how undemocratic the EU really is.