|
The 'parties' are not going to lie down and play dead, that is for sure. The first thing is not to fight them using their procedure, i.e. creating yet another party, but to :- 1:- Identify their weak points i.e. a:- with the voters, there are a lot of 'fed-up' voters out there. b:- their track record (all
parties), i.e. It does not matter what the issue is, whether you are 'for', or 'against', the fact that should be identified is YOU have never been asked, and what is equally important, your MP's opinion is suppressed by the party whips. 2:- Create an Association of Independents, the requirements being that they swear to :- 2a:- uphold the rights and wishes
of the citizens. Without a manifesto, to enable them to act according to the wishes of the electorate, and circumstances as they arise. The Association's function would be to publish the objectives of the members, i.e. the declaration to install an integrated democratic political system. Initially this would not require a 'land-slide' victory such as a party would need, desirable as it may be, the minimum would be just sufficient to create a negative situation for the majority party. The major impact would be in the population when they find that they do not have a vote on issues and the next constituency does. The parties could react in several ways:- 1:- Call another election. Unlikely, due to the risk of losing more voters
once the system was shown for it's weakness. Quite simply, it's the Law of Physic's. Where there is a vacuum something will fill it. The origins of our parliamentary system, comes from the Roman Empire, their leaders were soldiers, (territories were held by the sword, and when you are taking new territory all the time, it had to be a strong sword, in a strong fist), ours grew with the leaders being the knights, who had a vested interest in the well-being of their territory, they also had a vested interest in the survival of the 'nation'. It is also interesting to note, that the rules that they created, are still relevant today. They had the power at the local level, and at the 'national' level. With the increase of the power of the middle class, followed by the increase in the power of working class, the power of the knights diminished. This left a vacuum, the lack of continuity between local and national power, this void has been filled by parties. The party take-over worked, in a fashion, up to the advent of television, the media dream, suddenly, politics became a different animal. No longer was it the candidate who the public voted for, they started voting for the charismatic 'front', the leader of the party. This became more obvious, at least to me, during the Maggie Thatcher 'reign', and it led to her down fall. It is even more obvious with Tony Blair, who, after two years, was being accused of 'presidential' style of government, by members of his own party. The consequence of the public voting for the leader with a party tagged on, is that the MP's are just 'clones', or sheep to make the numbers up, the problem is, that when you have a lot of sheep, you also get a lot of shit, which is exactly what we have in having our 'soul's' being sold to a foreign power. Just how can an elected body sell us out by surrendering our farming, fisheries, manufacturing, mining, judicial system, police, army and soon our monetary system, without as much as a referendum? It is not just one party, it is all of the major parties. The Tories are saying 'save the Pound', they are not saying anything about the rest of it. Labour want in, and no questions asked, or permitted. The Lib's are so hungry for power that they will sell their own souls to the devil. There are various other parties who want out of EU, the problem is they will need money in order to be contenders for the 'throne'. Who has the kind of money that will give them the power to compete? Largely, it is the vested interests that want us in the EU, which is why the major parties are singing the EU song. Catch-22. It never fails to amaze me, how parties can raise taxes for three years, because the previous party left it in such a state, and then pay out about 2% of what they have rooked us for, in a pre-election budget, and the public fall for it (most of the time). Every time the governing party changes, the tax-payer foots the bill for the policy changes, again, and again, and again. It is time to call a halt to this insanity. It never fails to amaze me, how any one can expect to make progress, by driving in a zig-zag, from the left to the right, in a never ending cycle every four years. No one in politics dares to look 20, 40 years in front, the most they do is manipulations in order to survive the next election. The order of priority, for ANY government, should be We HAVE to break the cycle in order to have a future for our off-spring. The legacy that we leave, without a change, is dire, and that is the optimistic view. We need a permanent and continuous government, the members changed on a regular basis, BUT NOT ALL AT THE SAME TIME. For the same reasons, the idea of parliament shutting down for holidays is ludicrous, name a company that shuts it's doors for weeks at at a time. NO, holidays are programmed into the operational structure of a business, and so it should be for government. ----------------------------------------------------- Well it's my thoughts, what are yours? Comments Initiative & Referendum An alternative Direct Democracy is I&R as practiced is some parts of the world. Switzerland has the most developed, system but even that has a flaw in that a controlling 'hand' (committee) has to approve the petition before a referendum can be called. Just suppose a popular petition called for a referendum on an issue that did not meet the approval of the committee, can that still be Direct Democracy? |
