Part of the openDemocracy Network

Power2010

Breaking the monopoly of the professional politician: Guy Aitchison's idea for popular forums in Parliament
 

When you're in a hole, stop digging: Pam Giddy's advice to MPs who still don't get it
 

Ending the divine right of political parties: Steve Hawkins makes a radical suggestion
 

Les Miserables and Power 2010: John Jackson diagnoses the political class's selective crisis-mongering
 

A call to oD readers: Helena Kennedy calls on oD readers to support Power2010
 

More in this series

Submit your idea for the Power 2010 pledge.

The British Crisis

Do the public really want to change ‘the system’?: Stuart Wilks-Heeg presents polling evidence
 

Don't trust MPs' constitutional poker: Guy Aitchison supports the call for a citizens' convention
 

Brown's 'National Council for Democratic Renewal': Anthony Barnett on the Prime Minister's desperate proposal
 

More in this series

Navigation

delicious | digg | reddit | newsvine | furl | google | yahoo | technorati | diigolet

Syndicate content

Liberalise or die

John Jackson, 29 - 05 - 2008
delicious | digg | reddit | newsvine | furl | google | yahoo | technorati | diigolet

John Jackson (London, Mischon de Reya): In the current issue of Prospect, Philip Collins and Richard Reeves assert that “Labour is failing to win-or even to grasp- the big political argument: how to ensure people are in control of their own lives.” From that starting point they take their readers on a journey that ends with the conclusion that Labour has a stark choice-it must abandon its liking for central-state diktat and either liberalise or die

They signpost the journey with, for example, references to the dangers of the Fabian brand of “mechanical socialism”, Labour being heir to another tradition too, "Radical liberals, seeking to provide the conditions for people to live flourishing lives of their own choosing, having driven many of the social advances of the 20th century” and "Unless there are strong arguments to the contrary, power should reside with individuals."

It is very striking that the article does not recognise that ordinary people are entitled to decide for themselves how they should take control of their own lives. In essence it is a discussion of what a political party should do to “give” ordinary people such control in pursuit of its own opinions and interests. That is something very different and is an affront to the notions of personal liberty and human rights.

This goes to the root of an increasingly serious problem. The political parties have acquired a large amount of unconstitutional and unaccountable power. Their grip on our electoral arrangements coupled with the whipping system and the payroll vote have destroyed our system of representative democracy (so that it is neither representative nor democratic) and reduced Parliament to a role largely junior to that of the Government.

The inertia built in to this situation is such that we must accept the political parties as a permanent element in our lives-perhaps as one of the “powers” that need to be recognised and kept “separate” from the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.

That could not happen-directly or indirectly- without a new constitutional settlement which guarantees democracy and human rights and which sets out clearly the powers and responsibilities of the different levers of state. And that is where the ordinary person should come in. “We the People” have the right to exercise our ultimate sovereignty by actively participating in (and finally approving by referendum) the creation of such a new settlement.

If the Labour Party really wants to embrace radical liberalism that is an idea it should breathe life into. Having done so it should have the wisdom to stand back and not attempt to instruct the rest of us on how we should exercise our rights and freedom. Perhaps Collins and Reeves would like to think about this.

This article adheres to the openDemocracy.net principles.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

britologywatch said:

Fri, 2008-05-30 08:31

Any new constitutional settlement would have to also deal with the 'national question', i.e. at the very least, the powers to be exercised by national parliaments in each of the UK nations (including in England), the relationship of those bodies to the UK parliament and executive, and the degree of scrutiny of and control over those national parliaments. Failing to factor this in just maintains the pretence that national-level governance is still a unitary phenomenon in the UK, which it is not.

And this relates to another issue: why is it just the state versus the individual? What about other levels of government / self-government, including the UK nations but also communities and local areas? If you just 'devolve' everything to the individual, what kind of cohesive society do you think you can build?

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><b> <i> <br> <p> <div> <img> <map>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may quote other posts using [quote] tags.
More information about formatting options

Books from Amazon

They say about OK

"the ever-stimulating OpenDemocracy"
Ekklesia

"See OurKingdom to keep up"
South Belfast Diary

"...an essential guide to understanding the dynamic constitutional situation..."
Peter Oborne

"...becoming a daily read for me."
Iain Dale

"To make sense of it all, check out OurKingdom..."
Matthew d'Ancona

"Worth a look...it is, however, recommended by Matthew d'Ancona."
The Wardman Wire

"Fast becoming the best political website around"
Tom Waterhouse, CEP

"...attracting energy from a range of contributors."
thenextwave

"...looks very promising..."
The England Project

"The excellent new OurKingdom blog from OpenDemocracy..."
The Green Ribbon

"On the internet, I keep in touch with openDemocracy, a website on global current affairs, and its useful offshoot, OurKingdom"
Andreas Whittam-Smith

"thanks to the fine folk at OurKingdom, (who manage to communicate a variety of perspectives in the way that only a decent group blog can)"
Nostalgia For the Future