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

Lies, truth and politicians

12 - 10 - 2007
delicious | digg | reddit | newsvine | furl | google | yahoo | technorati | diigolet

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): A recent forum in openDemocracy discussed whether there should be a law against politicians lying. It was probably started because the word got out about the programme Richard Symons made for the BBC. I watched the full thing, called The Ministry of Truth, last night on BB2. It was much more interesting than the clip run on Newsnight. You can get to the latter from the new Newsnight Big Fat Politics Page. I am very suspicious of the way politics is being turned into comedy to become part of the politico-entertainment complex and dislike the overly jokey approach, but in the end I was won over to the argument - having just argued against it in the oD forum. The film shows a wonderful range of politicians confronted with a draft for a Bill that would make it illegal for them to lie, and their responses. The penalty, if found guilty: to be disqualified forthwith from holding public office. There was a lot of huffing, and puffing and saying that they didn't even "fib" as Jack Straw put it. Symons made the point that there is a law against murder even though it is very rare. So why not a law against politicians lying? What really emerged as the programme unfolded is the way that British legislators regard themselves as a law unto themselves, accountable to no one else except - in a most distant sense - the voters, whom they do everything they can to manipulate. The idea that they should be answerable to the law was an anathema to them. As this became clear it changed my mind, we need this law! I don't think it addresses the central issue which it pretends to: of getting politicians, the media and also us the public to be truthful. What it does do is challenge the elitism of the political class.

There is a link here to the argument in Peter Oborne's new book The Triumph of the Political Class and what I like about the idea, as I think about it, is that while it has a populist edge, its outcome is a law not a prejudice. At the end of the film the Welsh MP Adam Price is seen saying yes, he'd run with it and try and turn it into legislation. There will be an early day motion on the 17th. (By the way, Adam has been promising to blog for OurKingdom. Er, we still trust you, Adam)

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.

bill.thomas (not verified) said:

Wed, 2007-10-17 20:51

Did the bill on truthfull representation get aired to day in parliament??

I now feel our Prime Ministers cannot be totally relied upon and am worried if this is the case i.e Iraq and weapons of mass destructruction . Who can one trust as an 84 yr old?????as

dan leighton (not verified) said:

Fri, 2007-10-12 10:55

What I found fascinating was how noneof the featured MPs disagreed with the flawed premise the 'misrepresentation of the people' bill was based on: that sovereignty flows from the people in the British Constitution. Our Kingdom is a constiutional monarchy in which parliament is soveriegn, power does not formally reside with the people. However the film, intentionally or not, brilliant revealed the contrortions MPs have to go through to link this brute fact to the democratic norms on which their legitmacy is based.

Today’s politicians necessarily have to pay lip service to popular sovereignty as praliamentary soveriegnty is practically if not formally parastic upon it. Yet they are understandably reluctant to put this on a constitutional footing – which would, rightly in my view, constrain the discretion they have over the democratic process and the means by which they are held to account. What the film revealed so well was that outside of elections people have minimal control over a self-regulating political class. While it may not have been the original intention of the film makers the idea of using criminal law to prosecute MPs was to my mind a brilliant ruse for highlighting the self-serving way in which popular sovereignty is used and abused by politicians.

jamesgraham (not verified) said:

Fri, 2007-10-12 11:16

I've written about this here.

I have to admit to not having seen the programme yet, although I'm planning to watch it this weekend. But I think it is incredibly naive to think this would be a tool which the public could use to hold politicians to account: it would be a tool for politicians to bash each other over the head with.

Have you not seen how the Standards Board has degenerated local politics? It's based on the same fundamental premise. The result has been to transpose political arguments into a quasi-judicial sphere, using the fact that X has been "investigated" for Y as a perfectly legal way to smear your opponents (no smoke without fire and all that).

Have you not seen what a nonsense the police investigation into the sale of honours degenerated into?

The Misrepresentation of the People Act would catch out bad liars (who the system tends to catch out anyway) and exonerate the good ones. And what do you do about all those politicians (I could name a certain recently ex-Prime Minister for example) who have an uncanny knack of believing 100% of what they say? How do you regulate against that?

Its all very well to mock politicians for getting huffy about making it illegal for them to lie, but try arguing with a journalist that it should be illegal for them to tell fibs and the bumptuousness goes off the Richter scale. As it happens, I think both self-important professions are right - we ought to make defamation laws far more limited for example. It is crass to compare it to market traders being done for fraud; worse to compare it to murder.

ourkingdom (not verified) said:

Fri, 2007-10-12 23:19

I see what you are saying James, but watch the prog. Daniel gets the point that it exposes them - as I said we need a truthful politics which also needs a truthful media. This is a much bigger thing than making lies illegal. Tell us what you think when you've seen it.

Anthony

The Ministry of Truth « OurKingdom (not verified) said:

Sun, 2007-10-14 08:02

[...] Top Posts Fix it - or be fixed! Stormont's stumbling startIT IDiocyLies, truth and politiciansCompulsory voting and fixed term [...]

James Graham (not verified) said:

Sun, 2007-10-14 10:22

Now watched and duly blogged:

"I’ve just spent the morning watching the BBC’s Ministry of Truth programme. Surprisingly, it is even more loathesome, and unexpectedly sinister, than I imagined it would be."

Quaequam Blog! » Blog Archive » The Min (not verified) said:

Sun, 2007-10-14 10:10

[...] Unity and Dan Leighton point out, under our present constitution the people are NOT sovereign. Personally however, [...]

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

Email Alerts

Fill in the form below to sign up to our automatic daily alerts, or weekly editorial summary (you will be taken to another page to confirm which options you want).

Enter your Email


Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

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