Stuart Weir (Cambridge, Democratic Audit): It is very odd in a culture which hides behind pragmatism and custom actually to base an enterprise on principle, and especially if that enterprise is all about democracy. Democracy in Britain is what governments, or civil servants, or even special advisers, think and do, a backdrop to an informal political system from which the media benefit so much that they do not question it.
It is being grounded in principle that singles Democratic Audit out from other organisations and academic institutions that analyse or campaign on democratic issues in the United Kingdom. When we created Democratic Audit way back in the early 1990s, we decided that it was not good enough to add to the “whinging, whining and wanking” that Neil Kinnock then, and our political class always, resent about challenges to their hegemony. We would subject the UK state to comprehensive analysis over time, based on the two basic principles of democracy and the mediating values that derive from those principles.
The two principles are that the people should ultimately control everything that government does in their name, and that everyone should be equal in exercising that control. I can still remember the incredulous snort of a senior civil servant when David Beetham and I explained our first principle: “Are you serious?” She clearly thought we were not.
The “over time” is significant. Part of the Audit’s remit is to measure the quality of democracy and the protection of human rights in the UK at intervals. We began with two founding audits, the first of civil liberties (by Francesca Klug, Keir Starmer and me), the second of political power and democratic control (David Beetham and me). We followed these up with a third audit, Democracy under Blair, and yet another audit is in prospect as the next general election approaches.
One unexpected outcome of our work was an invitation from the intergovernmental organisation, International IDEA, to make our auditing framework universal. This we did, adding yet another principle: the only people who were qualified to carry out an audit in any country were the people who lived there. Since then, there have been in all some 21 democratic audits, or assessments, in countries around the world, organised by governments, the UNDP, bodies like the Open Society Institute and academic institutions. As Monika Ericson and Melida Jimenez from International IDEA explain in an article on the openDemocracy site, they have just published a new guide to the methodology and have created a network of audit teams and a new website (www.idea.int/sod).
The Audit’s major books and reports have been widely praised by (among others) Yasmin Alibhai, Professor Ronald Dworkin, Professor David Held, Lloyd of Berwick, Peter Oborne, Sir David Omand, Anthony Sampson, Lord Scarman, Lord Paul Tyler and Tony Wright MP. A new era funded by the Rowntree Charitable Trust will now open up under a new chairperson, Simon Burall, and a new director (the post is being advertised on openDemocracy and Guardian online). If there is one thing that has really pissed me off during my time – apart from the arrogant ignorance of most people in the political class – it is their crass assumption that those of us who care about democracy are joyless freaks. Democratic Audit has been great fun so far and I am sure it will continue to be.
