So the revolt against Gordon Brown fizzled out last night and it’s easy to see why. Ultimately, his opponents were only interested in saving their own skins come general election time and had no differences of principle or policy with the prime minister.
Backbench MPs as well as scores of ex-ministers have participated for over 12 years in shaping Labour to the point where any remaining signs of the party from which it had come have been extinguished for good. In its place appeared “New” Labour – openly dedicated to facilitating corporate and financial power and influence in a partnership with the state.
Being a Brownite or Blairite has made no essential difference to this naked and open alliance of capitalism and government. Between them they carved up the public sector for the benefit of private enterprise, urged on the City speculators and created a society where inequality grew at an unprecedented rate.
Apart from a handful of MPs, the vast majority sanctioned these changes as an easy way of getting re-elected. Now that their charmed existence is threatened in the wake of the economic, financial and parliamentary crises, it’s a case of every MP for him/herself. SOS in this case stands for Save Our Salaries (and pensions etc).
What finally convinced the so-called rebels to call of their attempted coup was the threat of an immediate general election should Brown be ousted, with the certainty that the vast majority would lose their seats if that happened. But the inevitable is surely only postponed.
The collapse of the New Labour vote in the European and council elections is historic in its depth and shows a party in terminal decline. While two-thirds of the electorate boycotted the polls, some sections of totally disillusioned working class voters even switched their allegiance to the neo-fascist British National Party out of desperation.
So it’s a bit late and more than a little disingenuous for Alistair Darling to say that his government’s failure to “articulate a sense of vision” and to “inspire confidence” was to blame for the BNP’s gathering of almost one million votes at the Euro elections (the BNP, naturally enough, used Brown’s slogan of “British Jobs for British Workers” during the election).
New Labour actually has had a “vision” – one based on people (and not a few MPs) getting wealthy through property dealing and spending their way out of poverty on credit cards. At the same time, many workers have endured low wages and poor to non-existent housing provision. Now younger generations especially are thrown on the dole as a result of the collapse of an economic boom based on fantasy finance and are prey to the appeals of the BNP, even if only temporarily.
This crisis is deepening by the day. Yesterday, the van maker LDV went into administration and a total of 3,000 direct and indirect jobs will go. Today, the Lloyds Banking Group, partly state owned, announced the loss of 1,500 jobs with the closure of its Cheltenham & Gloucester mortgage arm.
The break-up of New Labour and the crisis in the parliamentary system, which the election results reinforce, indicate that we have passed into a period of unprecedented social, economic and political instability. Ending the recession, creating decent jobs and housing will have to be achieved outside of the narrow confines of the parliamentary arena. You should sign our People’s Charter for Democracy and help build a movement to make leap that society needs.
Paul Feldman
AWTW communications editor
For revolutionary solutions to create a sustainable, not-for-profit economy in place of global capital alongside a real democracy based on People’s Assemblies. Visit our web site at www.aworldtowin.net
Showing posts with label Parliamentary crisis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parliamentary crisis. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Politics has to become our business
So more than half of the British electorate believe that MPs are corrupt and almost eight out of ten don’t trust them to “tell the truth” either. And 62% say they believe MPs put self-interest first. Not much of a vote of confidence in the Parliamentary system there then.
The Ipsos Mori poll for the BBC will do nothing to reassure the political establishment that a few tweaks here and tougher rules there will restore public confidence in a decrepit system.
In truth, support for the existing political system has withered on the vine for decades. Now it has reached a tipping point following the revelation in the Daily Telegraph of the hitherto secret world of MPs’ “expenses” which cabinet members like Alistair Darling and Geoff Hoon also milked.
Turnout in both national and local elections has fallen dramatically in the last decade – the 2001 and 2005 elections recorded the lowest turnout (59% and 61% respectively) since the advent of universal suffrage in 1918. Some 75% of people aged 65 and up voted in the last election compared to only 37% of young people. In other words, for every two older people who voted in the last general election, only one younger person voted. Turnout at local elections has fallen by around a tenth since the 1980s, with the result that little more than a third of registered electors turnout to vote in most local elections. Less than a quarter of registered voters say they intend to vote in Thursday’s European elections.
In 2004, the Power Inquiry was set up to discover what had happened to the political system and why “disengagement from formal democratic politics in Britain [has] grown in recent years and how can it be reversed?” The commission, chaired by radical lawyer Helena Kennedy QC, reported in 2006 that it was “vital to re-engage the British people with formal democracy” if the following were to be avoided:
the weakening of the mandate and legitimacy for elected governments – whichever party is in power – because of plummeting turnout
the further weakening of political equality because whole sections of the community feel estranged from politics
the weakening of effective dialogue between governed and governors
the weakening of effective recruitment into politics
the rise of undemocratic political forces
the rise of a “quiet authoritarianism” within government.
You could say with confidence that everything since the report was published has reinforced the inquiry’s fears. The question now arises as to whether it’s possible for the effectively disenfranchised electorate to take matters into their own hands in the sense of creating a more democratic political system?
For too long in history, politics has been left to or handed over to “others”. This was encouraged, for example, by the trade unions at the end of the 19th century when they created the Labour Party to deal with “political matters” on their behalf while they got on with industrial affairs. Well, “their” party turned out to be unaccountable and uncontrollable as it quickly became absorbed by the capitalist state. Now the unions are left powerless and unrepresented, pleading with New Labour to act to save jobs, all to no avail.
The existing set-up is clearly passed its use-by date and rearranging the deckchairs on a sinking SS Westminster will not suffice. Voters themselves have to decide what kind of new, democratic political system has to take its place through mechanisms like People’s Conventions. Politics should now become everyone’s affair.
Paul Feldman
AWTW communications editor
The Ipsos Mori poll for the BBC will do nothing to reassure the political establishment that a few tweaks here and tougher rules there will restore public confidence in a decrepit system.
In truth, support for the existing political system has withered on the vine for decades. Now it has reached a tipping point following the revelation in the Daily Telegraph of the hitherto secret world of MPs’ “expenses” which cabinet members like Alistair Darling and Geoff Hoon also milked.
Turnout in both national and local elections has fallen dramatically in the last decade – the 2001 and 2005 elections recorded the lowest turnout (59% and 61% respectively) since the advent of universal suffrage in 1918. Some 75% of people aged 65 and up voted in the last election compared to only 37% of young people. In other words, for every two older people who voted in the last general election, only one younger person voted. Turnout at local elections has fallen by around a tenth since the 1980s, with the result that little more than a third of registered electors turnout to vote in most local elections. Less than a quarter of registered voters say they intend to vote in Thursday’s European elections.
In 2004, the Power Inquiry was set up to discover what had happened to the political system and why “disengagement from formal democratic politics in Britain [has] grown in recent years and how can it be reversed?” The commission, chaired by radical lawyer Helena Kennedy QC, reported in 2006 that it was “vital to re-engage the British people with formal democracy” if the following were to be avoided:
the weakening of the mandate and legitimacy for elected governments – whichever party is in power – because of plummeting turnout
the further weakening of political equality because whole sections of the community feel estranged from politics
the weakening of effective dialogue between governed and governors
the weakening of effective recruitment into politics
the rise of undemocratic political forces
the rise of a “quiet authoritarianism” within government.
You could say with confidence that everything since the report was published has reinforced the inquiry’s fears. The question now arises as to whether it’s possible for the effectively disenfranchised electorate to take matters into their own hands in the sense of creating a more democratic political system?
For too long in history, politics has been left to or handed over to “others”. This was encouraged, for example, by the trade unions at the end of the 19th century when they created the Labour Party to deal with “political matters” on their behalf while they got on with industrial affairs. Well, “their” party turned out to be unaccountable and uncontrollable as it quickly became absorbed by the capitalist state. Now the unions are left powerless and unrepresented, pleading with New Labour to act to save jobs, all to no avail.
The existing set-up is clearly passed its use-by date and rearranging the deckchairs on a sinking SS Westminster will not suffice. Voters themselves have to decide what kind of new, democratic political system has to take its place through mechanisms like People’s Conventions. Politics should now become everyone’s affair.
Paul Feldman
AWTW communications editor
Friday, May 29, 2009
A way out of the political crisis
When political systems become corrupted and lose their legitimacy, history shows that ordinary people will try to establish new forms of government. And if there was ever a time to draw on this long struggle for democracy it is now.
And make no mistake about it, this is a people’s struggle that we are talking about, not some manoeuvring by political elites who have always sought – and too often succeeded – to direct popular anger in ways that benefit themselves.
Two enduring episodes point to a way forward out of the present impasse of constitutional crisis and economic/financial meltdown. The first is the struggle waged by the Levellers during the English Civil War of 1641-9 and the second is that of the Chartists.
Levellers were the most politically conscious and organised section of the rank and file of the New Model Army, which under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell had defeated the forces of Charles I in the war between Parliament and the King.
In the winter of 1647, with Charles I held prisoner at Hampton Court, army representatives – or “agitators” as they were known – came together with civilian activists and senior officers to discuss the principles of a new political system. The Levellers put forward “An Agreement of the People” for debate at St Mary’s Church in Putney.
The Agreement contained a truly revolutionary thought that, in the event, was far ahead of its time. The existing Parliament was to be dissolved and a new one elected for a period of two years. As to the powers of this Parliament, it would be “inferior only to theirs who choose them” and be limited by “whatsoever is not expressly or impliedly reserved by the represented to themselves”. In other words, the people would control what Parliament could do, and not the other way round.
Edward Sexby, agitator and trooper, set the tone. The most powerful advocate of the rights of the common soldier told Cromwell bluntly:
Although the King was executed two years later, the Levellers’ main demands for universal suffrage and control over Parliament were thwarted by leaders who represented a new ruling class. Two centuries later, the baton was passed in the historical sense to the Chartist movement. By then, Britain had been radically transformed. Capitalism had created a vast urban working class which had no political rights, while the new bourgeoisie had consolidated the power they inherited from the Civil War.
The Chartists, the first independent political movement of the masses, organised monster petitions, strikes and rallies in the struggle for the vote. And they organised several Conventions during two decades of Chartist activity from 1838.
One particular Convention considered itself an alternative to Parliament and vowed to sit until its demands were met. This is how we could pick up the baton from the Chartists. A Convention on Democracy, representing all those who favour truly democratic power, especially in terms of the economy, could present a way forward. Such a Convention could lay down a challenge to the existing power structures of capitalism and prepare the revolutionary change in society that our predecessors have laid the groundwork for.
Paul Feldman
AWTW communications editor
And make no mistake about it, this is a people’s struggle that we are talking about, not some manoeuvring by political elites who have always sought – and too often succeeded – to direct popular anger in ways that benefit themselves.
Two enduring episodes point to a way forward out of the present impasse of constitutional crisis and economic/financial meltdown. The first is the struggle waged by the Levellers during the English Civil War of 1641-9 and the second is that of the Chartists.
Levellers were the most politically conscious and organised section of the rank and file of the New Model Army, which under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell had defeated the forces of Charles I in the war between Parliament and the King.
In the winter of 1647, with Charles I held prisoner at Hampton Court, army representatives – or “agitators” as they were known – came together with civilian activists and senior officers to discuss the principles of a new political system. The Levellers put forward “An Agreement of the People” for debate at St Mary’s Church in Putney.
The Agreement contained a truly revolutionary thought that, in the event, was far ahead of its time. The existing Parliament was to be dissolved and a new one elected for a period of two years. As to the powers of this Parliament, it would be “inferior only to theirs who choose them” and be limited by “whatsoever is not expressly or impliedly reserved by the represented to themselves”. In other words, the people would control what Parliament could do, and not the other way round.
Edward Sexby, agitator and trooper, set the tone. The most powerful advocate of the rights of the common soldier told Cromwell bluntly:
The cause of our misery is upon two things. We sought to satisfy all men, and it was well; but in going about to do it we have dissatisfied all men. We have laboured to please a king and I think, except we go about to cut all our throats, we shall not please him; and we have gone to support an house which will prove rotten studs – I mean the Parliament, which consists of a company of rotten members. [emphasis added]
Although the King was executed two years later, the Levellers’ main demands for universal suffrage and control over Parliament were thwarted by leaders who represented a new ruling class. Two centuries later, the baton was passed in the historical sense to the Chartist movement. By then, Britain had been radically transformed. Capitalism had created a vast urban working class which had no political rights, while the new bourgeoisie had consolidated the power they inherited from the Civil War.
The Chartists, the first independent political movement of the masses, organised monster petitions, strikes and rallies in the struggle for the vote. And they organised several Conventions during two decades of Chartist activity from 1838.
One particular Convention considered itself an alternative to Parliament and vowed to sit until its demands were met. This is how we could pick up the baton from the Chartists. A Convention on Democracy, representing all those who favour truly democratic power, especially in terms of the economy, could present a way forward. Such a Convention could lay down a challenge to the existing power structures of capitalism and prepare the revolutionary change in society that our predecessors have laid the groundwork for.
Paul Feldman
AWTW communications editor
Monday, May 18, 2009
Parliament is beyond reform
When right-wing newspapers call for “revolution not reform” and leading Tory writers claim that the bond between rulers and ruled is “irreparably ruptured”, you can gauge the measure of the constitutional crisis now sweeping through the British state.
The Parliamentary system is in meltdown following the revelations about large-scale abuse of the Commons’ expenses system, whereby MPs of all the major parties claimed for just about everything, including mortgages already paid off. And not just backbench MPs either. The Cabinet has been at it too. Chancellor Alistair Darling is a serial tax evader who “flipped” the designation of his main residence four times in as many years to claim the maximum expenses.
This crisis is exericising the right wing, who perhaps sense the consequences better than the liberal media. Peter Oborne (whose book The Triumph of the Political Class foreshadowed what has been revealed) says: “This is hypocrisy of the most staggering order. The scandalous revelations over the past week about MPs' expenses have destroyed any concept of Britain having a virtuous governing class and have also irreparably ruptured the bond between rulers and ruled.” Fraser Nelson, writing in the Murdoch-owned News of the World, went further, declaring: “What started as a scandal is mutating into a constitutional crisis. And one that will have to end not just in reform, but in revolution.”
The scandal reveals not just a loss of confidence in the major parties but also, more significantly, in the parliamentary state itself in a way not seen before in modern British history. By and large, the majority have consented to the present system of government on the condition that it would a) act as a buffer between capitalists and citizens b) provide key services like housing, education, health and pensions c) protect liberties and human rights and d) protect the country from external threats.
That political bargain has broken down, a victim of corporate-driven globalisation which itself has now produced the prospect of the greatest economic and financial crash in history. Capitalism has been let rip in society, first under Thatcher and then courtesy of New Labour. The imposition of naked market forces has undermined not just areas like housing and pensions but also reinforced rampant individualism.
It’s easy to see the greed of MPs as a reflection of the atmosphere created in society at large. After all, why should they be excluded from making money by buying and selling homes just because they were MPs? Apart from siding with corporate and financial interests, the capitalist state under New Labour has destroyed many human rights and engaged in illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have actually increased the threat to the safety of ordinary people.
So the expenses scandal has brought to the surface frustrations that have been boiling up over decades. During the 1945 period, turnout at elections, for example, has plummeted from 83.9% in 1950 to 59.4% in 2001. It rose slightly in 2005, still leaving New Labour victorious with the votes of just one in four of the registered electorate.
Now it is reported that large numbers of the electorate plan to vote for smaller parties at the June 4 European elections in order to “punish” the major parties caught up in sleazegate. This includes the Greens as well as two far right parties, the BNP (which is cashing in on New Labour’s abandonment of low-paid white workers) and UKIP.
When a social or political institution fails, it’s time to move history on. This could be achieved, for example, through the calling of a People’s Convention for Democracy, charged with drawing up and then implementing a written democratic constitution. Delegates would be drawn from all ordinary sections of the community but exclude the rich and the powerful who are responsible for first the economic and now the political crisis. Instead of being cast as bystanders, we should seize the initiative before the right wing uses the expenses' scandal to close down the democratic process altogether.
The Convention’s aim should be the transfer of power not just from the corrupt political elites but also from the minority who have run the economy into the sands. In short, we need a revolutionary new system of government that goes beyond mere representation to forms of direct democracy in all areas of society, including the workplace. If Parliament is to have any future, it has to be in this context because it is certainly beyond reform.
Paul Feldman
AWTW communications editor
The Parliamentary system is in meltdown following the revelations about large-scale abuse of the Commons’ expenses system, whereby MPs of all the major parties claimed for just about everything, including mortgages already paid off. And not just backbench MPs either. The Cabinet has been at it too. Chancellor Alistair Darling is a serial tax evader who “flipped” the designation of his main residence four times in as many years to claim the maximum expenses.
This crisis is exericising the right wing, who perhaps sense the consequences better than the liberal media. Peter Oborne (whose book The Triumph of the Political Class foreshadowed what has been revealed) says: “This is hypocrisy of the most staggering order. The scandalous revelations over the past week about MPs' expenses have destroyed any concept of Britain having a virtuous governing class and have also irreparably ruptured the bond between rulers and ruled.” Fraser Nelson, writing in the Murdoch-owned News of the World, went further, declaring: “What started as a scandal is mutating into a constitutional crisis. And one that will have to end not just in reform, but in revolution.”
The scandal reveals not just a loss of confidence in the major parties but also, more significantly, in the parliamentary state itself in a way not seen before in modern British history. By and large, the majority have consented to the present system of government on the condition that it would a) act as a buffer between capitalists and citizens b) provide key services like housing, education, health and pensions c) protect liberties and human rights and d) protect the country from external threats.
That political bargain has broken down, a victim of corporate-driven globalisation which itself has now produced the prospect of the greatest economic and financial crash in history. Capitalism has been let rip in society, first under Thatcher and then courtesy of New Labour. The imposition of naked market forces has undermined not just areas like housing and pensions but also reinforced rampant individualism.
It’s easy to see the greed of MPs as a reflection of the atmosphere created in society at large. After all, why should they be excluded from making money by buying and selling homes just because they were MPs? Apart from siding with corporate and financial interests, the capitalist state under New Labour has destroyed many human rights and engaged in illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have actually increased the threat to the safety of ordinary people.
So the expenses scandal has brought to the surface frustrations that have been boiling up over decades. During the 1945 period, turnout at elections, for example, has plummeted from 83.9% in 1950 to 59.4% in 2001. It rose slightly in 2005, still leaving New Labour victorious with the votes of just one in four of the registered electorate.
Now it is reported that large numbers of the electorate plan to vote for smaller parties at the June 4 European elections in order to “punish” the major parties caught up in sleazegate. This includes the Greens as well as two far right parties, the BNP (which is cashing in on New Labour’s abandonment of low-paid white workers) and UKIP.
When a social or political institution fails, it’s time to move history on. This could be achieved, for example, through the calling of a People’s Convention for Democracy, charged with drawing up and then implementing a written democratic constitution. Delegates would be drawn from all ordinary sections of the community but exclude the rich and the powerful who are responsible for first the economic and now the political crisis. Instead of being cast as bystanders, we should seize the initiative before the right wing uses the expenses' scandal to close down the democratic process altogether.
The Convention’s aim should be the transfer of power not just from the corrupt political elites but also from the minority who have run the economy into the sands. In short, we need a revolutionary new system of government that goes beyond mere representation to forms of direct democracy in all areas of society, including the workplace. If Parliament is to have any future, it has to be in this context because it is certainly beyond reform.
Paul Feldman
AWTW communications editor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)