Democracy Countdown: Dirdem will give you a say on all these measures
►
UK: Parking Association
to set clamping fees
►
International: More
European Soldiers to Afghanistan?
►
Civil Liberties: EU wants
body scans on all airports
►
Subsidies: 3 Billion Euro for Georgia
►
Migration: European MPs
want to ease access for immigrants
►
Non-Profit Sector: Need
Olympic Committees more internal democracy?
►
Europe: EU Parliament
costs Euro 1.5 Billion annually
►
Environment: Carbon Trade
- Politician's dream tax: on the air we breathe!
►
Politicians: Kinnocks
have amassed state pensions from six sources |
Brown wants fast track reform on expenses
This newspaper
headline sums up all that is wrong with today's politics. The article
states that 'Gordon Brown will tell MPs today that he wants legislation to
clean up their expenses system to be rushed through Parliament before the
end of the autumn parliamentary session' (Times,
10 June 2009).
The citizens have no say in the way the politicians regulate their own
affairs and the representatives of the people are bludgeoned into
submission by the party machine controlled by the Prime Minister. As
usual, there is no effective separation of power.
10-Jun-09
Many Elections but no Change
Due to the federal
structure of Germany there is not only one major national election after 4
years but the elections in the federal states also have a national impact
as their governments have a say in national legislation.
2009 is even called a 'Superwahljahr'. The national elections are held in
September and there are also elections in a few federal states. One could
say that a permanent election campaign is taking place in Germany.
The odd thing is - all this voting changes very little in the political
landscape due to perverse effects inherent in the Constitution. The ruling
political class has never bothered to explicitly consult the citizens when
the Constitution was decreed in 1949. But there is also very little or no
chance to change it from the bottom up via initiatives that are instigated
by the citizens as an overpowering system of machine politics controls
executive, legislature and the judiciary.
8-Jun-09
Should Constitutional
Laws be subject to a referendum?
The Austrian President asks if changes in the constitution should be made
subject to further checks by the constitutional court. We would say that
the present sorry state of affairs where the large parties can easily
change the constitution at a stroke of the pen is insufficient and also
undemocratic. The two-thirds hurdle (of parliamentary votes) poses no
problem as the two main parties can muster the necessary votes ever since
World War II.
We demand that any changes to the constitution are subject to a mandatory
referendum. The majority would have to be two thirds as well. In cases of
changes to an eventual European Constitution there should also be the
requirement that a majority of all member states is in favor of any
change.
22-Apr-09
British MPs to get paid
twice for same job
People in most countries would have no hope of recognizing the member of
parliament that is supposed to represent them. So it is no surprise that
the electorate becomes more and more emancipated and critical of
Parliaments.
In recent weeks there was growing criticism of real or supposed abuses by
MPs that made excessive use of generous allowances that they get in
addition to their salary.
Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, stated "The issue of expenses is casting
a cloud over the whole of Parliament. So Members of Parliament need to
have the humility to recognise that the country has lost confidence in the
current system."
But what did he do next to fix the discredited system? Unbelievably he
proposed to pay MPs a fixed daily attendance allowance in lieu of the
allowance for a second home they can presently claim.
It is as if the ordinary employee gets two salaries, one for accepting the
job and another (tax-free one!) for turning up at his place of employment.
22-Apr-09
Veto on tax increases proposed
In Britain the
conservative opposition announced plans that residents would be able to
veto increases in local council taxes. David Cameron said he wanted a
fundamental 'shift of power and wealth' back towards local people.
We welcome this announcement but would like to see voter participation
extended to all parts of government.
19-Feb-09
US Presidential Campaign - Party Machines or Personalities?
The endless
Campaign exposes a dilemma in modern politics - should candidates, and in
particular the candidates for the top positions - be selected by party
machines or should they be personalities that are backed by the media or
their own substantial wealth?
We think that both methods have their disadvantages and that Direct
Democracy offers an effective safeguard against the abuses latent in
either system of selection.
Olympic Games: who picks up the bill?
A
report just released by the CBI and KPMG found that more than half of
London businesses feel they will get no direct benefit from the 2012
Olympics.
This reminded us of the fact that the IOC found the perfect recipe to make
other people pick up the bill for the frolics.
We would not mind if the people making this generous contribution would be
doing it voluntarily and because they are dedicated sports enthusiasts.
But the unfortunate fact is that the IOC (whose structure does not appear
to be all that democratic) is getting the money on the say-so of
politicians who refuse to consult their electorate.
It is in any case not
clear that it should be the task - much less responsibility - of the
state to spend money on what is after all a private entertainment. It
should be not beyond the capability of the IOC and all the worthies
sitting on its committees to raise the required funds. If the facilities
for the games have to be scaled down it might be a worthwhile contribution
towards preserving a better environment.
Stop to 'proposals', 'initiatives' and 'schemes'
More and more
legislation and bureaucratic regulation is created as a consequence of
so-called 'proposals', 'initiatives' or 'schemes' launched by elected
politicians or civil servants.
We think this is a symptom of what is wrong with the legislative process
in our societies. People who have an in-built interest to increase their
power or force their individual views on others are in the driving seat
when their main focus should be on the smooth running of the government
machinery. Their attention should be directed towards the efficient
execution of existing legislation and only in extremis should they add new
rules and regulations. These should not be created with the stroke of a
pen and nodded through by subservient placeholders (aka Members of
Parliament) but the process of launching new laws should start at
grassroots and only be moved forward if enough citizens are willing to
back it.
Every new initiative that is set up
increases the distrust we feel for the State
writes Camilla Cavendish in The Times (12 June 2008).
Apart from the fact that most of these 'initiatives' are thinly disguised
edicts based on only a shred of legitimacy we just want to point out the
main cause of this malaise: the citizens are effectively excluded from the
process of legislation and only a radical reform can reverse the growing
distrust that is felt.
Direct action in the form of protests such as truck drivers blockading
streets in order to support their demands will become a growing feature in
our societies if this root-and-branch reform is not started soon.
Politics as Spectator Sport
All
too often one hears that a politician (we do not like the word 'leader'
for obvious reasons although it is continuously used in the
English-language press) has 'won' a victory when a vote in a usually
docile Parliament is going his way.
This is not the way that political decisions are reached, much less
celebrated or commented on. Legislation should not be the expression of
the will or preference of an individual person (or narrow clique at the
top of political parties) who just happens to be responsible for the
management of government functions at a particular point in time but the
expression of a consensus established after broad debate among all
concerned citizens. This consensus should be validated by a referendum (or
at least be subject to a facultative referendum in less important
legislation).
London Congestion Charge -How not to
conduct a referendum
Transport Politicians all over the world are given the impression that
the £8 congestion charge that drivers into central London have to pay has
been a success. They are keen to emulate this measure and pile another tax
onto the already overtaxed citizen.
An extra argument in favour of the London tax is the claim that the
citizen's of London had been 'consulted'. We beg to differ as there was no
proper legally-binding referendum. A key question that is always
overlooked is also the problem of the wider implications of such a charge.
The present charge is arbitrary and discriminatory: people inside the zone
are not taxed at all, they pay no tax driving through zones that are
nearby. Only in a patchwork of arbitrary rules that constitute the
so-called 'unwritten' British Constitution is it possible to introduce
taxes that are levied only on a certain part of the population. Why is it
not possible that areas that surround Inner London levy a tax on those
that pass through them on their way into and out of London? Should there
not have been separate referenda inside and outside the charging zone and
only a clear majority in both votes would have been a signal to introduce
the congestion tax? Why not vote on the level of the tax, and what
provisions are made on how to repeal the charge when a sufficient number
of citizens wants to abolish or change it?
The Elections are over, now let's start to
vote!
That
would be our comment now that the elections in Italy and England are over.
The result of the elections may lead to some small changes in the life of
the ordinary citizen but we think that the permanent impact on everyday
life will be modest at best. The faces of the politicians may change, some
egos will be bruised while some will be boosted but in the end the big
questions related to the cost effectiveness and quality of government
services will not be answered in any conclusive fashion.
This should come as no surprise to anyone who questions the viability of
the current system of representative government which is an ineffective
parody of democracy.
Once every few years the citizen is asked to participate in a box-ticking
exercise and select one option among a very limited and never-changing
menu of political parties. The voter is basically expected to give carte
blanche to a party to do as they please during the term in office.
Electoral promises are treated as an inconvenient hindrance and the only
check on government tend to be the media (who often also follow an agenda
of their own).
|
What is democratic?
A different definition
Power to the citizens
We are advocating a
radical
shift in the balance of power
Electoral Reform
Electoral
Law - Does it matter?
Referendums
Why qualifying quorum is
necessary part of referendum
Parliament
Taxpayer to fund propaganda
Petitions
The problem with petitions - or should we say the problem with politicians?
Rees-Moog (>Election) assumes basic system is OK, needs only a bit
of tinkering
Basic immorality of
selective bail-outs |