Yesterday was the day when UK politicians did, at least for the time being, concede that there is no one in charge.
David Cameron gave his ministers a free vote in the EU referendum debate to come, opening up factions and discord as a result and tearing asunder the united election fighting machine that is the Conservative Party in the process.
Jeremy Corbyn had the longest and smallest reshuffle of a cabinet in history and left Hilary Benn in his existing role, which seemed to leave all the divisions he was facing in place.
Just for the record, the SNP had another MP come under investigation.
The impression that no one is in charge is growing, and with reason. Maybe no party now has the ability to build the consensus within it to co-exist in any meaningful way with the demands of the first past the list system. The consequence is that the power of the financial elite grows, unchecked.
I do not see a solution to the problem that is now apparent in creating parties capable of really governing with a substantial majority in a first past the post system. The challenges, divides and opportunities for dissent are just too great to achieve again what Labour did in 1997. I can only see multi-party rule, coalition and electoral reform as the way forward.
But the financial elite, via the media that is their best friend, will fight that as it is in their interests to do so: they want weak government.
There is a fight for the credibility of democratic government to be taken on and won in that case, with the problem being that existing political forces and big business are aligned against it. It is not a pretty prospect.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Government may well need to be strong in opposing financial power blocs but there are other ways in which I think dissent valuable. Being a little older than you, I have memories of the aftermath of overly strong governments which tolerated no dissent in Europe – and therefore realise that the unfettered power of strong government is also a danger. At the moment we’re close to a situation in which every party representative is told their role by the party whip and doesn’t need to think too much. Dissenting MPs have a value, so long as their dissent is thoughtful and constructive (which it hasn’t always been lately).
I think we run a greater danger than you suggest, which is a strong government preventing dissent and dependent on strong financial power blocs. Government can easily be brought (or bought) to act in the interests of those who have or control the money. It’s possible that dissenting MPs may be more willing to speak against big business or to ask questions which make international corporations uncomfortable. But what we need is a determination as nations (voters as well as politicians) to re-establish the power of nations over the corporations.
When you consider why parties don’t do this, please look at how dependent parties, and hence their elites, on funding from big business. Look at the way in which party conferences are dependent for the existence by the rent of commercial stands and the behind-the-scenes business days they run when companies pay for privileged access to ministers and shadows. That financial indebtedness makes me deeply concerned.
Agree with all that
Perhaps local councils, starved of money by government, will together take up a more responsible role and start issuing their own local currencies. This would be illegal I believe but hey, if the majority decide to do it together… setting up local banking would be an option too, bringing profits into the areas which make them rather than seeing potential prosperity vanish into tax havens.
But money only has value, ultimately, if tax is paid with it
So these currencies would have to be used to pay council tax, at least
Indeed, business rates too I’d think.
The Worgl experiment (that got people into jobs) was soon shut down by the Authorities.
The same would happen here, I’m sure. Not sure whether Gesel’s ‘scrip’ was used for tax Payments or not.
After the 2005-2010 coalition – a regime in all but name, and ideologically an oppositionless one-part state – the concept of ‘coalition’ is dead in British politics.
Either we get an unstable and ineffective 1970`s Lib-Lab pact in a divided and ungovernable country, or a unified and ruthless monolith of destructive greed.
lt remains to be seen what Corbyn Labour and the SNP can do to offer an alternative: they are at least constructive in intent.
I presume you mean 2010 – 2015
Thank you for the correction: I find it difficult to keep track of different sets of privatising neoliberals with lucrative private-sector interests.
Meanwhile, I think that coalition as a concept is discredited – toxic! – in the United Kingdom.
Lord Hailsham coined the term elective dictatorship in 1976, and it is a more accurate description of the political landscape today than was the case forty years ago. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/elective-dictatorship-democratic-mandate/
We get to vote, now, since the last parliament, every five years. How often will it be in the next Parliament, will the UK electorate protest; I doubt it? “Negative campaigning” as used by the Conservative party, worked extremely well in the last election. “Things will only get worse if you vote for a different ideology; stick with us” type message. I am expecting a similar strategy by Cameron for the referendum. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-shy-english-nationalists-who-won-it-for-the-tories-and-flummoxed-the-pollsters/
After several centuries the UK managed to separate the Judiciary from the Legislature, IMO it is time we separated the Executive from the Legislature as well. Elect a Prime Minister by a UK wide popular vote. The PM then appoints his own cabinet from anyone who is not elected as an MP or any other elected office; or, appointed to and/or serves in, any other government office.
A “Top Two” Primary election system would help. A system where the voters get to choose the candidates for the general election, NOT the party machines. In the US this is known as “Non-partisan Blanket Primary”. See https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faqcandidates.aspx You can get a result where the top two candidates “prefer” the same party (but may not be official party candidates). For instance, a leave the EU Tory and a don’t leave the EU Tory. At the general election voters would choose.
How about one MP per District Council (circa 390); half elected every two years, maximum of two terms (8 years). Most governments / politicians are burnt out and run out of ideas after eight years. Generous JG / pension arrangements at the end. Yes, two years between elections does cause short term thinking, but it might wake up the electorate a bit.
What are the chances of ever changing the UK system? Absolutely ZERO; there is no release mechanism. No EU style Article 50 for opting out of the present UK system.
Bill Mitchell puts this very thing succinctly today:
” Political leaders are meant to lead, which means they are meant to formulate policy positions that they consider will advance the well-being of the citizens they aspire to represent, and then educate the public on why these are desirable initiatives.
In the neo-liberal era, politics has become one of mirroring the interests of capital, channelled through the right-wing (hysteria prone) press, and expressed through manipulated public opinion polls.”
The tail is wagging the dog with politician being flailed around and manipulated by the perceived Overton Window. I’m sad to see that even Corbyn has succumbed to this as manifest in his (non) reshuffle. It was a moment where firmness and leadership vision was needed. The fact that he didn’t ditch ‘Windbag Benn’ is a sure sign that he was bowing to pressure from the press and fear over further resignations that the press would exploit. Disgruntled MP’s have exploited Corbyn’s statements over inclusiveness as if he was deserting a ‘principle’ but it was clear that the Labour party can’t be a debating society for too long. A bold and clear anti-austerity agenda has to emerge even if it causes mass resignations-MP’s like Dugher need to stop moaning and accept they failed and let down millions of people due to a lack of economic/political vision.
The Tories, of course, don’t need vision because the staus quo IS the vision realised.
“I can only see multi-party rule, coalition and electoral reform as the way forward.”
I believe that was your prediction shortly before the 2015 general election.
With the Labour party now unelectable and boundary anomalies to be removed, why on earth should the Conservatives not expect to win the next election as well? What is to stop them?
A coalition
And the failure of their economuc and European policies, plus the chance their party will divide