alternatehistory.com

Party politics is when a political party or entity competes with other parties to control the government. The system is `adversarial` in that there is a government and opposition who tend to vote on major issues along party lines. In the first of my blogs I am going to try and outline why I think this is wrong and what I would propose as an alternative. Also before you make judgement I am not an Anarchist or anti-system.




The first thing about the British Governance system is that everyone votes for an MP who represents their constituency in Parliament and governs that constituency. This is the first thing that needs to change because representing people by voting on legislation and governing people are completely different tasks that require different skills.

To govern you want an Individual who can manage efficiently and stretch whatever budget they get by comparison the person who you want in Parliament is someone who is in line with your political persuasion, whatever that may be. Whoever is in line with your political beliefs may not be the best person to govern, and if he isn’t an efficient at running the constituency that isn’t going to be helped by the fact his job (which is a full time task) will be interrupted by him going to vote in Parliament.
I would propose:

● Splitting the current job of MP up into electing a constituency Governor and an MP, MP’s to be elected proportionally (for example needing a certain number of votes to gain a seat) and Governors to be elected on Constituency basis (As this position isn’t Legislation based there will be no need for no mainstream groups to complain as the people will be voting for who they think is best for them as a region)

●This would mean you are voting for the most effective manager regardless of political persuasion (I am going to refer to it as this instead of political parties for reasons that will become evident later on) and would hopefully this will mean you get the right man for the job.

●Importantly MPs who live outside London won’t have to spend hours travelling back and forth, and would allow them to completely focus on what needs to be done.
Much like the all round Swiss army knife position of MP political parties are also outdated in modern politics. There are two main political parties Conservative and Labour, unfortunately both have a certain ammount of corruption attached to them because both have Lobby groups and Fundraisers at their backs with a gun.

Labour gets its funds from Trade Unions this means under Labour Administrations the Unions have a fair ammount of power to wield, a good example of this would be under the Brown Administration public sector workers have been guaranteed pensions which will cost the tax-payer (For more information see this BBC article
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7783147.stm)
Conservative gets its funds from big business and so under Conservative Administrations Corporations have a fair ammount of power to wield, an example of this would be Margaret Thatcher’s ruthless opposion to the Trade Unions in the 1980’s.

</EM></SPAN>
This corruption has been seen time and time again in various scandals, most recently the ‘cash for honours scandal’.

I would propose:

●Anyone wishing to run for Office to run as an Independent politician (further reasons for which I will explain later)

●The creation of a political lending system, in which people are lent money to fund campaigns (this should help eliminate more hopeless politicians who under the current system will be given the money needed for their campaign by their party in exchange for promising not to launch any revolts and vote their way).

The money for the fund will be provided by the taxpayer, the political ‘stock brokers’ must avoid corruption (which will be maintained by an Independent judicial body which I will go into greater detail about later). I realise that this will be an incredibly unpopular move but don’t stop reading yet, the amount of money saved from this will certainly be in your benefit.

Not only will you for a few more pence in your tax get the right person for the job, a more ethical government, you will also save money on decisions not made in the public’s best interest for example the expansion of Heathrow airport; which in my opinion was a corrupt decision and done for political reasons.

Finally on political campaigns I would say this. Before any money is lent the Politician must make a dossier of some description outlining everything he intends to do as governor, MP etc and argue this point and similarly at the end of his term must justify everything he has done. This manifesto will be under Independent judicial review at the beginning and end of terms.

Independent politics is often criticised because it leads to a lack of decisions and is a constant hung Parliament, however it doesn’t mean you can’t have a political leaning. For example in the French Assembly those who sat on the Right supported the Monarchy, Church and Old order and those on the Left supported more populist ideas. Hence the birth of Right and Left wing, Conservative and Liberal; however this doesn’t mean you can’t have organisations representing these political leanings.

The Cabinet is the group of people an organisation puts forward to run the country (for example Conservative) and has large amounts of power. In similar fashion you should elect a cabinet, unless you’re really politically active if you vote for say Labour in the general election you will be basing that on the party leader and perhaps the shadow Chancellor. In this manner you often end up will people you’ve never heard of before, placed their because of political favours and are not necessarily the right person for the job. Considering the ammount of power Cabinet holds this almost seems ridiculous, I believe it makes sense to elect these positions for example someone with direct experience of the military could become Minister of Defence a man who knows all about the job and what it needs and wants to make an honest change; this in the place of a nobody placed there to further their own political career.

I would propose:

● Organisations would be unable to run for government however it can still exist to co-ordinate supporters, who have to run by themselves and not be elected as a collective group.

● Considering the ammount of power Cabinet holds this almost seems ridiculous, I believe it makes sense to elect these positions. In my example, the person with military experiencecoul become Minister of Defence a man who knows all about the job and what it needs and wants to make an honest change; this in the place of a nobody placed there to further their own political career.

The last few weeks has shown how corrupt British politics really is, the politicians make the rules which they believe makes them above them. There needs to be an Independent organisation to regulate the entire political system for example distributef funds, monitor corruption and make sure Politicians manifesto’s and performance records are in the public domain and properly scrutinised.

I would propose:

● Having a lottery (between all judges)for a small number of Judges to monitor corruption and political stockbrokers, serving short times in office (for example 6 months before being rotated)

● Having a lottery for Magistrates (between all magistrates) for individual regions to make sure a manifesto is produced pre election and a performance record for during and after their term. Making sure these are in the public domain and cross examined by Analysts, also these Magistrates will serve a short rotation.

The problem with the current system is that you are really not voting the right people into power but an ideology, which has various hangers on who get power for example as they promise to vote the governments way. These people are a menace to democracy and politics, similarly Government needs to be cleaned up and truly corruption free. When Gordon Brown and David Cameron say they are going to clean up politics you wonder why they didn’t say this whilst they were making money from it; or force the speaker out when he had set up the system. The answer is simple you can’t trust those who will benefit from corruption clamp down on it, just like you can’t trust Americans to stop wars, bankers decide economic policy or paedophiles to monitor the Youth services.

●This is not an end to tradition or culture, because tradition and culture are always changing.

●I recognise there are things wrong with this system, but there are things wrong with every system.

● To me it just makes so much sense, it is a far more pure democracy.

Thank you for reading.
Top