Morning:
8°c
BRITAIN is in desperate need of constitutional
reform and should change its electoral methods in the wake of the expenses scandal.
That was the view of audience members at last night's Intelligence Squared debate at the Royal Geographical Society, supported by the Evening Standard.
Most agreed with a number of panellists that the future of parliamentary democracy in Britain lay in wholesale structural reform of the entire
system which had been sullied by “corrupt”
politicians.
Speakers at the People's Debate included historian Sir David Cannadine, Labour peer Helena Kennedy QC, and former Tory Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind.
The exchanges among the panellists were interspersed with observations from the audience, conducted by Standard columnist Simon Jenkins. In a show of hands, he acknowledged that
“the revolution had it” in voting for
constitutional reform.
Prof Sir David Cannadine, Historian
“The British constitution is very unusual — the British have never been very democratic a nation even though we like to think we have been. Lloyd George sold peerages across the counter like packets of tea, and for the last 20 years the National Trust had more members than all the major parties put together. It is the demise of local government and excitement and involvement in local politics of people that is very worrying.”
Sir Malcolm Rifkind, Former Conservative Foreign Secretary and currently Kensington and Chelsea MP
“I am conscious that MPs are not flavour of the month to put it mildly. What is awful about this
scandal is the embarrassing triviality. That problem is solvable and it is being solved. It was ghastly. Every single MP will face the electorate in 11 months. It won't come back again because every claim will be transparent
and on the internet. Parliament has to resume proper control over the government of the day.”
Helena Kennedy QC, Labour peer
“Britain remains a very rich, civic society and people take part in all manner of political processes, volunteering, raising money — the
British public by and large are fairly active.
But they were concerned about the quality of politicians. They felt they were too self-serving, never had a real job, and that politicians had become craven to their parties rather than looking after constituencies.
The expenses scandal is symptomatic of a far deeper malaise.”
Vernon Bogdanor, author and professor of Government at Oxford University
“The turnout as a whole in the last two elections was the lowest since universal suffrage and that is because in most cases there is no point in voting. People are voting and we do not belong to a political party — only one in 88 of us do. They are dying on their feet. There 81 million adults who gave to the tsunami appeal. The RSPB and not just the National Trust has more members than the political parties put together.”
John Keane, professor of politics at the University of Westminster and consultant to the UN
“We live in an age of monitory democracy' — think tanks, bloggers and other forms of monitory society who wrong-foot our governments. If you think about the big public issues that have exercised people since 1945 — civil rights, nuclear weapons, women in politics — all of theses issues have been put on the table by people from outside. Churchill was right in saying democracy was the best weapon we have against stupidity.”
Peter Oborne, author and political columnist for the Daily Mail
“There is something rotten in the state of Britain but our parliamentary democracy does not need root and branch reform. The real problem is we have turned our back on parliamentary democracy. Something has gone wrong with the self-serving, venal political class. They (politicians) have called for constitutional
reform but it is a diversion tactic. What we need to do is make sure the people who have stolen from the taxpayers are brought to account.”
David Aaronovitch, author and Times newspaper columnist
“I would agree that the system is not right. MPs have not been abusing' the system of expenses, but overusing a system of allowances. This
reaction is... symptomatic of the simple fact that we hate them. We hate the government, hate
politicians, and hate them for soliciting our votes. And what is interesting is they hate us back. The demands placed on them by constituents are absurd. What we are talking about is a dysfunctional relationship that must be reformed.”
Reader views (7)
The reason people are not voting and their is very low regard for politicians is that they do not stand for anything and do not keep their promises, simple. I understand that things do not always work out, then simply explain this to us like adults and move on. It may cost them their jobs at the next election, but that is the way it should be.
- Mark, London, 17/06/2009 10:29
Report abuse
There is no need to reform any of the ways that our government or constitution SHOULD work. That is not the problem.
The problem is having a Political Class that self selects its own membership and then permits the People to vote for one of its membership. All the corruption is actually in having a self serving Political Class who see themselves as the baronial rulers of old.
The only reform needed is that the People get to select first their own candidates and their own representatives. However, the Political Class will never allow this as it would lead to Democracy and government by the People for the People.
- Ian, Reading, England, 17/06/2009 10:13
Report abuse
I have a suggestion or two for constitutional reform in the UK...
No elected member of the commons, and no appointed member of the House of Lords can be foreign born or hold dual citizenship with another country ( and must also have lived in the UK for an unbroken period of time equal to the age of majority)
No political party in government may change leader ( and thus Prime Minister) without calling a new election immediately.
Create an elected judiciary with compulsory retirement for senior judges in line with current legislation. British birth and residency rules to apply here also.
Ban 'private' lobby groups.
Ban 'private' inquiries.
Ban all MP's expenses beyond staff, travel and hotel accomodation costs.
Change the voting system to proportional representation.
If one or two of these suggestions became reality, I might start having a little faith in the 'establishment' again.
Rant over.
- Londoner, London, England, 17/06/2009 06:24
Report abuse
Phil Jones - California has a Constitution - That's what all the proposition 8 protests were about the changing, so I would guess that Florida also has one. If we had a constitution (like the Irish) the even Tory B.Liar and Crash Gordon could not have signed us up to Lisbon without a vote!
- Jim, London, 16/06/2009 14:41
Report abuse
WHAT CONSTITUTION ? OH THE ONE THEY MAKE UP AS THEY GO ALONG AND ALL THE SECRETS THEY HIDE FROM THE PUBLIC THIS COUNTRY WAS NEVER A DEMOCRACY THEY JUST USE EVERYONE FOR THEIR OWN ENDS IT IS ALL SO PATHETTIC BUT ALL THE POLITITONS HAVE DONE WELL AND WE ARE ALL BACK TO SCRATCH ONE,
- James Fennessey, london, 16/06/2009 13:56
Report abuse
All the talk of a new British Constitution makes no sense in view of the U.K. now being a de facto E.U. province. Does Florida have a constitution? Countries have constitutions. If you define a 'country' as a territory that is self-governing, the U.K. is no longer a country. At least 75% of all new laws coming out of London are rubber-stamped E.U. legislation. What you have in the E.U./U.K. relationship is a similar federal framework to that in the U.S., excepting that in the U.S. the State Legislature in Albany or other state capitals don't have to rubber-stamp new laws passed in Washington, D.C. and present them as their own initiatives. It's all a charade to make the British feel that they still live in a separate country -- which they don't. Only countries have constitutions -- such as the E.U. Constitution, aka Lisbon Treaty.
- Phil Jones, London UK, 16/06/2009 13:26
Report abuse
I applaud Mr. Osborne's comments - "we need to make sure the poeple who have stolen from taxpayers are brought to account". The electorate have been crying out for this to happen since the expenses scandal broke but we all we get are pitiful promises that "we will clean up the system". If party leaders had any real intention of doing so they would have immediately sacked those found guilty of making unethical/fraudulent claims. By allowing some of them to merely "step down at the next election" is an insult to tax payers as this allows them to continue drawing a salary for another year whilst continuing to thieve from the public purse. There should be NO golden handshakes for these crooks when they do step down.
- R.F., Yorks, UK, 16/06/2009 12:04
Report abuse
