With all the goings on in Parliament over the past months, and despite the victory of Boris, it now feels that we are in the Doldrums awaiting the fair wind that will see us in the promised land of democracy or the storm that will see us marooned on the rocks of tyranny. It all depends on whether Boris will stick to the letter of his Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration or is prepared to face down the EU and crash out.
Let’s start on a positive note and take a look what this might look like:
– A Parliament that represents the voters;
– Parties that respect their manifestos;
– MPs that respect their promises;
– A government that respects our sovereignty and independence;
– No subservience to any foreign or global power;
– Foreign ownership of critical UK assets prohibited;
– An independent UK military which acts solely in defence of the UK;
– An education system which teaches our kids to think for themselves;
– Respect for our Christian heritage;
I’m sure that we could collectively add more.
I expect that we have all heard or read of those phrases which threaten our future as an independent democratic nation:
– ‘equality, diversity and inclusion’;
– ‘compulsory LGBT education’;
– ‘global warming’;
…and the failures in government policy whether intended or not:
– Acceptance of the UN Global Compact on Migration promoting out-of-control mass immigration by those of alien cultures;
– Acceptance of the UN’s Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 without due consideration of the intent;
– Continuing control by the EU in some form including so-called cooperation in defence matters and any agreement allowing continued access to our fishing grounds;
– The growing acceptance of Islam with no regard for the likely outcome;
It seems to me that there is much dissatisfaction with our present electoral system. Alternatives are available and some are already in use elsewhere. However, it is important that a voter of normal intelligence is able to understand and critically evaluate the process.
Whatever system of voting and counting is employed it must be, and be seen to be, free from the possibility of fraud. Certainly, the present allowing of a postal vote without a substantive reason needs to change. Having not been able to vote in person from some years I’m not sure how difficult it would be to somehow cheat the system at the polling centre.
Full and proper representation might only be achieved if voting were to be compulsory. Maybe a new system of voting could allow some account to be taken of null votes. The present system fails to take account of constituency population; indeed, it would be impossible to continually adjust constituency boundaries to achieve that. This is a particular issue with Scotland having a greater number of MPs in Parliament than the relative size of its population justifies.
One possibility is to replace the present archaic system in Parliament with an electronic voting system. The EU Parliament uses such a system which was installed in 1980. Surely a far better system could be designed and implemented now. It could even be used to ensure that an MP had actually been present during the debate and not just turned up for the vote. More importantly it could be used to factor an MP’s vote in proportion to some measure of constituency population. Obviously, there are a number of possibilities which need to be evaluated, maybe with voter participation.
One thing that I would personally find unacceptable is the transfer of my vote to a candidate who I opposed; that, for me, is where some of the AV systems fall down.
It might be a moot point, particularly to those of the Labour Party, but should we require MPs to have a minimum standard of education, maybe even a professional qualification? Certainly, we would be rightly concerned if a bridge, motorway or building had been designed by someone without a relevant professional qualification coupled with appropriate experience. Surely the job of an MP is equally important?
Certainly, government ministers should be required to have a relevant professional qualification and appropriate real-world experience as would be necessary for a job outside government. We know that they can rely on advice from civil servants but they should be able to make their own judgment on the veracity of such advice. Even those civil servants would be better able to perform had they had previous real-world experience.
Sir John Redwood made an interesting comment on the job of MPs recently: “The MP needs to get the right balance between listening and leading, between taking the views of the constituents to government to get explanation or change, and explaining the views of government or Opposition to constituents. It does help to live in the local area.”
We all, perhaps aside from tribal voters, choose who to vote for guided by a party manifesto. Too often that manifesto is designed to secure a vote and is often ignored or modified once a party is elected. Perhaps the recall of individual MPs who renege on their manifesto promises without good reason, and certainly those who switch parties, needs to be considered.
It seems to me that our education system is failing, partly because of the diversity agenda, but also because too many are pursuing university courses which have no practical value. No reform in other areas will be possible unless we have people, preferably native Brits, who have the necessary qualifications to satisfy employment needs.
In addition, there is widespread misunderstanding of the policies of various organisations; perhaps because they are not openly declared in a way which would engage everyone. We would be wise to judge them by that which we see, not what they proclaim about their intent. The intent of the EU and the UN in particular has been clearly stated if one is willing to take time to seek it out.
Clearly change is necessary in many areas. If I may paraphrase the words of Lennon / McCartney: “Some day when we’re dreaming, deep in thought not a lot to say, then we will remember things we saw today.”
Let us remember that which has failed / is failing in our society and set our sights on change, which must be carefully considered before implementation. Most of all such change should be subject to voter approval.