Skip to main content

Trust but verify

A recent survey has shown that people in Britain are moderately happy with their lives. All in all a happy society is to be welcomed.

One area where the survey showed particular dissatisfaction was with politics. The Brits don't trust their leaders- any of them. They are not even sure about the institutions. The findings are striking, and very distinctive.

Personally I think that it shows the good sense of most of the British people- the fact is that a healthy scepticism is much to be preferred compared to the slavishness of the citizens of a tyranny.

However it also shows the corrosive effect of the image and spin obsession of the Government and now of Cameron's Conservatives. People do not have trust in the institutions because they do not feel ownership or connection with the political system. There is a great divorce between an increasingly professionalised political system and an alienated population. The fact is that a single vote every few years in a rigged electoral system allows very few voters to get the MP that they voted for, still less the policies that they support.

Until the power of the electorate is restored through a fair voting system, then the Executive will continue to treat MPs with contempt. MPs gain their power from being selected by a handful of their party members- for the number of safe seats that there are already means that the result is all but sure. Personally I do not believe in safe seats- every seat should be marginal and every MP should justify themselves to the electorate.

The only way to keep politicians honest is to ensure that the electoral system makes them accountable and unless that happens, then the British are quite right to look on politicians with a sceptical eye.

When we have politicians who work to earn our trust, then maybe we can think about trusting them- until then we can play the political game, but we should cut the cards ourselves.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and ...

The Will of the People

Many of the most criminal political minds of the past generations have claimed to be an expression of the "will of the people"... The will of the people, that is, as interpreted by themselves. Most authoritarian rulers: Napoleon III, Mussolini, Hitler, have called referendums in order to claim some spurious popular support for the actions they had already determined upon. The problem with the June 2016 European Union was that the question was actually insufficiently clear. To leave the EU was actually a vast set of choices, not one specific choice. Danial Hannan, once of faces of Vote Leave was quite clear that leaving the EU did NOT mean leaving the Single Market:    “There is a free trade zone stretching all the way from Iceland to the Russian border. We will still be part of it after we Vote Leave.” He declared: “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market.” The problem was that this relatively moderate position was almost immediately ...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...