Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#1
This has caught my eye even down here in France when politics is not at the forefront of my mind (good food, wine and beer.....rather)
There is a 4 part article in the Guardian today by David Cameron. When the Guardian describes a Conservative leader's plans as "the most dramatic redistribution of power in living memory", then there is something very significant being said that is chiming well outside Conservative circles.
I quote a short piece to demonstrate why:
"I believe the central objective of the new politics we need should be a massive, sweeping, radical redistribution of power. From the state to citizens; from the government to parliament; from Whitehall to communities. From the EU to Britain; from judges to the people; from bureaucracy to democracy. Through decentralisation, transparency and accountability we must take power away from the political elite and hand it to the man and woman in the street." unquote....
I have been talking for years now about the growing 'localisation' agenda withing the Conservative Party. This started about 5 years ago or so when I was chairman and now more than ever this agenda is looking relevant. Make no mistake this is serious stuff and will be the driving force behind a new Conservative Government. Two things have advanced this agenda, the sheer incompetence shown by Government and the expenses scandal. Yes the time is ripe for such policies and the introduction of a new politics.
Sid Pollitt
#2
We could argue for this not just here but across the whole of the EU, in Germany I believe it is called fedralism.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#3
BARRYW
REDISTRBUTION of wealth next DC will be wanting labours old clause 4 !!!!!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#4
Keith - redistribution of POWER not wealth. This perhaps proves you dont read what is actually written.
This is a very Conservative thing, we do not believe in the big Government model so pursued by the Government with its targets and nannying interference in every aspect of our lives.
Sid, I dont think you have quite grasped the scale of what DC is proposing. This is no Federal or Regional system of Government but a wholescale reduction in the power responsibilities and role of Government full stop and that includes all layers of Government.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#5
worth a try Barryw lol
I think conservative and Labour govts have failed over many years to get decisions down to the local level.
If DC were to ever achieve it I would be the first to applaud him.
What I do think is this is more about the general election and saying things that you feel people might like to hear.
Sadly politicians are very good at this, they then get into office and make all the excuses why they then cant do it.
So i'm wary at the moment.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#6
I think you may be right there Keef...its probably more about electioneering. It w as discussed on the radio and although there are good ideas in what he was saying, the radio pundits felt it wouldnt happen...as who ever gets into power is not going to bring about legislation that gives them less power. We are in turkeys voting for Christmas territory there.
One aspect I thought was good from this DC collection of ideas was the fixed parliamentary term idea. In other words you had an election as per schedule not when a Prime Minister decided when it was right to go for it. There is too much pointless manouvering..trying to get the best brief slot of time when things are going reasonably well, to go for it in the hope of winning. The public are kind of sick of all this stuff.
Its perfectly respectable and understandable to want to win but the manouverings about are tasteless at times.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#7
Paulb
further, the tories record on local govt finances(squeezing them dry)hardly inspires you.
I'm a great believer that decisions should be made as local as possible,
I would abolish the KCC and give the powers to the Districts/town councils, it would take a lot of working out and hard work, but if you truely believe in decisions more local you would go for it.
Also I would have local consultation that means something, not just ticking boxes.
local people should be able to feel they are making a diffrence by being consulted and not only being listened to but also a way found that views are taken notice of.
At the end of the day we live here, shouldn't we be able to help formulate our future?
blimey thats radical
what do you all think?
Sid Pollitt
#8
We've stubbled upon a European issue during the Euro elections, about time eh? A debate on subsidiarity, by default, is better than the usual rhetoric I suppose. Whilst you dont need a federal state system, it is a step on that road, with subsidiarity the idea that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level.
Subsidiarity is a fundamental principle of European Union law and according to this principle, the EU may only act and make laws where member states agree that the action of individual countries is insufficient. The principle was established in the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht and is contained within the new Lisbon Treaty.
Is Cammoron now a EU convert? Is he trying to push us into the centre of Europe instead of sitting on the edge? Let's hope his party's MEPs wont be sat with the rag-tag neo nazi faction after the election as it will do our country no favours.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#9
Sid - where on earth do you get that idea that Cameron is some kind of EU convert...
The opposite in fact.
1/ He said we would have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, no caveats.
2/ Referenda on any and all further proposals to transfer power to the EU
3/ The repatriation of powers from the EU
The entire thrust of this is in the opposite direction to what the EU stands for with its centralising of power and the concentrating of it in the hands of the political elite,
Keith - localism and getting away from big Government, opposition to nannying, rules and red tape are all meat and drink to Conservatives.
Mrs T's policies of privatisation, right to buy, ending subsidy and interference in industry etc were themselves a move away from the State. DC is now taking this much much further. In some respects Mrs T's solutions to the problems of the 80's did remove some discretion from Councils so you are corrrect in that, but is a contrast to many other policies that were in the opposite direction. Now the time is right for radical changes, including the way Councils are financed.
This is a reaction to Labours top heavy apporach that has so dismally failed.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#10
earlier in the thread, it may have been keith, mentioned about money being cut from councils.
this has been a continuous thing starting with mrs t and still carrying on under mr b.
a sea change in financing is urgently required, that is without all the localisation that mr c talks about.
from a personal viewpoint the more local control the better.
each locality has its own problems that only elected councillors can address.
#11
I have to agree with PaulB. It's easy to say noble and public-spirited things when you're in opposition. If DC becomes the next PM, is he really going to make sure that power is spread more evenly among the people? Yeah right! And what on earth is a Conservative leader doing suggesting such a socialist idea in the first place? Does "reform" also mean revising the core values of the parties?
One thing I would LOVE to see happen is the close scrutiny of MPs. We get constantly scrutinized and spied on in every imaginable way, but it is THEM that needs to be watched closely as has now been proven. I hope all the CCTV cameras, expense receipts, databases, and god-knows what else turn inwards onto their creators so that we have a means of keeping tabs on those cheating, thieving a****oles.
Let's face it, they're all doing and saying whatever to shut us up and rebuild their own reputations. At the end of the day, when the dust settles and the burning headlines turn to cool ash, power will still be where THEY want it to be and we'll have been conned yet again into believing whatever crap they tell us in order to "resolve an issue". Their one and only agenda is now to restore public confidence - but it won't be at any cost and it won't be for real. It will be largely superficial and any big changes that do arise will only be to placate the angry mob. None of them - not one - will actually want less power so I regard this whole debate as pure folly.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#12
at present they are playing the "reform" card.
new rules, outside monitoring etc.
the next stage will be the "lets get back to the issues" card.
about a dozen will be hung out to dry with massive pay offs, then things will get back to normal.
what does that madam guillotine do nowadays?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#13
Rick - sorry to correct you but there is nothing socialist about spreading power, in fact limiting the power and influence of the State is a very Conservative thing while central control and top down Governance is very much the hallmark of Labour.
You can believe that DC means what he says because it runs with the grain of Conservative thinking.
From a previous era, Right to Buy and privatisation are both part of that spreading of power enabling people to own their own homes and a real share in businesses through share ownership were manifestations of this under Mrs T.
Compare that to Labour where they opposed right to buy wanting to keep municipal control over huge swathes of housing stock and also wanting to run huge swathes of industry through nationalisation.
That alone demonstrates the big difference between Conservative and Labour thinking from a different time.
in the present we have a somewhat different set of problems but the differing attitudes still reflect this divide. The old Labour corporate socialism of nationalised industries may have gone but that is replaced by a new Beaurocratic Socialism where they instead try to control industry and businesses through a mass of laws and regulations. You can see daily how they cannot devolve power from their centrally controlled targets and how they feel they can and should interfere in all aspects of our lives nannying.
In the Conservative Party around 5 years there was a renewed thrust to take us in the opposite direction which involves Government standing back from interferance and smaller Government. Dan Hannen was at the forefront of that and he produced a book 'The Plan' iin response. I have posted here about The Plan, some of which formed a significant part of DC's recent speech. If you go to conservativehome.com and read the discussions and threads there you will see that this 'localism' is becoming embedded into Conservative attitudes and there is much discussion of the 'post-beaurocratic age'. All that DC is saying is very much mainstream in the Conservative Party and he really does mean it.
Make no mistake there will be huge changes in the way Britain is run under the Conservatives and peple will be empowered as never before. Locally elected 'sherrifs' to run the local prosecution service and police operations is not a new policy for us, it was in the last manifesto and will be in the next. Then there is indeed, as howard said, a need to reform LG finance and Dan Hannan had a solution for that by converting VAT to a local sales tax (County based). This latter is particularly well argued. There is much, much more and it is very Conservative with smaller Government and personal responsibility at its heart.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#14
Rick - if you want further evidence of Cameron speech being fully in tune with Conservative thinking you might want to read the blog of Thatcherite right wing MP John Redwood
http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2009/05/28/power-to-the-people/