Monday, 8 February 2010

Rebuilding Trust In Politics - Cameron

In a speech today, David Cameron dealt with Gordon Brown, Conservative change, Ethics and Accountability in Government and the People's Parliament. Whilst the aims are, to a certain extent, laudable I was struck by some 'contradictions of principle'.

"We [the Conservative Party] are a new generation, come of age in the modern world of openness and accountability. And when we say we will take power from the political elite and give it to the man and woman in the street - it's not just because we believe it will help fix broken politics. It's what we believe, full stop." If iDave really believes that, full stop, why will he not take power from the political elite (EU) and return it to Parliament?

"We don't believe that an arrogant, all-controlling government sitting in London passing endless laws and regulations actually makes things better. In fact, on many occasions it makes things worse." Hardly resonates with this statement on climate change, does it: "A very small number of people take a different view on the science, but the policy is driven by me, and that is the way it is going to be." And that statement is not 'arrogant' and 'all-controlling'?

Discussing the need to 'empower parliament' iDave says: "There was a time when Parliament used to stand tall, a beacon of democracy leading national debate. But people look at it now and see a place they feel little connection to, play little part in, and don’t feel proud to represent them. It all adds up to a weak Parliament – and we’ve got to get its strength back." And the reason that Parliament no longer stands tall, is no longer a beacon to democracy is that, initiated by iDave's own party and continued by subsequent governments, Parliament's ability to govern this country has been virtually totally emasculated. It is not just because of 'Expensegate' that people have no respect for MPs and Parliament, it is because through their own actions MPs are no more than administration clerks for Brussels.

"To restore that link we need to restore proper accountability – we need to give people the feeling that they are the ones pulling the strings and that they hire and fire their representative in parliament." If iDave wishes to restore proper accountability and restore the ability to hire and fire the representatives that are elected, then he needs to get Britain the hell out of the EU!

"It’s absurd that a tiny percentage of the population craft legislation that will apply to one hundred per cent of the population." If ever there was an argument against the form of democracy as practised by the EU, then this must surely be it!

"And one of the biggest constitutional changes in our history - our membership of the European Union - has practically passed Parliament by." And iDave wishes to remain a member of the EU? In his own words, the institution of which he professes to be so proud and considers so important, is now irrelevant, as are the MPs who inhabit it.

There other examples of a 'contradiction of principle', however one last one stands out by its sheer effrontery to common logic. "And it’s why we will abolish the Human Rights Act and introduce a new Bill of Rights, so that Britain’s laws can no longer be decided by unaccountable judges." Err, surely iDave has not forgotten that the European Court of Justice, staffed by unaccountable judges, does, in fact, decide so much of Britain's laws and that whilst Britain remains a member of the EU there is sod all that iDave can do to change it!

iDave may be able to talk the talk (debatable even, when considering the above) but when it comes to walk the walk he promptly falls flat on his face.

1 comment:

paulo said...

Spot on.

A tiny percentage of the population make laws for 100%. Given the all-pervasive power of the EU why do we even need these Westminster half-wits fleecing our money?