Do we no longer live in a democracy?

[LilyBolero]

The United Kingdom purports to be a democracy. And yet, the people of this country have no say in what happens in this country.

Look at the NHS reforms. Nobody voted for them. Cameron and Lansley KNEW that if they announced what they were planning before the election, they would be roundly beaten. And so they kept it secret. Now, when polls say that 73% of voters oppose the use of private companies in the NHS, and 62% of voters do not trust the Tories on the NHS, when they are opposed by many health organisations (Royal College of GPs, Royal College of Nurses, Royal College of Midwives, Royal College of physiotherapists, and the list goes on and on) - their solution is to shut the door on them, and to exclude them from any further discussions.

How is this democracy? Most people DON'T WANT the reforms. Most medical people DON'T WANT the reforms. Even half the government DON'T WANT the reforms. And yet, because Cameron and Lansley want them, this is what is going to happen. Cameron said 'No more top-down reorganisation of the NHS'.

Then we have Michael Gove imposing his 'ban on termtime holidays'. Is it not up to parents to decide how to bring up their children? Has he forgotten that it is not 'his' country, to rule as he wishes, but all of our country.

Even on the economy, we have no democratic say. At the last election, there were 2 distinct approaches. The Labour way, and the LibDem way was to halve the deficit over 4-5 years. The Conservative way was to cut savagely and to eliminate the deficit in 5 years. Although elections are rarely fought on one issue, I think in the extraordinary situation of 2010, it would be fair to say that the economy was the over-riding issue, and if ever an election was mono-issue, it was that one.

The first solution, of shallower cuts received about 15.4 million votes. The second solution of savage cuts received 10.7 million votes.

So we get the second option.

The Lib Dems campaigned on a ticket of 'pledging to oppose ANY rise in tution fees'. In government, they are trebling the tuition fees.

David Cameron before the election said he 'liked child benefit being a universal benefit'. He said 'I LIKE child benefit, I WOULDN'T CHANGE child benefit'.

Now he is abolishing child benefit for some in an unfair and incompetent slash at families.

They are liars, and buy votes through lies, and then do whatever the hell they want. We should be able to force an election and actually hold politicians to account. We don't live in a democracy, we live in a fascist dictatorship.

Because he didn't try. He didn't score any open goals. He let Gordon off the hook about Mrs Duffy and nearly everything else Labour had done over their 13 years. I think they wanted a Coalition, not a Tory government on its own, because that would draw all the "Tory scum" crowd to oppose the reforms they knew were necessary. I think they wanted strength through unity.

The Tories weren't elected because they still - rightfully - have a reputation as being the 'nasty' party, and people's memories aren't so short. They still remember the destruction caused by Thatcher and previous Tory governments.

Having lied and pretended not to be nasty any more viz. destroying the NHS, and just barely getting enough votes to form a coalition but not win a majority, they are now on course to set the public straight again exactly the sociopathic and nasty policies they are known for.

It will take yet another generation to forget before they're elected again.

King Canute's hyperbolic proclamation "we have only 50 days left to stop the tide" didn't convince the voters then and it doesn't now. To convince voters you have to get real.

'Having lied and pretended not to be nasty any more viz. destroying the NHS, and just barely getting enough votes to form a coalition but not win a majority, they are now on course to set the public straight again exactly the sociopathic and nasty policies they are known for.'

Then why are their poll ratings only now neck and neck with Labour and only last month were at record highs?

They just dropped 4 points in the polls, and are now polling below Labour.

When the NHS quagmire develops, and the cuts destroy more lives, even fewer people will support them.

Secondly. the ratings are relative. Some voters voted New Labour out, rather than the Tories in. Because of our broken political system, voters have few choices and no real choice. Just because they don't like Labour, don't think this means they support the Tories. It doesn't follow.

'Why don't you get some political education and stop reading the Daily Mail?'

What paper do you think all those progressive spin doctors read every morning? They devour the Daily Mail every morning in order to read the truth so that they can counter it with lies.

zzzzzzz...

Good night, you strange, confused, ideologically-incoherent, right-wing populist. :P

'When the NHS quagmire develops, and the cuts destroy more lives, even fewer people will support them.'

Yes that is possible and is why some Tory MPs are asking for it to be dropped. We don't know what will happen. We will have to see if it goes through or not.

'Just because they don't like Labour, don't think this means they support the Tories'

I agree, lots of people don't like either of them much, but they usually like one better than the other.

How about a fifth of constituencies voting every 5 years. That way no party has guaranteed power for any more than a year at a time. The PM is demoted to mere figurehead to shake hands with Heads of State and host party functions.

Oh and Claig, Canute was trying to demonstrate to his people that he was only a man and couldn't stop the tide. He knew he couldn't, and was showing the flatterers surrounding him that he couldn't, that he was no more than they were.

Thanks for that, Jux. I didn't know that about Canute. He sounds very wise. I take it back; he has nothing in common with an early socialist whatsoever. However, it seems the same cannot be said about his people.

claig, you are missing a fundamental point of this thread - you are trying to counter every argument with a pro-Tory statement, usually along the lines of 'Labour were really terrible'....

But that isn't the point of the thread. It is not meant to be a party-political thread, rather one that looks at the current system in this country, whereby politicians have no-one to hold them to account, and as such can lie their way into power, and then do whatever they want. Right or left, that is wrong.

And the particular results the last election threw up with no one party claiming a majority, opened the way for our government to be decided by ONE party, who came third in the election. And that is not right. And I would be saying that whether it were Cameron, or Brown, or Miliband, or anyone in number 10. I am convinced that the only fair thing to do would be to have representatives of all parties. Or you could hold a 2nd ballot of yes/no on a proposed coalition, but obviously that would take longer to implement and be expensive.

I don't think politicians should be able to call all the shots in the way they do - they are supposed to represent the people, and the NHS is a perfect example of how one or two people, by virtue of being politicians, can make MAJOR changes to how the country runs, when NOBODY wants it. And that is not right.

a counter argument isn't "...Labour started it/did worse/fucked kittens"

It doesn't excuse the fact that the Tory bastards are dismantling any last safety net of the poor

We do live in a democracy and by one convoluted way or another, this is what we voted for. Sorry it might not suit you, but to say it is no longer a democracy because your team didn't win is silly.

Hilly - have you read the thread? Have you even read my last post? I VOTED libdem in the last election!

Rowan Williams June last year: "anger and anxiety" felt by voters is a result of the government's failure to expose its policies to "proper public argument......"
"With remarkable speed, we are being committed to radical, long-term policies for which no one voted,"
"At the very least, there is an understandable anxiety about what democracy means in such a context......"

"...the comprehensive reworking of the Education Act 1944 that is now going forward might well be regarded as a proper matter for open probing in the context of election debates." Gove's free school reforms were pushed through Parliament with a haste usually reserved for emergency anti-terrorist powers.

He warns "Government badly needs to hear just how much plain fear there is around such questions at present."

in short, no one voted for this democracy

Yes but you didn't vote for a coalition, and you didn't vote for the cuts you are complaining about. But we got what we got as a result of the way we all voted, one way or another.

HillyWallaby is right.

The fact that 'Labour were terrible' doesn't mean that we didn't have democracy when they were in power.

Your argument is that we no longer live in a democracy. Did you argue that when Labour were in power? When Blair never held a majority of teh votes of the entire voting population? Blair had more votes than any other single party and enough to form a government. That is how our democracy works, but he was never representative of the majority of the country's people.

Alliances and coalitions are not the end of democracy as you are implying. In fact they are more represntative of the entire population than first past the post overall minority winners. A coalition is more diverse than one single party and the coalition holds the leadership to greater account since teh leadership has to take account of diverse views that reflect a greater spread of the population.

The Labour party itself is an alliance and a coalition of individuals from the far left to the centre, who agree common policies. After they gain election, they often implement things that were not in their manifestos. That is the real world. It is complex, not a simplistic black or white system that was all predfined in a manifesto.

We have democracy now, just as we had it when Labour were in power under a Lib-Lab pact or on their own. Tories never complained that it was the end of democracy, why are you complaining that because you now disagree with the Coalition's policies?

"Why do YOU think David Cameron couldn't get a majority, even after the worst financial crisis in modern times?"

My honest opinion is that it was because people didn't actually realise how bad the economic crisis was. If you remember, just a few short years ago, one of the biggest problems facing politicians of all colours was voter apathy. Low turn-outs, zero interest in political matters, too many 'don't knows' etc. And the reason we had apathy was because we had been rendered dumb, fat and happy with an orgy of credit card borrowing and a Labour government, 'intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich', happy to blew all our taxes, and some more besides on making millions dependent on the state rather than investing in sustainable industries and capital projects. Everyone, government included, confused 'easy credit' with 'wealth creation' and at the last election we hadn't quite woken up to reality and we weren't angry yet. Darling tried to warn us what was ahead but we weren't listening.

The cynic in me wishes that Labour had won in 2010 and that they were the ones having to make the tough decisions being made today. The pragmatist is glad they didn't.

RowanWilliams is talking nonsense

"With remarkable speed, we are being committed to radical, long-term policies for which no one voted,"
"At the very least, there is an understandable anxiety about what democracy means in such a context......"

Did he say the same about teh curtailment of teh country's civil liberties and of the proposed introduction of ID cards and DNA databases, and teh end of double jeopardy?

No government since the beginning of time has only implemented policies that it spelt out in a manifesto, but that doesn't mean that we have never had democracy. If that was the case, why isn't Rowan Williams marching in the streets to defend democracy if he really believes what he says?

"Why do YOU think David Cameron couldn't get a majority, even after the worst financial crisis in modern times?"

I think it was because the public sector/state had become such a lumbering great behemoth on the back of which so many millions of people rode, that they were scared to vote for anyone who might want to rein it in a bit and cut it down to size. I think it was all about self-preservation. That is not a criticism btw, I think it is wholly understandable under the circumstances. If my job or my benefits or my public sector pension had been directly in the firing line by voting for anyone other than Gordon Brown then I would probably have voted for him too, irrespective of whether I believed he was responsible for the mess we were in, or capable of getting us out of it. We all selfish in the end.

Well said HillyWallaby.

However, I disagree with this bit
"We all selfish in the end."

Coalition members such as Nick Clegg and many others are not and they are prepared to sacrifice some of their wishes for the good of the country as a whole.

Well I meant the voters, Claig but I get your point. I sometimes wonder why NC took this poisoned chalice, and didn't just sit back and let Dave get on with it by himself, then pick up the mantle in four years time, when the worst bit of the job had been done, and everyone hated his guts! Like screaming at the doctor that has to amputate your limb without anaesthetic by the roadside, so you don't bleed to death.

It was always going to be a thankless task no matter who we gave the job to.

We do live in a democracy and by one convoluted way or another, this is what we voted for. Sorry it might not suit you, but to say it is no longer a democracy because your team didn't win is silly.

Yes, that would be a silly thing to say. Fortunately, nobody has said that.

Yes but you didn't vote for a coalition, and you didn't vote for the cuts you are complaining about. But we got what we got as a result of the way we all voted, one way or another.

Same situation with China then. It's the fault of the public for voting for one of the two approved candidates of the Communist party.

The great thing about democracy is that you have a chance to kick them out if you disagree with what they do. You have to wait 5 years and then you can have a say with the rest of the population. You can vote on their record. If the public agree with you then they will be voted out, just as Labour lost their majority this time round.