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.

YABU OP.

I'm afraid democracy isnt measured in terms of the left getting everything it wants.

And to be honest, the constant MN whining about the cuts shows how out of touch with the country we have become. The people want reform - its what they voted for when they kicked Labour out. You dont speak for them.

AfterDinner - I'm not talking big time-scales here you know - we're talking 6 weeks? - between the things they say before the election and the things they do afterwards.

mingofmongo - nothing to do with left/right - I just don't think it's right to tell lies to get power.

I don't think its lying actually. I think a lot of the current cabinet - particularly in the Lib Dems - got a hell of a shock when they came into government.

Even the best laid intentions and plans came up against a sudden reality that actually, no matter how much we believe in this and how much we want to do this, actually we can't deliver it and we have more pressing concerns that we are going to have to face up. Being in power is about making difficult decisions. Being good in government is sometimes about making difficult unpopular decisions in order to get a better deal overall.

Of course no one is going to vote for certain tax rises. It doesn't mean they aren't the right thing to do. And I don't think thats necessarily a betrayal on manifesto pledges. I think the word compromise is such a dirty one, especially in politics, but it shouldn't be.

I honestly think thats where the student fees thing fell, especially in terms of the Lib Dems getting more say on other issues. (I must note on that subject that the way the new system has been reported is actually very bad, as the reality is under the current one many students actually are paying far more than they would under the new one. There are a couple of good independent break downs on the subject - including from reputable places like moneysaving expert. Its definitely not as much of a betrayal to students as a lot of people would make you believe. Its been a real propaganda fight rather one based on reality. Its just a real shame that the upfront, rather than the long term figures, have put so many kids off applying for uni).

What's more, the NHS reforms WERE thought out before the election, but they knew they would be unelectable if they announced them so they kept them deliberately secret, saying instead "no more top-down reorganisation".

That is pure and simple deception imo.

'I think it is worth pointing out situations in europe where disagreement between parties have left them with a properly elected government for over 12 months whilst they hammered out deals. Thats a far worse situation.'

Actually, it isn't. Belgium still functioned without a govt for 541 days, however it has more powers devolved to the regions than the UK does.

As for no coalition if ideologically opposed - why not? One could argue that the Lib Dems have tempered the Tories (hampered I think personally) and that the Tories are having to look at policies that they wouldn't have otherwise, like how far we engage with Europe (Clegg afraid he may lose his EU pension) and when we deploy the veto over certain things. Politics is the 'art of the possible' as Bismarck remarked.

This was a LibDem election broadcast

Certainly in our area, their biggest promise was that they would keep the Tories out.

- this is April 2010.

The VAT increase was announced in June 2010, 1 month after the election.

Perhaps the people who were making promises to the electorate about what they would and wouldn't do should have made it their business to find out whether what they were saying was possible.

I know that if I went to a job interview and made a lot of claims about what I could/would do and then, not only didn't deliver on those claims, but actually did the opposite, I don't think many people would be congratulating me.

AfterDinner - what you say about the university fees is right however, when you look at the repayment levels, there is a very steep rise once you are earning above the initial £21000 threshold. To think that you won't be free of that 'debt'/repayment for 30 years is quite demoralising.

And it is a debt (despite how some are marketing it) because those whose parents can afford to pay upfront will never incur that additional 'tax'.

Many lib deb votes were a result of a few convincing TV interviews from Clegg, and a not too subtle 'vote for us and stop the Tories' message.

To be honest, if that was all the thought that went into them then voters cant really complain when democracy doesnt democracy in their direction .

One of the biggest beefs I have with politics is its short termist and being so populist. Its one of the most major failings of democracy.

The current pension crisis is it has been very foreseeable. (And I don't just mean public sector). And PIF is undoubtably the result of populist, short termist politics.

But in playing populist politics and not suggesting and making changes sooner everyone is far worse off for it.

That has been the fault of successive governments over a period of time. I'm not pointing at blue, red or yellow here but a public problem in our attitude too. We do have a situation where we are obsessed with the here and now and we do have a problem where the public at large expects everything and doesn't want to take the necessarily level of responsibility too where it is appropriate. Hence why previous governments have been so unwilling to admit to failings or make unpopular suggestions.

I think the public as a whole needs to be more willing to vote for unpopular things. Parties would be 'more honest' if the public was more realistic and more willing to take an intelligent response to some tax rises if it can be clearly shown what is being done with that extra money or why it is needed.

And I don't see that happening any time soon. Instead we are stuck with simplistic ideas which are impossible to deliver 'honestly' as the world, economics and politics are just so much more complicated than that.

mingofmongo, a lot of Lib Dem votes were from 'vote for us and keep the Tories out'.

However the Lib Dem strategy was in other areas to use leaflets that said 'vote for us and keep Labour out'!

It was a classic, divide and conquer move. It was about picking up voters of BOTH labour and tory parties and playing the lesser of two evil card.

It was a very deliberate strategy and one that was well publicised by critics at the time. It wasn't a huge secret.

The Lib Dems then found themselves in a situation where they were going to let down one group of voters whoever they entered into a coalition with...

FolkGirl, but the same thing about not being clear of the debt in 30 years time is also true now though, especially if you defer payment.

The threshold is a big thing though. In the same way that the LDs are keen to push for starting to pay tax at a £10,000 threshold which is a fantastic idea that I hope is seen out (its perhaps the best thing in all three party manifestos imho).

The current threshold of £15,000 puts much more of a strain on low earners straight out of uni who don't manage to find the graduate jobs they thought they would. The weight of how much you pay back should be inline with how much you earn in the same way as tax is. And the new system to all intents and purposes is a graduate tax minus some of the problems that would be associated with just making it a simple tax.

You can't just shift the threshold up without putting a greater burden elsewhere. If you are suggesting that people who earn £15k should foot a greater percentage than those who earn £21k I find that a somewhat perplexing argument.

But this is getting somewhat off topic...

There are 2 real democratic deficits in the UK.

The first is the lack of real choice among the parties. Both parties have broadly similar tax and spend policies. The big argument about the "Tory cuts" is really splitting hairs. Both parties would have to address the deficit and the Tories have even stuck with the 50% tax and are talking about bringing in a "mansion" tax. Is there really a party for individual choice, localism and small government?

The second is the lack of referendums on constitutional matters such as reforming the lords and signing European treaties. NL were egregiously bad on the latter, always getting a dodgy legal opinion (they were the masters of those) that each treaty was not a fundamental constitional change, when it clearly was. I suspect that if we now had a referendum of whether to stay or leave the EC, we would get a good majority in favour of leaving. However, neither party will ever offer that. There are just far too many tax free retirement jobs going in Brussels.

I love you Scaryteacher

can we stop talking about 'cuts' as if they actually exist? Spending has gone up and continues to do so.

Lilybolero if you think that you can do a better job than the current politicians then put yourself up as an MP at the next election. Join a political party ( i suspect you are already a member of one!) or stand as an independent. i am fed up of people whinging about how crap labour/libdems/tories politicians are but arent actually prepared to stand up and do the job themselves. You are coming across as an idealistic 20 something perhaps being an old girl like me makes you cynical. seen it done and worn the tee shirt as far as politicians of all parties and their lies are concerned. But and this is the big but, i am not prepared to become an MP so feel my whinging has to be curtailed. And if you don't think we live in a democracy then i suggest you move - go somewhere that really isnt a democracy like china. then stand up in the street and say something anti govt and see how long you last. Honestly some people need to get older so they can get wiser!!

What a load of bollocks mummy

Why TBM - what have I done?

Suggest a better system baby.

AV wouldn't change things significantly.

And PR is just so awful I don't know where to begin.

Neither would produce a majority either.

Throughout history, some oligarchies have been tyrannical, relying on public servitude to exist, although others have been relatively benign. Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich, for which the exact term is plutocracy, but oligarchy is not always a rule by wealth, as oligarchs can simply be a privileged group, and do not have to be connected by bloodlines as in a monarchy. Some city-states from ancient Greece were oligarchies.

From Wiki.

AfterDinner - I suppose the difference is that under the current scheme, when you have paid back what you borrowed you cease to pay (hence my DH will be all paid up this April, whereas I will be unlikely to ever repay mine) yet under the new scheme, when you have repayed the amount you initially borrowed, you continue to pay.

None of it is fair. But the speed and lack of time for families to prepare is probably my biggest gripe with it. Especially when those wealthy enough to pay upfront, won't incur any of it so will only pay exactly what it costs and not a penny more.

Just seems unfair and I do think that it will affect student numbers. My DS and his friends are 13 and already talking about alternatives to university.

In fact my biggest gripe is that the fees don't seem to reflect the standard of the university, the resources, the entry requirements, contact time, the course QAA score of the specific course, the employability of the graduates...

thanks girlwithpointyshoes glad to see you are still mature enough to offer up some interesting points in an argument. why is it seemingly intelligent people feel the need to swear at people they don't know. still you won't be standing for election which is a relief to us all.

You're right, it is off topic, but tuition fees is one of the areas where a lot of people feel well and truly stuffed.

I know a lot of people who did vote LD on the strength of their tuition fee pledge alone. They are feeling mightily peed off now!