Forum Topic

Power to the People

The Power InquirySome of the key recommendation (as published by the BBC) of the Power Inquiry “Power to the People” report into electoral reform are as follows.• Donations on political parties to be capped at £10,000• A "voter vouchers" system, where individuals indicate if they wish to allocate £3 of state funding to a particular party• Voters given the chance to put forward laws• The voting age, and the minimum age where people can stand for Parliament, to be reduced to 16• A 70%-elected House of Lords• Monthly logs to monitor ministerial contact with companies, lobbyists and pressure groups• Restrictions on the powers of party whipsShould the state be funding Political Parties? Do you consider someone mature enough to vote at 16?It is interesting stuff what do you think?

Alan Sheerins ● 7021d13 Comments

“There should be no taxation without representation”To put another slant on this:Several authors in the past have expressed the view that “all taxation is theft”. In the sense that this is money extracted by force without consent, so it is, -  whether used for our good or not.I cannot bring to mind any modern government or political party that would make contribution to the nation’s expenses a voluntary matter; so in any democracy, the question of whether this theft is permissible does not arise, we are only confronted with a limited choice between those who will exercise the power of this piracy! An issue we decide on the basis of promises as to how the loot will be spent.So, - is it OK to be robbed for so long as we choose the burglars?

Nigel Moore ● 7013d

Alan * Donations to political parties capped at 10k - yes* Voter Voucher system - yes, then maybe we'd be able to react quicker to causes. Look at the CND, look Greenpeace - years ago many committed members were looked at with scorn by many, especially the press barons - now we accept that there are alternatives to nuclear power and we are very slowly reacting to the damage we are causing to the planet. * Voters putting forward laws, excellent and something that Tony Benn has been on about for years. * Reducing the voting age to 16 - Yes, without doubt and the sooner the better too. House of Lords - Personally I'm all for an elected house, rename it and abolition the peers. * Monitoring - Yes. Westminster are very good at telling the rest of the private and public sectors what they should be doing without Westminster doing the same. Its about time that MP's and Ministers were held accountable from the start of their term and not feel that they can get away with murder. * Party whips - Again, abolish these. The power should be with the people through their elected representative, not in the hands of a few especially selected elite who only think of what is good for the party. The older I get the more I realise that Tony Benn was the best Prime Minister that Britain never had.

Gareth Evans ● 7013d

There should be no taxation without representation.

Gareth Evans ● 7013d

Burglaries,muggings,viloent crimes(the difficult ones to solve)are not down.The crimes solved stats. are up mainly because of speeding convictions and motoring offences which involve very little police work as your car reg. plate is effectively your name and address writ large for all to see.I'll believe we've more police when I see a few walking around and engaging people in conversation and offering a reassuring presence to the law abiding.More people might vote if they thought some politicians weren't skirting the bounds of morality,integrity and ethics with ,in my view, spurious expense claims and undeclared 'gifts' from leaders of other countries.Going for midnight strolls on Clapham Common does their image and standing no good either,imho.....

Keith Iddon ● 7018d

"People generally vote for a Party and its manifesto and not so much for the individual MP. The Whips are an essential part of reminding members of Parliament that they stood for election on and should support these manifesto commitments"The quote of the year Alan,no wonder you worship the ground the Keens walk on mate as you have described them to a tee.I respect your opinion about the Iraq war but I recall Mrs Keen leaving a meeting abruptly she was chairing at Mogden Sewage Works so she could rush to Parliament to vote for the war.Do you express your opinion to her still or accept she is a sheep who does what she is told by the Whip?The "Police teams" you commend are mainly Community Support Officers who do not possess the same powers as regular Officers and most crimes are on the increase in the area.

Paul Fisher ● 7018d

Blimy Alan, how many 16 year olds do you know who are married, have jobs, paying tax and are raising a family?

Andrew Sibley ● 7018d

Interesting Pete. If 16 year olds can get married raise children have full time jobs and pay tax. Should they not be entitled to vote? On the other issues you point out. • The Government has made help available directly to pensioners to relieve the burden of Council Tax and there is a full review of the system going on. • On the Police we now have dedicated police teams for all local wards (4 in each I think, this will rise to 6 in each ward next year). Police numbers have increased in the last few years and most types of crime have reduced significantly. Of course there will always be new challenges, new types of crime to deal with. • On the War (which I never supported), a majority were in favour at the time the Government made the decision to go in.I entirely disagree with the state funding of Political Parties. The governments we elect, have to be based on some sort of popular movement or organisation which has genuine grass roots participation to make it credible. All Political Parties have this to a greater or lesser extent at the moment. I fear that this vital link might be broken if state funding was introduced. I am not sure about the donation limit of £10,000. With a cap set this low, individuals and organisation will find less formal, less accountable means of supporting Political Parties.Giving voters the chance to put forward laws is interesting, it would be a great idea if  it could be made to work in a fair way. I fear that the mad elements of the right wing press might skew the process and would start sponsoring new laws in their papers. That would not be good.I believe that a revising chamber like the Lords is necessary, but that it should be 100% elected. People generally vote for a Party and its manifesto and not so much for the individual MP. The Whips are an essential part of reminding members of Parliament that they stood for election on and should support these manifesto commitments. Obviously there are a lot of grey areas in this, I would not be opposed to changes but getting a proper balance will be difficult.

Alan Sheerins ● 7018d

Interesting Pete. If 16 year olds can get married raise children have full time jobs and pay tax. Should they not be entitled to vote? On the other issues you point out. • The Government has made help available directly to pensioners to relieve the burden of Council Tax and there is a full review of the system going on. • On the Police we now have dedicated police teams for all local wards (4 in each I think, this will rise to 6 in each ward next year). Police numbers have increased in the last few years and most types of crime have reduced significantly. Of course there will always be new challenges, new types of crime to deal with. • On the War (which I never supported), a majority were in favour at the time the Government made the decision to go in.I entirely disagree with the state funding of Political Parties. The governments we elect, have to be based on some sort of popular movement or organisation which has genuine grass roots participation to make it credible. All Political Parties have this to a greater or lesser extent at the moment. I fear that this vital link might be broken if state funding was introduced. I am not sure about the donation limit of £10,000. With a cap set this low, individuals and organisation will find less formal, less accountable means of supporting Political Parties.Giving voters the chance to put forward laws is interesting, it would be a great idea if  it could be made to work in a fair way. I fear that the mad elements of the right wing press might skew the process and would start sponsoring new laws in their papers. That would not be good.I believe that a revising chamber like the Lords is necessary, but that it should be 100% elected. People generally vote for a Party and its manifesto and not so much for the individual MP. The Whips are an essential part of reminding members of Parliament that they stood for election on and should support these manifesto commitments. Obviously there are a lot of grey areas in this, I would not be opposed to changes but getting a proper balance will be difficult.

Alan Sheerins ● 7018d

Perhaps if the main parties offered a real choice(and didn't all say broadly the same things)and people felt they were being listened too and their wishes acted upon(Iraq,council tax reductions for pensioners,more police on the streets)they may want to engage in the political process.I do not think lowering the voting age is a good idea.We seem to been taking away youth from the young in lots of areas in this consumerist society as it is.Also,it may prove to be just another group that are as apathetic.The main way to get more voters is to BE RELEVANT AND BE INTERESTING.

Keith Iddon ● 7019d

AlanAn excellent posting.  My two penn'orth, for what it's worth:• Donations on political parties to be capped at £10,000In our case irrelevant, but presumably designed to reduce the inequality between the funding potential of the two major parties.  Why £10k, out of interest?  • A "voter vouchers" system, where individuals indicate if they wish to allocate £3 of state funding to a particular party?This would need explaining further, but if this were offered as a free choice I suspect most voters would pass on it.  I am worried by the prospect of political parties becoming state-funded, because they will inevitably become state-dependant.  And if I don't agree with any of the "approved" parties - why should I have to fund them?• Voters given the chance to put forward lawsSounds like my kind of idea.  How would it work in practice?• The voting age, and the minimum age where people can stand for Parliament, to be reduced to 16I would agree with this, but it is not in itself a solution to the problem of voter apathy.• A 70%-elected House of LordsWhy do we need a House of Lords?• Monthly logs to monitor ministerial contact with companies, lobbyists and pressure groupsHow about a monthly log to monitor MPs' contact with constituents?• Restrictions on the powers of party whipsRestricted to nothing would be good.  Why should a political representative have to vote for or against something which/she believes just because he/she is required to follow a party line?All sensible responses welcome...

Phil Andrews ● 7021d

Looking at the voting age matter...the pros and cons are briefly outlined on the following webpage..and that is helpful to see:http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=77As in so many spheres of living I find that whilst the say 80% of decent,knowledgeable and level headed people deserve to be given a "treat..."...its the misuse by the undeserving 20% that offsets any advantages in giving privileges or power.  So, the 20% spoil the fun for the 80%.  This Forum is a fine example!!I believe that there should be no change. Voting age to stay at 18.

Jim Lawes ● 7021d

Personally, I think the voting age (along with drinking and smoking) should be raised to 21.

The Pseudometer ● 7021d

It should me made compulsory to vote “Do you consider someone mature enough to vote at 16?”Judging by political posts on this forum, YES!

Ian Roberts ● 7021d