EU President rejects democracy. No, really.

Directly electing the European Commission President at the 2014 EU elections would “organise the disappointment in advance”, said European Council President Herman Van Rompuy. Directly electing his own successor would be “even more absurd”, he added in comments that are likely to irritate proponents of increased democracy in the European institutions.

Brilliant. Our good friend Van Rompuy seems hell-bent on ensuring eurosceptic parties are victorious in 2014; not only does the EU Commission desire to increase the EU budget, increasing costs on the net contributors, but also rejects the idea of bringing some democratic accountability to Brussels.

I’m sure ordinary Greeks, Spaniards, Portuguese, Italians and Irish reject the idea of unelected President’s imposing austerity onto them. As well as the majority of Europeans.

The sooner Cameron grants us a referendum, the sooner we depart from this nursery of tyrants.

Read Full Post »

Freedom is worth fighting for

I never thought I see the day, where a leader of a liberal party would endorse basic statutory regulation of the press. It is truly a sad day for liberalism. The press are far from perfect, but their freedom – especially from Parliament – is vital for a healthy democracy.

Granting Parliament the power to recognise and authorise a self-regulatory body – without constitutional protections – opens a dark road towards potential abuse and censorship. This current Parliament might believe in a independent free press, but we have no idea what the successors desire.

And this is the major worry; we cannot predict the future.

Liberalism, rightly, is about balancing freedoms – but you don’t do it by undermining others.

I joined the Liberal Democrats to actively defend freedom, democracy and liberty; not undermine the freedom of the press. You’re entitled to disagree with my opinion, but I stand by my position.

Read Full Post »

Leveson: UK needs a US style ‘First Amendment’

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

His Lordships recommendation is easier said than done; Britain has struggled to write a constitution and we currently enjoy a very complex, uncoded and confusing set of constitutional laws. In order to enshrine freedom of speech and the press, which Leveson recommends in his report, it would require an additional constitutional act.

Parliament, and governments, dislike adding more and more constitutional acts; in fact, since 2007, Parliament has even struggled to agree on creating a modern Bill of Rights (which would be the nearest thing to a UK Constitution). The Prime Minister would like one, however, his Deputy objects to it replacing the Human Rights Act.

And, for the record, writing a single constitutional document – to include articles dating back from the Magna Carta – would take time. Took the United States nearly 15 years to write, agree and ratify one. There is no question the document would have to go to a public referendum, too.

In conclusion, Leveson is right: we need to a UK First Amendment, but don’t bank on Parliament creating one.

Read Full Post »

Fleet Street make a stand on free of speech

Some politicians are clearly seeing this as a chance to give the press a bloody nose… or worse. Some, sadly, are more interested in seizing political advantage.

Mr Cameron must rise above such pettiness and demonstrate true statesmanship because FAR too much is at stake.

He must banish his nightmare and follow his rational belief that Britain’s democracy deserves not parliamentary ­regulation for its newspapers, but a truly free press.

I hope, and believe, he will.

A very rare op/ed from the Mirror’s Editor-in-chief and it’s not the only paper; Telegraph and The Sun have printed passionate defences of free speech and the press. Politicians, especially party leaders, depend on the national papers to get their message out; what if the press simply refuse to publish editorials and guest opinions? Ed Miliband might not enjoy the Daily Mirror opting not to print that ridiculous “One Nation” phrase and Dave probably wishes The Sun stop giving favourable headlines to UKip.

But, again, you cannot demand the press to be more balanced and then criticise them for providing a platform for other, much smaller, political parties.

Boycotting the current political class might prove to be the greatest weapon in the arsenal of the press. Might seem innocent and irrelevant, but could prove very damaging during a General Election – if the tabloids, etc give unprecedented coverage to UKip, RESPECT, Greens, et al.

Parliament might not enjoy a more politically balanced press, that refuses to endorse the current monopoly.

Read Full Post »

The free press and liberty.

Burke said there were Three Estates in Parliament; but, in the Reporters’ Gallery yonder, there sat a Fourth Estate more important far than they all.

- Thomas Carlyle in On Heroes and Hero Worship (1840)

If we regulate the press, then the press cannot regulate the state; regardless of personal preferences to particular newspapers and broadcasters, the press are the true guardians of our democracy. Even if we are apathetic, the press are there to inform and critique the actions of Parliament.

The fact journalists are independent and swear no allegiance to Parliament is a good thing. Exposing failures, incompetence, scandals and even potential illegal activities is the reason why we have a free press. It helps to bring transparency and accountability to the most clandestine institution of them all – the state.

Either we believe in liberty or we don’t. Authorising Parliament to regulate the press can lead towards a dark and dangerous conclusion, in which future MP’s can use laws to gag and halt legitimate press activities. It already occurs in France.

Our current press might not be perfect, but the alternative is much worse.

Read Full Post »

The death of mainstream parties in Britain

Regardless of what happens on Thursday (I do, however, suspect RESPECT might pull off a shock and get at least one new MP), the traditional parties in Britain are rapidly losing votes. Labour’s left fringes are under siege from RESPECT and the Greens, Conservatives see a marching popular conservative UKip and Liberal Democrats votes are nearly non-existent.

If Britain had a more proportional electoral system, we could witness the mass death of the ‘big three’; yet, though, the internal makeup and coalitions within each party are fragmenting. The socialists, social conservatives and social democrats are becoming more or less independent. None of those idealogical groups are represented by a mainstream party; economic, left and social liberalism dominate British politics. In reality, there really is not a big idealogical difference between Labour, Conservatives or Liberal Democrats – only minor variations.

It is likely, as predicated, no party will gain a majority in 2015 and even in 2020. As the ‘big three’ continue to decline in popularity, it will be difficult to justify the current electoral system and the constitutional mandate to govern. Opinion polls, for example, show the vast majority of public questioning our current leaders ability to lead and understand the average citizen. This is not just apathy, but out right rejection of the current status quo.

The ‘big three’ only have one option left: reform. If they don’t, then the same fate of the old Liberal party awaits them.

Read Full Post »

Web 4.0 and the beginning of e-democracy

Imagine a semantic Internet, more self-aware and intelligent; a network, which is so personalised to the point where a user receives Parliamentary bills, government briefs, manifestos, policy ideas and even the ability to vote online. Connecting either via a Twitter or Facebook account could give you access to how the government is spending your taxes and even how the fiscal agenda is actually affecting your income. This futuristic Web 4.0 has created a more vibrant, transparent and accountable government with a direct relationship with individuals.

Scary, yes? Unimaginable? – you’d be surprise how close this reality is.

The Foreign Office already discusses and  informs Twitter users of foreign affairs, developments and travel advice; even holds Q&A sessions and ask users how the government can improve relations with other countries. The Budget of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is published on Twitter, with the Treasury distributing charts and graphs to provide transparency on public spending and taxation.

Now party leaders, elected officials and candidates are extending campaigning to Twitter and other forms of social media; a wider target audience, significantly cheaper and instant feedback is much more useful than blanketing a street with leaflets.

10 years ago, the Internet was a collection of small communities, sharing common interests and values; now, it has morphed into a globalised reality with intelligent and sophisticated networks, designed to allocate and filter information based on user preferences. This is Web 3.o; the present world.

Web 4.0 is different. We would not need to provide recommendations and preferences – the Internet would already know what we wanted. As I discussed earlier on Twitter, the sense of a ‘online community’ is coming to an end. Whether by television or phones, we will always be connected to the Internet. It is obvious, at some point in the next decade, governments will make a online transitions to end political apathy and encourage participation.

Whether you like it or not, its the future.

Read Full Post »

In/out referendum in 2014? Apparently so

@RolandRudd

Bill Cash tells me Cameron will bow to Eurosceptic pressure and call in/out EU referendum in 2014. Can’t believe it myself@BloombergNews

I have to say, I’m rather sceptical. This would, of course, deliver a killer blow to UKIP – especially if voters request to leave. On current polling, that would actually happen. But if the EU continues to get fed up with us then it might leave Cameron with no choice, but to advocate leaving.

No point staying, if we’re not welcomed anymore.

Read Full Post »

YouGov: Labour 8 point lead

YouGov 20th – 21st November:

LAB 41%

CON 33%

UKIP 10%

LD 9%

GREEN 3%

 

Read Full Post »

A free and open world depends on a free and open Internet.

The UN is trying to regulate legitimate free speech on the Internet. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) proposals could grant government the power to censor and block websites, including adding fees to YouTube, Skype and maybe even WordPress. This new treaty, if agreed and signed, could put the last area of true freedom under the control of govermments and corporations.

For once, Google is right – we MUST take action

Read Full Post »