Digital government and political engagement

I came across a great item about House of Commons Speaker John Bercow starting a project to see if democracy could be run more effectively in a digital era.


Specifically, he is trying to find out how "parliamentary democracy in the United Kingdom can embrace the opportunities afforded by the digital world to become more effective in representing the people, making laws, scrutinising the work and performance of government..."

Music to the ears for any G and P student contemplating reform of the British democratic system in Unit 1.

Wired has a report about it here, and the interesting point made is that the way people relate to government and politics today is largely the same that generations of voters would have been used to. Voting still has to be done on pieces of paper several times per decade:

I may now be able to look at a tweeted picture of George Osborne as he signs off the budget, or sign an e-petition that may (no promises) be debated in the House of Commons, but the basic ways that I can express my consent, pick and influence my representatives would be familiar to generations of Brits who have never heard of Facebook. 

Wikipedia is getting in on the act too, and in fact has set up a project here. I would encourage students to get involved.

The Commission's web page can be found here.

I can forsee a future class project!

"God" discusses political participation

In brief, Gus O'Donnell (now Lord O'Donnell) the former senior civil servant has given evidence to a Parliamentary committee civil service reform, and he discusses how party politics is in decline.

As a typical Whitehall mandarin, he doesn't give proscribe solutions but highlight problems.

Video can be found here (courtesy of BBC):

New political alignments in the UK? The death of Party politics as we know it... Jim.

A "fantasy Westminster", with a 1904 proposed design
for an Imperial Hall. Photo credit: NGCA 

I've just come across a fascinating piece in the Economist by the Bagehot columnist about the nature of party politics in the UK; very useful for any G & P student contemplating the nature of the UK's political parties, factions in parties and participation in politics. 

In essence, the piece describes the current three main political parties as "crumbling". It refers to the changing political alignment of society; party politics as we know it today does not represent the different parts of society.

For example, there is a segment of the working class who have some sympathy with policies from both Conservative and Labour:

 But such voters transcend the right/left and big-state/small-state divide. They dislike out-of-work welfare and are socially conservative, but approve of interventionist, and potentially expensive, industrial and housing policies, so are by no means "economically conservative". They could potentially join a coalition on the left, or one on the right.

In turn the piece critiques work by Conservative blogger Tim Montgomerie in the Times (paywall) who suggested some new alignments.

All of which may suggest yet another reason why participation in party politics is declining - the parties as they exist today are unable to represent the different views of society effectively.

An earlier piece by the same blogger in the Economist, drawing on the experience of Europe, suggested these new parties, and I think it is worth quoting in full:

Christian Democrats (c.30% support)

• Core agenda: Pro-business, institutional conservatism, support for families
• Voters: Middle- and upper-classes in suburban and rural areas
• Would draw on: Conservatives, Lib Dems
• Foreign corollaries: CDU (Germany), Moderates (Sweden)
• Possible leaders: David Cameron, Ken Clarke, Jesse Norman

Social Democratic Party (c.30% support)

• Core agenda: Progressive taxation, industrial activism, vocational training
• Voters: Working- and middle-classes in urban and suburban areas
• Would draw on: Labour, Lib Dems
• Foreign corollaries: SPD (Germany), Social Democrats (Sweden), NDP (Canada)
• Possible leaders: Ed Miliband, Andrew Adonis, Vince Cable

Free Liberals (c.15% support)

• Core agenda: Cutting taxes, pro-immigration, social liberalism
• Voters: Younger, urban, middle- and upper-class voters
• Would draw on: Lib Dems, Conservatives, Labour
• Foreign corollaries: FDP (Germany), VVD (Netherlands)
• Possible leaders: George Osborne, Nick Clegg, Peter Mandelson

People's Party (c.15% support)

•  Core agenda: Living costs, curbing immigration, social conservatism
• Voters: Older working- and lower-middle-class voters in post-industrial areas
• Would draw on: Labour, Conservatives, UKIP
• Foreign corollaries: Die Linke (Germany), Socialist People's Party (Denmark)
• Possible leaders: Jon Cruddas, Robert Halfon

National Party (c.10% support)

• Core agenda: Socially conservative, small-state, anti-immigration
• Voters: Older middle-class and upper-class voters
• Would draw on: Conservative Party, UKIP
• Foreign corollaries: True Finns (Finland), Lega Nord (Italy)
• Possible leaders: Nigel Farage, Liam Fox 

 

Participation in the UK - Paxman and Brand

By Tom Baker, L6

Who knew that Jeremy Dickson Paxman, an English journalist, broadcaster and author would have something in common with the overly exaggerated English comedian, actor, radio host, and author Russell Edward Brand.

Both these men do not vote in our elections. This is due to Brand believing our political and voting system is not democratic enough, and Paxman stating that “the choice was so unappetising” in the last election, so just did not vote. Despite this, Paxman told Brand in a recent interview (see video below) “If you can’t be arsed to vote, why should we be arsed to listen to your political point of view?” which may be true, but in my view it is very hypocritical.

Picture Credit: http://markwadsworth.blogspot.co.uk,
using data from http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm

However, putting their statements and argument behind, what will their absence in voting cause to our participation in politics? It is well known that political participation is not high within the UK; it is in fact on average decreasing through the years. This is shown through the last few elections, in 1997 around 71.4% of the population voted. However, recently in the 2010 election only 65.1% of the population voted. This shows there has been a substantial decrease in the amount of voters within 13 years; evidently a serious problem if it keeps continuing to decrease.


It makes you wonder, if popular and famous figures, like Russell Brand, are not voting it could influence the upcoming younger generation not to vote which therefore may create a further decrease in political participation. Furthermore, if people like Jeremy Paxman, a man who understands politics well and who is well known for interviewing politicians harshly, do not vote it could swing people’s views on voting, due to people believing he knows best. This could then cause a further decrease in political participation and in a serious case cause a death to politics as we know it!

[Editor's note: See an interesting article here in the Guardian about the issue]

Political Party Size & Pressure Groups

In brief, according to the Daily Telegraph, the number of registered members of the Conservative Party have fallen significantly to under 100,000, and according to the Conservative Home web-site, this is 58,000. This figure is the lowest since WW2.

By contrast, Labour has gone from 156,000 to 188,000 between 2009 and today.

Neither figures are great for the two big parties in UK politics, and this ties in nicely with a key issue that is dealt with in Unit 1; partisan dealignment and the fall in participation in politics.

Pressure Groups

Also, while I am thinking about it, the anti-Fracking protests in Sussex over the Summer are great examples of Pressure Group action. Students studying Unit 1 should certainly be thinking of using events like these in their essays.

[Picture credit - BBC News]